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.

@blowinahoolie
In Scotland children born between March and December start school the year they turn 5 so August-december are 4 when they start. Children born in January and February should start at age 4 but you can choose to defer a year.
Sorry to say this but with an August born child it will never happen in Scotland

Friend did in london but she had agreement from her catchment school that she would go into reception and not year 1 when she started

My August son should be starting school this year but I have declined his offer and will be sending him next August instead, a few days after his 5th birthday.

Thankfully both schools I have spoken to were fully supportive and gave their agreement straight away.

Yes, it was the best parenting decision I have ver made and he has been a much happier child than I believe he would have been if he started school at just turned 4 and yr 1 formal learning just turned 5.

I have a summer born DD. She went to reception aged 4 and 2 months. Emotionally she was fine, ready for it. But her social skills were definitely less well developed than some of her peers, and it has taken her longer to get to grips with reading and writing. She was viewed as being slightly behind where she should be at the end of reception.
Then, boom, lockdown. I was v worried about her falling even further behind and really regretted not keeping her back. Even contemplated asking her to drop down.

However since going back this time she has really matured. Her reading and writing really come on, and her social skills as well. I think being in this group has helped accelerate that.

You know your child.

[quote Cabinfever10]@blowinahoolie
In Scotland children born between March and December start school the year they turn 5 so August-december are 4 when they start. Children born in January and February should start at age 4 but you can choose to defer a year.
Sorry to say this but with an August born child it will never happen in Scotland[/quote]
There's a campaign to make it possible to automatically defer your child, I think it's gained traction. Give Them Time. So that mid August to December born children in Scotland get the same chance without a battle from the local authority. Funding begins 2023 unfortunately!

DS nowhere near ready to start school in August next year. He was assessed by a paediatrician who has put his speech level equivalent to a 15 month old. I am open to also ASN placement for him, but feel deferment would be in his best interests. He was also born very premature.

We did. My son started in Reception 2 weeks after his 5th birthday. He’s now in year 1. Best decision we made for him, no way was he ready a year earlier.

It’s not about giving him an academic advantage. I couldn’t give a fig where he is in comparison to the rest of his class. I just wanted to send him to school when he was ready so that he could learn to the best of his ability. He is in the advanced group for maths but in a middle group for reading, and that’s absolutely fine.

If school starting age was later, say 6 or 7, I probably wouldn’t have deferred him. I think just turned 4 is too young. Or it certainly was for him.

Scotland has managed this for years without any major problems, I don’t know why some people are so against it here.

If your children are bright and you might consider a state grammar they don't usually accept deferred entry. Seems like a long way away at 4 but it comes around. This might change though.

I can see why people do it, but I do think it screws over the younger children in class who don't defer. It's not just about individual readiness, but the cohort, as the larger the age range, the more difficult it is for the youngest members to thrive. It's bad enough that there is nearly a year's range in reception, to make that 1.5yes surely disadvantages the summer borns that don't defer.

So I have no issues doing it due to SEN or if there are specific reasons (ie can't manage the toilet) but not just because they seem young and would benefit from more play.

I'm a summer born, married to a summer born, with 2 summer born babies!

Looking into deferral for DS... August born. In Scotland. It's not looking good at the moment even though he really needs extra year IMO.

But August born children start at 5 anyway in Scotland (or just a couple of weeks before 5) so will have reached compulsory school age. As the school intake is from March to February, August borns are in the older half of the cohort anyway.

We deferred both of mine and it was completely the right choice for us. I I remembering looking at the older children at nursery who were going to school at the time they should and they were so much more mature than my two.

I agree it’s more to do with the emotional side than anything. My two have struggled with a few things and it would have been really difficult for them to process everything if they were younger (no major issues just things like not getting a sticker etc).

