July born child held back a year

[AlorMy]

Not my child but DN (nephew)

He is 3. Seems average in development and is well socialised.

His birthday is late June and his parents are wanting him to be in the class below because they feel that he’ll be at a disadvantage being so young in the class.

Reception is saying no.

How can parents push through with this?

Children born in July, in my opinion, should start with their cohort.

Worrying that teaching staff have such a 'one size fits all' attitude - fwiw i'm also a TA and my opinion is very different.

That’s your opinion forflip, but the fact is that a July baby starting the September they are four actually means they are starting three terms before they are compulsory school age - which is the whole reason it is April-August inclusive who can apply to delay year R.

Taking the option to simply delay school til they are legally supposed to go at age 5 would mean missing the whole of reception.

Holding children back just creates more problems for the school system surely. If a June born child starts in the same year as children born in the following August the class now encompasses a 15 month age range, with the August born children now at even more of a disadvantage. Not everyone is able to hold their children back (cost of childcare) or wants to.

If holding back becomes the norm, then the youngest in the class will become the April/May children. Their parents will start seeing that as a disadvantage!

Yes but as you have said basicila Not everyone is able to hold their children back (cost of childcare) or wants to.

By the way, on childcare costs, when you send your child to school three terms before they are 5 (as I did with DC1) you lose out on preschool funding which is available til age 5.

I have an August birthday and had been 4 for only a couple of weeks before going to school. Could read before primary school. All fine here; exams completed when I was 15 and 17 then graduated when I was 20 (was 21 the month later). Appreciate it depends on the child though but wanted to provide an alternative view that it can all be ok! Good luck with whatever you decide.

Taking the option to simply delay school til they are legally supposed to go at age 5 would mean missing the whole of reception.
.

Yes this is the part that isn't helpful to just miss reception and start in yr1 - there are ways round it - it's no longer the case that you need to do this, but as you say you won't get the correct info here as is obvious from previous posters even people who actually work in admissions don't seem to be aware. This isn't unusual. My friends headmistress was absolutely adamant her dd couldn't apply to start reception a year later - she did! Another friend decided to send her dd but part time - this was also a battle.

Do the new guidelines mean that children start secondary school at 12 or do they miss year 5 or 6 at primary school?

@Ginfordinner That's the crux of the matter for me, shrouded in mystery, misinformation and varying from one LA to the next.

If your child doesn't start when they are 'supposed' to i.e. the September after they turn four, do they then simply miss reception and join their age group a year later, or start in reception with children a year younger? In which case do they stay with those friends forever or skip some other year in future to catch up later?

It's a mess and I wish they did a January intake like they used to.

I think the fact it can vary from LA to the next is problematic. You're tied to that area for the child's entire school life, or potentially risk them being moved back to their original cohort.

If a child starts reception at 5 and moves to secondary school at 12 wouldn't this would affect post 16 funding if they need an extra year for A levels as funding is up to 19 only?

This sort of thread needs thumbs up/down etcas so much wrong info from people who dont have a clue stated as fact.
Just shows how silly it is to listen to people rather than look for yourself.

I think the words CSA start in reception should be used as delay defer etc are being used but mean something different to what the LA use them for.

Fact-
It is risky there are no guarantees

• HT could change
• you could move to a SS
• move house
• transfer to junior or secondary

You get preschool funding so cost not that different.

You cannot limit it to dc with sen - as most are not diagnosed at 3.5yo.
Plus things like say dyslexia could maybe be a lack of learning letters etc but that wouldnt be disgnosed till 8.
The children likely to most helped are the average to low average who can go from bottom of their cohort and left behind in some subjects to average of the year below (saving on interventions and differentiation).

My dd is August born and we deferred her- best thing we did. You apply to the council- just email and they'll send a form. Then put reason. Then apply- email- the school of your choice.
Our dd is year 1 now- reading really well and enjoying school- the shy, quiet little girl has gained massively in confidence and fits in well in her class. No regrets.

The problems come when they reach high school. Some academise refuse to take children out of their correct year group, even a letter from the education authority carnt change that . If they want to play sport competitively in high school they will have to join the teams for their correct year group.

I see that even explaining things doesn’t stop more misinformation minutes later, so I will stop and say join the Facebook group OP.

You dont legally have to send them until the term they turn 5.

