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 delayed entry to reception until the September after our DC turned 5. It was a no-brainer for us due to clear developmental delay and being born preterm. He's just keeping up now & it's clear that it would have been a huge mistake to have sent him in his "proper" year.

Only you can make the decision about your child, although it sounds like she's doing well & may be fine to stay in the expected year.

I would add that you’ll likely have some pragmatic concerns to think about re the general hoopla of primary school admissions (assuming you’re looking at the state system rather than private).

Not sure this applies everywhere but in our area, you apply in the usual year for your reception place. In theory you’re supposed to speak to all the schools that you intend to put on your list of preferred schools to see if they’re happy to accept your child as a deferred entry. Then once you’ve been allocated a school and accepted it you then need to ask if they would be happy to accept on deferred basis. Even if they say yes, you then need to apply in the next rounds of admissions the following year. They don’t keep your spot open. But if you get offered a spot then you can proceed as per your deferral.

I’m not sure if that is the same everywhere but worth checking , where you live. In our area catchments can be tight and changeable. We were really happy with the school we were offered and where our DD now goes. Personally I’m not sure I could have coped with the stress of going through admissions again and thinking that we’d just given up a spot at a favoured school and might not get in the year after. So maybe something else to consider.

marveloustimeruiningeverything:
“Parents can't afford to 'vote' by deferral either to show it's too young; childcare is expensive. But if everyone had to wait until they were 4 and a half, then perhaps all the children would do better.”

In Scotland where deferral has been allowed for quite some time now parents have shown through action that they prefer later starting dates. Cut off is end of February for starting in August, so 4.5 would be the youngest. I would say that the majority now defer their Jan/Feb born so that they are at least 5.5 (it was 44% in 2018 and has been growing every year). Increasingly Nov/Dec children are being deferred but that requires local authority agreement and is not guaranteed, although in 2019 the Scottish government committed to funding an extra year of early funding for those born Aug to Dec - so it is likely that the deferral rate for those children will grow as well.

I haven’t met anyone who regrets deferring their child. As it becomes ‘normalised’ in England I’d expect to see a significant growth in deferrals. If I was in England with a 4 year old I’d defer.

Personally, I don’t agree that this should be an option for NT children. I work in reception, in my experience it’s completely unnecessary unless a child has a delay in their ability to learn or were premature. I have higher ability children in my class that are summerborns and lower ability children that come from the top of the age range to the bottom. Classes are designed to cope with children with a year in age difference and differing abilities, and by deferring, parents are only trying to gain an unfair advantage over other children.

@NailsNeedDoing

Personally, I don’t agree that this should be an option for NT children. I work in reception, in my experience it’s completely unnecessary unless a child has a delay in their ability to learn or were premature. I have higher ability children in my class that are summerborns and lower ability children that come from the top of the age range to the bottom. Classes are designed to cope with children with a year in age difference and differing abilities, and by deferring, parents are only trying to gain an unfair advantage over other children.

That’s an unfair accusation, and a ridiculous one. People have the option to defer if they don’t believe their child will thrive at school and would benefit from another year of maturity. You say yourself that age makes little difference to ability, so why would that change if a child defers or not?

Not to mention it’s an argument that could be applied to literally any decision you make as a parent - reading with them at home gives them an unfair advantage over the kids whose parents don’t. Paying for a tutor puts them at an unfair advantage. Helping them to apply for Cambridge puts them at an unfair advantage.

Depends on the child if it’s necessary. We had two children defer and stay with us at nursery an extra year. The school needed proof that it was in the child’s best interest to have the deferral. One child would have been fine going in with their school year group and for the other it was definitely the right decision to stay back that extra year. They were only just ready to start with the deferral.

It’s disingenuous to pretend that deferral isn’t disproportionately available to families who are educated enough to negotiate the very complex systems and affluent enough to afford an extra year in childcare or with a SAH parent.

@EmilySpinach

It’s disingenuous to pretend that deferral isn’t disproportionately available to families who are educated enough to negotiate the very complex systems and affluent enough to afford an extra year in childcare or with a SAH parent.

That’s definitely true, which is why Scotland introduced the 1140 early years hours, as a pp said above.

@Buddytheelf85

You do whatever you think is right for your child.

Thankfully it seems now that most schools have to have a very strong case as to why they would put a deferred starter into Year 1 as opposed to reception. The Department of Education say that if the school want to send the child straight into Year 1 they have back this up by explaining why they think missing out on Reception is in the child’s best interests.

