Has anyone deferred starting primary school in the UK?

[Foreverexhausted]

I have a Summer born child who really isn't ready to start school in September. We attend activities and classes etc but she struggled to settle in to nursery to the point we were advised to remove her as it was making her physically ill. I really do think the extra year will make a difference, emotionally she just isn't ready.

Has anyone else deferred and are you glad you did or do you regret it and why?

Thanks.

I know this is a stupid question but if you defer a year do the start in reception or y1 when they do start?

Make sure you understand what defer means. According my local authority documentation it means you skip reception and start school in year One. (I checked this after a previous thread on here claimed the rules had changed and you could now force them to let you start reception a year later. Perhaps you can, but my LA are clearly not interested in letting you do that.)

Following, my little lady is end of August.. had she been on her due date of 1st September she'd be in the next year!

Ah ok petty maybe it varies then?

Just googled it..So they forfeit reception and start school in year one. I can't see how that helps, as by reception year surely most kids have been to a nursery of some sorts?

@PettyContractor the government webiste actually states that you cannot be forced to put them straight into year 1 because you deferred them a year.

Scratch what I said, it says 'proposed changes'

Nope the change enables starting reception at CSA, not skipping and starting year one. As previous posters mentioned, some local authorities will deny it’s actually and option and have a blanket policy of not allowing but that’s illegal and you can fight them over it. Some still won’t accept but that’s the LA acting entirely awfully!

This is why it’s so important the postcode lottery stops and the changes made more officially. Which is supposedly happening but is ever delayed by brexit and other nonsense.

No, in England they do not 'forfeit' Reception. It is a parental right to start at compulsory school age (the term after they turn 5). The Admissions authority decides (normally in consultation with HT) whether the child starts in Reception or Year One. This decision is meant to be made in the 'best interests of the child' (as is this case with a subsequent decision about skipping a year). I find it hard to think of circumstances (even for the most academically gifted of children) where it would benefit the child to miss a year of school. Unfortunately as with many things whether or not the LA or academy actually follows the law is a bit of a post code lottery. As mentioned upthread the Flexible Admissions for Summerborns group offers v useful guidance.

At my DC school there are two boys older than him and he is the oldest in the year. One is born May and previous school year and one in June, think the parents chose to go private to give their boys an advantage. They are def more mature and academically more advanced than their contemporaries. There are also two boys from the year below who are v gifted and moved up a year. ‘Red shirting’ for academic advantage is very common in other countries.

Ds1 and 2 are both late summer, but in our area they'd have to go straight to year 1, so it wasn't a choice.

Ds1 was absolutely fine, he was the youngest and smallest in the class, but he's very resilient, works very hard and does fine. Ds2 seemed a lot more ready as he's extremely academically bright, but emotionally he's still struggling a bit in year 2, he's socially immature for his age in any case, so the extra year shows even more.

However - he was also incredibly bored in nursery, so it's hard to see that staying back would have been an answer either.
I think that part of it is that they need to have a cutoff somewhere, so some children will always be left out one way or another. Or move to the southern hemisphere and have the cutoff around January instead!

My eldest DS was similar and I didn't defer. He evened out after a few years and I'd say I made the right choice now.

Deferring and being able to start in reception but a year later would surely be the best thing?
I can't imagine how missing a year would help a child who is young in the year?
I have four dc aged 14,8 5 and 4. One is in reception now and one is starting in September. The difference in how much the have to do now compared to when my 14 and 8 year old were in reception is unbelievable.
Ds has two reading books and week, two comprehensions, spellings and is asked to write in his learning journal, he also gets some sheets to do at the weekend.
That's a lot for reception in my opinion ds is coping ok with it but is a September baby I couldn't imagine him doing it the year before.

At my DC school there are two boys older than him and he is the oldest in the year. One is born May and previous school year and one in June, think the parents chose to go private to give their boys an advantage. They are def more mature and academically more advanced than their contemporaries. There are also two boys from the year below who are v gifted and moved up a year. ‘Red shirting’ for academic advantage is very common in other countries.