That's true canadianpancake, but that dosent mean they automatically get a reception place, in most cases they will go straight into year 1 missing reception completely.

Lots of misinformation on this thread. People saying 'my understanding is...' who have a completely incorrect understanding and haven't bothered to check. As parents we all have different interpretations of what is best for our child and that's what the scho admissions code makes clear, that the decision should be made in the best interests of that individual child. I could share my experiences of deferring my own summerborn child but I won't because actually the individual exeriences of others aren't particularly relevant. To me what is relevant is the relevant sections of the school admissions code and evidence on the performance of summer born children which suggests on average that they do significantly worse than peers born earlier. People piling in here to say their summerborn was fine - yes of course some summerborns will do better than others (and how much better might they have done if they'd been a year older starting school? ) But the persistent disadvantage at a population level is clear. It's really interesting that some see it as 'holding back'. I see it as giving a gift of an extra year of development- emotional social and academic- before the challenges of school begin.

nutbrownhare15 not sure if that is aimed at me as I specifically put "my understanding" but I checked my LA website before posting and that is what I understood from reading it. Also stated I was happy to be corrected if I was wrong. I have a late July born child who will be starting school in September, which is why I looked at it as I hadn't thought about the option of delaying his start in reception.

Yes Hanging you are wrong.
Starting part way through is one choice (as long as you start by Apr it is up to the parents starting Sept /Jan or Apr after 4yo.

The other choice is harder as it requires agreement (though some LA are automatic). Start at 5 in reception.

The reason this is now allowable (subject to agreement before applications) is that there is a statistically significant disadvantage to being younger. Hardly surprising is it. In fact it would be harder to believe it made no difference.
Starting PT or later in reception year makes the disadvantage worse (again not rocket science).

Just losing a bit of confidence or having fewer friends would be bad enough. Im not sure of the exact stats but i assume what happens is that some of the youngest do really well and come top anyway. Others do slightly worse than they should. But the results go down every month from Sept. I think the younger you are you are just more likely to have been left behind in something. And if you get behind you have to work harder on that and so that affects other subjects.
Or in things like English maybe you are slightly worse at spelling even if you meet end of year targets. Or certain books are unsuitable of you cant stay up as late reading etc.
I find it all adds up to a negative picture. There are almost no advantages (sun for birthday parties - except everyone on holiday), or some sports arent sept-aug based.
For my dc i would say the social side is worst (bright but doesnt fit with the bright kids, immature etc) but also they are i think good at maths for age but think they are rubbish.
Schools now set targets on KS1 to KS2 results so instead of maybe getting exceeded only met targets so school dont need to work for them to exceed at ks2.

He will not be of compulsory school
age until 31st August after he turns five, so it's not a case of 'delaying' him, he simply does not legally need to be in school until then. It's all clearly outlined in that document, which someone has posted upthread:

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachmentdata/file/838983/SummerrbornadmissionssadviceDecc_2014.pdf

The school can't just say 'no'. Can you be any more specific?

It depends on the school tbh. My son is late June and was really ready to move on from nursery but when he got to school he really wasnt ready for that either. There was a big pressure on him/his peers from reception to conform to a school timetable which wasnt great and meant he fell behind a lot, particularly behind the ones that were turning 5 just as they were starting in September. I think if he'd been in a school nursery he might've been better prepared and (if it had been an option) he could've benefited from another year in a school nursery. It is totally down to the child and the child as to what's best in this situation from my experience.

29th August and 7 weeks prem - he struggled and still is to be honest.

I still wonder 5 years later what I should have done -school handled it poorly as despite all the health issues and age he was one of the tallest in his year. Got sent to the headteacher for answering a teacher back about acting his age - he was still 7 and all his mates 8!!

They do struggle but what people don't consider is they are pulling the top of the next class even further. Of course your child has a better chance if he's the oldest in the group. But next year's summer borns will be in a class with not only autumn birthday children but the previous summer (your DN). So then parents will want to defer them too and the whole system unravels.

We have chosen to have our DC delayed - end of August birthday, very premature, was clear that social/emotional development, language etc behind his age, so would be nowhere near that of other pupils who would be up to 12 months older.

We felt that he would struggle and become demotivated early on, which could have a knock on impact as he went through school.

I have no doubt that it's the right thing to do for him. As others have said, the Facebook group is very helpful for accurate information and advice.