Also, I haven’t found R to be that play based if I’m honest. There seems to be a lot of talk around play based/child led but it seems to be “normal” school with a bit more time outside. Phonics, maths, hand writing, literacy, projects are all taught in a traditional way and there’s not a lot of play based anything to be seen. They’ve also had to come to terms with a behaviour rainbow, star of the day, being on the rainbow (or not!) at the end of the week, marble jar (and the horror of having to take a marble out of the jar for misdemeanours) and they’ve recently introduced a timeout (ie naughty) chair. We may just have a particularly bad school (appearing to be lovely and friendly and all about supporting and nurturing the child 🙄), but it’s all of that side of things mine have struggled with most.

I can see why people do it, but I do think it screws over the younger children in class who don't defer. It's not just about individual readiness, but the cohort, as the larger the age range, the more difficult it is for the youngest members to thrive. It's bad enough that there is nearly a year's range in reception, to make that 1.5yes surely disadvantages the summer borns that don't defer.

I would agree with this. Certainly in Scotland, the majority of January and February birthdays defer; also a small number of December birthdays. And it is generally more to gain advantage of being the oldest in year, rather than because a child is particularly likely to struggle. So now the youngest is 15 month younger than the oldest. And P1 teachers have to cater for 15 month cohort rather than a 12 month and which includes deferred children who would have done well in there own year and non-deferred children who would have benefited from an extra year in nursery. I think the Scottish Government should go the whole hog and officially change the intake from January to December.

@blowinahoolie

Sounds like you are pretty well informed so appologies if I'm telling you stuff you already know! Our October born 4 year old has just had his deferral accepted.

If your child is still 4 on the first day of term in August you currently have the legal right to defer them but it depends on the council if they will fund the additional pre school year. Some are happy to fund, some allow parents to self fund in council settings and some flat out refuse.

It's a different process if they are 5 by the first day of term.

The Facebook group Deferral Support Scotland is really helpful.

None of mine started until the term after their 5th birthday, which in DS's case meant he skipped reception and went straight to Y1 as his birthday is the end of July.

We still socialised with the friends who'd gone to school but at different times (after school, holidays, etc.).

When they did start school they all made friends (including my intensely shy one) and it didn't have a negative impact at all. In fact, my youngest missed the first 2 weeks of her first term.

I also meant to say my boy has a similar speech delay.

Also, I haven’t found R to be that play based if I’m honest. There seems to be a lot of talk around play based/child led but it seems to be “normal” school with a bit more time outside. Phonics, maths, hand writing, literacy, projects are all taught in a traditional way and there’s not a lot of play based anything to be seen.

This would seem to be part of the problem. In the old days, children started school the term after their 5th birthday. Now the whole school year can start in September but no real concessions or changes were made to allow for children who had just turned 4. Or perhaps the were but this has now been lost.

TabbyMumz - no, they can remain with their adopted cohort throughout. If a head teacher wanted to move them into the year above they would have to show it was in their best interest. It’s unlikely to be in any child’s best interest to skip a whole year of schooling.

You know your child and if you feel that they would benefit from the extra year then defer them. Some are more than ready at 4 some need the extra time.

I am a summer born and also suffered from ADHD which wasn't diagnosed until later in life. Looking back through my school reports my psychiatrist thought it was obvious but my issues were written off as me being the youngest. The two combined had a significant negative impact on my life.

My daughter nearly came on 31st August and I was reading about deferring in labour! The relief when midnight ticked round and she was born in September. As it turns out she would probably be OK starting at 4 and is already more prepared than some of her slightly older nursery friends who will be in the year above.

I’m in Scotland and didn’t defer for a couple of reasons, but in hindsight it would have been better for DS as he got older. He was born a month prematurely in late December. Diagnosed ASD at 7 years, but great Primary School and no major issues when younger. His lack of maturity really showed up when he got to his mid-teens and sitting exams.

He’s had two years of college and all going well will go to Uni this autumn. He did need the time to catch up with himself.

My uncle, a retired teacher, did say it’s less about how ready they are to start school and more about how ready they’ll be when it comes time to leave. He was right, but it’s hard to make decisions for the teenager you don’t have yet.

The London borough that I live in used to have a policy that they would automatically approve any application from a parent to delay their summerborn child. Apparently only 4 local authorities in the country had the same policy (this was about two years ago, they seem to have changed it now).

