To defer my Summer born daughter’s school start date?

[ThornAmongstRoses]

I have a daughter who should be starting school next September but she will have only turned 4 about a week before the start date.

For the last few months I have seriously been thinking about delaying her starting until the following year when she will have just turned 5.

I have done so much reading up around the subject and it’s quite clear that statistically (because I know there will always be exceptions) starting school after just turning 4 can be very detrimental to their education and achievements through their schooling compared to Autumn, Winter and Spring borns.

My husband is a teacher and is absolutely on board with the deferral.

I mentioned it to my brother a few days ago as his child is summer born (a year behind mine) and he totally laughed me off.

He said it was a pointless thing to do and if the younger kids struggle then it’s down to the parents to do more at home with them.

It was a bit of a black and white attitude I thought.

I told him that if it was as simple as doing some work at home to get the Summer borns to the same level as their peers, then there wouldn’t be so much information out there about the disparities between Summer borns and other children.

I’m not being unreasonable to consider this though am I?

I do understand there will always be exceptions and there will be many stories abouthigh achieving Summer born children, but that doesn’t detract from the fact that overall, Summer Born children do fare worse at school if they start when they have just turned four years old.

My brother has made me doubt myself

We deferred August-born DC1 and haven't regretted it for a second. They started YR in September and it's a good fit for them - a year earlier and they would have struggled far more.

DC2 is also summer born. However, they're thriving in the preschool attached to the school and we're planning to apply for a place rather than a deferral for them.

Each child is different and you need to do what you feel is best for each one - it won't necessarily mean doing the same thing.

Talk to your preferred school about the deferral and, if they will support it, ask then to confirm in writing that they'll accept your DC into YR in the following years intake. Put this in with your deferral application and it should help (certainly helped us!). Good luck!

@Pumperthepumper

This highlights a major problem with deferring - it's supposed to help children who would struggle in their correct age group, particularly children with developmental delays, but it is seen as an opportunity for, usually sharp-elbowed middle-class, parents to try and gain an advantage for their perfectly able children, rather than giving children who will be at a disadvantage a bit longer to catch up.

Is there limited places in England for deferral?

Well, there are limited places in every school, so the more children held back one year, the more children 'competing' for the same places in reception the next.

If all the summer born children started waiting until they were 5 to start, parents of children born in the spring would probably then start thinking their children were at a disadvantage by being the youngest in the year.

Hi op, early years teacher here. The biggest factor in how well your child will do (SEND not being a factor) is how supported s/he is at home. I think the fact that you are on here asking the questions indicated you are a supportive type.
I am sure you talk to your child and read to your child, play with them etc. All of those things help with preparing for school.

More and more children are starting school with poor language and communication skills. These children definitely benefit from delaying a year but as you have pointed out, at some point they will need to transition into another year group away from established friendship groups and be taught content which builds on the class’ previous learning which they will not have benefitted from.

You and your DH are in the best position to decide if your child would benefit from the additional year to build on pre-school skills/language and communication etc.
Anecdotally my DD was August born and left handed, I worried no end! Within the first year she climbed from her low-middle group to middle-high. From year 1 she had closed the gap between her and the eldest and went on to get the highest grades in her SATs.

A year can seem like a huge difference at four and five, but at 7 and 8 onwards there is not much to it at all. If your little one is bright/sociable they might even enjoy the challenge.

Agreed that it really depends on the child. A child in DDs class is 1st September and is emotionally and behaviourally far younger than DD who is end of July.

I actually contemplated deferral for DD (but then you had to go straight to year one) when she had just turned three - she seemed SO young compared to others who were autumn born. But that year she rapidly caught up and went off to school happily.

I wish I had deferred it for my son (July birthday)
He was a late talker and also very shy so struggled socially for the first couple of years.
I think a later start date would definitely have helped him

@sst1234

By deferring you are setting all her academic milestones in life by a whole year, which will ultimately translate into career milestones being delayed.

He might have to retire at 66!

They also said though, that if we do delay her start by a year, that at some point she will have to skip a year before going to secondary school, as they can only go into Year 7 at the age appropriate cohort.

That's pretty bizarre, and I'd be inclined to doubt it. Schools are not always very good at giving accurate information about policy, I'd dig into this.