Both our boys started at 4 and 3 weeks and 4 and 2 days, not had any issues. I can see why people think it’s young but I’m just showing you the other side of the coin :)
Our school has the summer borns with different targets And things though, sort of like a hybrid. so it is a very very good school that offers individuality to all the kids so we were happy to. Very difficult if you aren’t offered that! If it feels right I would defer, you don’t want regrets

In Ireland a child must start by their sixth birthday and cannot start until they turn four. Many schools have changed their admissions policy so children can’t start until they are 4.5 yrs. More and more people are sending their children later and children are frequently nearer six than four starting. It is very beneficial socially and emotionally.

In secondary school there is an optional year called a transition year where the students undertake work experience. It is not compulsory so they can skip this year without skipping coursework. Or they can do this year and do six years at secondary depending on the child’s wants and needs.

In our area children who defer still go into reception, not straight into year 1 anymore. This is a relatively recent thing.
I wonder how this will evolve over the next few years, though. If you've got Feb born kids being deferred, as shown here, but then August born kids from the following year not deferred, you've potentially got a massive age range in one class.

I wonder how this will evolve over the next few years, though. If you've got Feb born kids being deferred, as shown here, but then August born kids from the following year not deferred, you've potentially got a massive age range in one class

Agree. And it ends up being a bit of a class issue too - wealthier families who can afford childcare or for a parent to be home can keep a March born child home a year later, while poorer families (or ones with multiple other dcs to share funds/attention) are much more likely to send in an August child, as school plus wraparound care is cheaper than nursery (even with the 30 hours). Then the August child is socio-economically disadvantaged AND has children 16 months older than them in the class.

It has to stop somewhere, someone's children need to get the short end of the straw.

And to the socio-economic and age gap also add aspiration differences... It's the parents who have high aspirations for academics who are holding back their kids.

To me it's another way to increase inequality. And I say this as the parent of 4 summer borns, including 2 who haven't started school yet so could benefit from these changes.

The February born children in this thread will all be Scottish. Our year runs March to Feb as our children start no younger than 4.5. Our eldest were March born at 5.5 but now it’s relatively common for Feb or January kids to wait so the intake is from 4.5yrs old to 5.7yrs old.
We’ve had this for years now and it hasn’t resulted in all jan/Feb kids deferring - some are just clearly ready at 4.5.

OP, yes - but only in so far as mine (both June born) went straight into Y1 just after they had turned 5, and we didn't bother with Reception as I thought they were better off at home with me for their Reception year. Another way to do this!

An afterthought. No idea what the 'right' answer is, but DC1 (who didn't do Reception), has been predicted 4 A*s in his A levels, and is going to Cambridge unless there's a major fuck-up (which, of course, can never be ruled out). Looks as if DC2 will do similar. Both have been at independent schools, though no idea if this has made a difference. I think I'd have done the same re deferring until Y1, regardless of whatever school they had been to.

Final comment from me. My b'day is 31st August, though I wasn't the youngest in my year as I also went to an independent school and some girls were younger in the year. I have a PhD. 'Reception' didn't exist when I started school, so I started in Y2 equivalent, having spent all the time before that at home with DM. My DSis started in Y1 equivalent.

I'd be tempted to send them in Reception for just 6 months, or straight into year 1 with their contemporaries.

The problem with having them a year behind is that they are able to leave school at the end of year 10 without any GCSEs if they feel that way inclined.
Either that or your child has to skip a year at some point in Primary to catch up with their proper cohort, which isn't fair on them firstly because of the social aspect of this, and also because the academic jump will be difficult and it could potentially cause gaps in their learning.

I think that the research about deferral in Scotland showed that there were no significant differences in deferral decisions between parents from different socio-economic groups.

Now that there is 30 hours pre-school funded for 3+ I don't think the cost of childcare would be a big factor in parental choices (but I think it is a big factor in the Goverment not implementing their reform proposals).

Really I think that we start children at school too young in England which is why I think that the Scottish system is preferable.