Anyway, my LA did a review of the applications that they were having, broken down by ethnic background and family income. Even though this is an economically deprived LA, with a majority black population at school level, the majority of deferral applications came from white families with a household income of over £50k. Virtually no applications from black households on low incomes. It's definitely a social justice issue which compounds the inequality that the poorest children face (the economically disadvantaged children that do not defer now have to deal with being the youngest in a year with a 17 month age span).

I can see why people do it, but I do think it screws over the younger children in class who don't defer. It's not just about individual readiness, but the cohort, as the larger the age range, the more difficult it is for the youngest members to thrive. It's bad enough that there is nearly a year's range in reception, to make that 1.5yes surely disadvantages the summer borns that don't defer.

I do get your point to a degree but every parent has the choice to defer or not. Those who don’t defer do so for their own reasons and it was their choice to do that.

All summer borns have the same opportunity.

At the end of the day, deferral wouldn’t be “allowed” if there was no evidence to say it was beneficial or in the child’s best interests.

Parents who decide their child isn’t ready for school at just turned 4 should be allowed to make the decision to defer without having to factor in how it may affect other summer born children who parents chose not to defer them.

I certainly wouldn’t send my own child to school when he wasn’t ready just to be fair to other summer born children whose parents believe are ready to begin school.

[quote MacTootBlowsonHisBagpipes]@blowinahoolie

Sounds like you are pretty well informed so appologies if I'm telling you stuff you already know! Our October born 4 year old has just had his deferral accepted.

If your child is still 4 on the first day of term in August you currently have the legal right to defer them but it depends on the council if they will fund the additional pre school year. Some are happy to fund, some allow parents to self fund in council settings and some flat out refuse.

It's a different process if they are 5 by the first day of term.

The Facebook group Deferral Support Scotland is really helpful.[/quote]
DS's neurosurgeon will write a supporting letter if necessary to back up the application, as will the paediatrician, health visitor and speech and language therapist who assesses children in the nursery setting..

The health visitor agrees DS would greatly benefit from an extra year in nursery.

Thanks for the link, will have a look at Deferral Support Scotland 👍

@ThornAmongstRoses

Also many have said though, it's often not about readiness, it's about parents wanting their child to be the oldest not the youngest to gain an advantage, and it's also not an option available for everyone because of the increased cost of deferring.

Most children would gain from having an extra year of play, and one person's view of readiness will vary from another's, even for the same child.

I'd support everyone starting school later, or a system where if there is a specific need to start later that could be accommodated. What I don't support is the current system which allows parents who can afford an extra year of childcare to gain a huge advantage to their children, to the detriment of others.

Also many have said though, it's often not about readiness, it's about parents wanting their child to be the oldest not the youngest to gain an advantage, and it's also not an option available for everyone because of the increased cost of deferring.

I would be very surprised if the main driver of the parents decision making is simply because they don’t want their child to be the youngest in the year. I’m not saying that’s not the case, it’s just not my experience.

And as for increased costs, children are entitled to the 30 hours free childcare up until the term they start school. That doesn’t change if a child is deferred, they just get their 30 free hours for another year.

It may not a specific 'i don't want them to be the youngest' thought, but that is intrinsically linked with 'readiness' as virtually all children will be more ready at 5 than 4, even if they were sufficiently ready/as ready as their peers before.

I have a very bright happy nearly 4yo, who will be starting in September. Is she as mature as someone a year older - obviously not! Would she benefit from an extra year of play - probably (as would everyone). Is she similar to the others of her age that will be starting - yes.

And there is a huge difference in cost between using the 30hrs and school. The additional hours that most children will need is often far cheaper at school. My daughter's future school does wraparound car both ends for £7, so £35 a week. The extra hours for the childminder (including the cost of lunch which would be free in school) would be £20 a day, so £100 a week. 3 X the price.

Then there's needing an extra year of cover for things like school holidays.

It's not also as viable where there are older siblings to keep them in childcare for another year (yet another drop off), so it's often based on family circumstance as much as the individual child.

It's definitely a privilege of wealthier parents.