Genome that's certainly a reminder to the adults. But a bit unfair on the kids.

I was the youngest in my year by about 2 weeks. It's bad enough when the other kids say 'You can't do x until you are 5' without a teacher pointing out ages!

@Goosefoot

They also said though, that if we do delay her start by a year, that at some point she will have to skip a year before going to secondary school, as they can only go into Year 7 at the age appropriate cohort.

That's pretty bizarre, and I'd be inclined to doubt it. Schools are not always very good at giving accurate information about policy, I'd dig into this.

Definitely check this. I've spoken to the primary school, secondary school and ed psych - all three have reassured me that this is not the case, and DC1 will remain with their current cohort (unless there's a massive and massively unlikely development which means they'd be better off moving up a year).

I have an August born, planned for September but arrived 3 weeks early. So I understand the argument. But there has to be a cut off otherwise it becomes unsustainable. And do schools do this now?

@BobbingPuffins

I’m Scotland based.

It’s really surreal reading all these comments with people saying you shouldn’t defer. In Scotland no child starts school until they’re 4.5 at the earliest, and in practice many defer. It works absolutely fine.

My DC was born in March, started school at 5.5, loved it all the way through, did well in exams, went to Oxbridge. The extra year of playing before school started was a bonus.

It's only in the last 10 years or so that schools in England have been expected to offer full-time places from the September after children turn 4. Before that most children started school in the term they turned 5 (often half days only), or began full-time the term after. This meant a fair proportion of summer born children only started full-time school when they went into year 1 in September. Once again it's anecdotal, but this system did not cause a problem for my son or any of his summer born friends, who all went on to achieve good grades and attend high ranking universities.

And regarding the 11 plus- if they start school a year later than others, then they will not be legible to sit the 11 plus at the start of year six because they will be too old, likewise with KS2 sats.

I think that there is a difference between deferring because you think your child will struggle due to certain factors such as developmental delay etc, and just wanting to defer because you don’t want them to be at a real or perceived disadvantage because of the month they were born.

Someone always has to be the youngest, if every summer born child deferred to gain an advantage one year then the system would simply break down. A child born in May could potentially end up being the youngest in a school year by 16 months.

As the parent of an August born boy, at just turned 4 he was chomping at the bit to get out of nursery and start school, although as you say at just turned 3 years old it was quite unbelievable that I was looking at schools to send him to and was hard to believe that he would be ready.

Academically in that first year he was middle of the road. Socially he was absolutely fine but he did struggle slightly behaviour-wise for the first 1-2 terms I will admit. Bhe is a cheeky little monkey so might not have been completely due to age!

Now in year 3, it makes not an ounce of difference.

I didn’t know that about secondary school bit either. I’m think struggling through reception is preferable to missing an entire academic year, regardless of how tiny they feel at 3 or just turned 4!

@Goosefoot

They also said though, that if we do delay her start by a year, that at some point she will have to skip a year before going to secondary school, as they can only go into Year 7 at the age appropriate cohort.

That's pretty bizarre, and I'd be inclined to doubt it. Schools are not always very good at giving accurate information about policy, I'd dig into this.

This is what we were told by the lady who deals with EHCPs, as we pushed to put it in his EHCP that he would remain with his current year. Apparently "they can't do it." Now I'm pretty sure that I've read about children where they HAVE been able to stay with the year group all the way through. I'm keeping my powder dry at the moment but will be digging into the legalities around this in a couple of years.

I think it's a case of "computer says no" because it can't easily process a child as an individual rather than not actually being able to do it. Too complicated. Parents here are certainly being told they will have to rejoin at some point.

@Pumperthepumper

I don’t understand that comment then. What difference does it make why they choose to defer?

It just means that parents of children who are already advantaged by having engaged, clued-up parents, and who will probably do well anyway, are seeking to gain a further advantage.

I know some autumn born kids who have outgrown nursery but then had to wait a whole year to go. So it can go either way. Depends on the child.

My dd is a young 4 and recently started reception. She has a speech disorder which had a knock on effect and meant she is behind developmentally in some areas. She is loving being at school and she is progressing so well with her learning. She's been to nursery 4 days a week since she was a baby. She's never been shy so we weren't worried about her socially. That may have made me feel differently.

It's a very personal decision.

It just means that parents of children who are already advantaged by having engaged, clued-up parents, and who will probably do well anyway, are seeking to gain a further advantage.

But only the same advantage as those who manage to time it so their child is an autumn born (which lots of people aim to do) obtain for their child, and no one thinks that that's wrong!

I think there is an issue with advantage and delayed starts but it's more that not enough summer borns who are less advantaged in other ways are delayed, even though they'd actually statistically benefit the most.

@BasinHaircut

I think that there is a difference between deferring because you think your child will struggle due to certain factors such as developmental delay etc, and just wanting to defer because you don’t want them to be at a real or perceived disadvantage because of the month they were born.

Someone always has to be the youngest, if every summer born child deferred to gain an advantage one year then the system would simply break down. A child born in May could potentially end up being the youngest in a school year by 16 months.

As the parent of an August born boy, at just turned 4 he was chomping at the bit to get out of nursery and start school, although as you say at just turned 3 years old it was quite unbelievable that I was looking at schools to send him to and was hard to believe that he would be ready.

Academically in that first year he was middle of the road. Socially he was absolutely fine but he did struggle slightly behaviour-wise for the first 1-2 terms I will admit. Bhe is a cheeky little monkey so might not have been completely due to age!

Now in year 3, it makes not an ounce of difference.

I didn’t know that about secondary school bit either. I’m think struggling through reception is preferable to missing an entire academic year, regardless of how tiny they feel at 3 or just turned 4!

If all those people chose to defer, maybe that would be a good sign that many parents felt that the school cut of ages were inappropriate.

I think it's a case of "computer says no" because it can't easily process a child as an individual rather than not actually being able to do it. Too complicated. Parents here are certainly being told they will have to rejoin at some point.

I find this sort of thing so frustrating. Sure, poorly designed computer systems should absolutely be driving educational decisions.

[quote Anniemabel]@ThornAmongstRoses are you sure you need to put the deferral request in the school application in January? I had understood that you apply for a place as normal and then defer by approaching the school once you’ve accepted a place there. Please correct me if I’m wrong though.

My current plan is to apply for a place and then not have DS start until, day, after the Christmas hols or maybe even after the Easter hols. If I get to the Easter hols and he still doesn’t seem ready I’d then apply to defer for him to start reception in September with the intake below.[/quote]
I'm pretty sure you will have to put in an application for a reception place the following year and can't just hold on to your original place.

I didn’t defer my late July born and I wish I had have done. He’s happy enough at school but definitely struggles emotionally compared to the older ones. They are so little when they start having just turned 4.

Regarding secondary education, you have to apply to continue to educate out of normal age group in year 5, though I don't think many secondary schools would refuse an application as it is not in their interests for a child to suddenly skip a year.

The legislation has now changed to ensure LA's consult with potential schools regarding delayed entry to education. This makes it more complicated as schools who say they wouldn't honour approval have to say why and if they state that it is parental choice rather than developmental need, the LA has a difficult decision to make.

FWIW, the Trust I work for honours the decision made by the LA .

@Goosefoot what do you mean though? Unless we moved to a system where every parent got to choose exactly when their child started school, regardless of age, then what is the solution?

There has to be a cut-off, so someone always has to be the youngest. If you let all summer born children defer so they are the oldest, regardless of the reason, then that just means that the next youngest children become the ones at the disadvantage?

My late summer daughter would have gone bananas at home another year. She may be almost s year younger than her contemporaries but she's exceeding expectations in all aspects of school. She was so, so ready to go reading etc.

We are an 11+ area and delaying her would mean she was ineligible in Yr6. Big consideration of you think this may be the route your child takes.

I would do it. My DS18's birthday is on 18th August and he's come out with reasonable GCSEs and good A levels (courtesy of his teachers optimistic predictions) and he's now off at paid prison - I mean university.

However he was quite a shy child who had quite a few ups and downs during his school life and I firmly believe he would have been happier, more confident and successful if he'd started school later. I don't think it's only about academic achievement but also about building friendships and dealing with the hurly burly of school. I also think he might have been more mature when it came to putting the work in for his major exams.