I’m not saying you’re wrong, maybe this differs by area, but I have a summer born so I’ve been looking into this. As I understand it, in our area it’s the opposite - the local school will happily defer a summer born’s entry into reception until the summer term (which I think I’m going to do - it’ll be expensive but still cheaper than if I had a September-born I suppose!) but they require a very strong case indeed to allow the child to enter Year 1 with the younger age group.

In that case they are not following the law. It is the parent's choice to start the child early or when they are compulsory school age (i.e. the term after they turn 5). If the parents of a summerborn child decide they will start at compulsory school age, the school must prove that it's in the child's best interests to insist that they go into year one (given the scientific research, this is impossible) otherwise they must start in reception. The government guidance, law and recent tribunal findings are clear on this.

Some schools and local authorities may well be breaking the law, but given the increase in parents aware of their rights and potential detrimental impacts on their child resulting from starting school earlier than compulsory school age, I doubt they will get away with it for much longer.

We did. Absolutely no regrets. Read Outliers...by Malcolm Gladwell.
No brainer.

Where I live, you just email the council and they approve it. It’s not complex. Then we’ve had another year of free 30hrs/topped up with tax credit support. It is possible for those on low incomes too.

I would defer. If she was born a couple of weeks later she'd be in the year after. Doesn't make a huge amount of difference.

Read ‘Outliers’ - fascinating! And definitely something in it.

I have one oldest in the year and one youngest in the year - the one who was youngest was top of the class, the one who is the oldest is mid-way, so it completely depends on your child.

I wouldn’t hesitate to do it, if you are able to at your preferred school and if you think your daughter would benefit. It’s no one else business so I really wouldn’t worry about opinions from your family.

@EmilySpinach

It’s disingenuous to pretend that deferral isn’t disproportionately available to families who are educated enough to negotiate the very complex systems and affluent enough to afford an extra year in childcare or with a SAH parent.

This is nonsense. I will be doing it and I am a single mother who works. Others I know who have done the same come from all kinds of backgrounds. Not everything has to be twisted into some kind of class war that has nothing to do with the issue.

I love Malcolm Gladwell but I wonder how many parents read Outliers and made decisions about their child’s education based on a small sample of Canadian ice hockey players instead of their own individual child.

I think parents often underestimate their child’s ability to rise to a challenge. There is a lot to be said for allowing just a little bit of struggle; for well-supported NT children it builds resilience.

@NailsNeedDoing

Personally, I don’t agree that this should be an option for NT children. I work in reception, in my experience it’s completely unnecessary unless a child has a delay in their ability to learn or were premature. I have higher ability children in my class that are summerborns and lower ability children that come from the top of the age range to the bottom. Classes are designed to cope with children with a year in age difference and differing abilities, and by deferring, parents are only trying to gain an unfair advantage over other children.

As someone who works in reception, I'd hope you'd have enough grasp of basic mathematics and statistics to know that the fact you have high achieving summerborns and lower achieving autumnborns in your class, or previous classes, does not refute robust academic research based on statistical analysis of the psychological and academic effects or starting school so young.

You’re clearly an intelligent and informed parent, @PolkadotGiraffe, and your child is fortunate to have you. Would it be necessary to have FB groups supporting parents who wish to take on this fight if it were easy and transparent? Are you telling us that there are no sacrifices involved in making the decision that you feel is right for your child?

It’s disingenuous to pretend that deferral isn’t disproportionately available to families who are educated enough to negotiate the very complex systems and affluent enough to afford an extra year in childcare or with a SAH parent.

Whilst I'm sure there is a correlation between educated families and summer born delays, I resent the suggestion that I'm unfairly advantaging my child (when our decision was made solely on her emotional immaturity). We continued to claim the same funding for her extra year as previously.

It is likely those 'middle class' parents pushing the point (sometimes with very complicated appeals procedures) that might ultimately get the system changed to benefit all.

I think educational achievement is much more skewed by those paying for private schools, tutors and expensive houses in 'outstanding' school areas.

@EmilySpinach

You’re clearly an intelligent and informed parent, *@PolkadotGiraffe*, and your child is fortunate to have you. Would it be necessary to have FB groups supporting parents who wish to take on this fight if it were easy and transparent? Are you telling us that there are no sacrifices involved in making the decision that you feel is right for your child?

That's very kind of you to say, thank you. There are fb groups supporting parents with all kinds of aspects of parenting. Parenting is hard! But something like this is so important that I think it is brilliant to see parents coming together, supporting each other and sharing information so that they know the facts and their rights and can make an informed decision for their child.

I don't feel there is any sacrifice involved, no. I'm not sure what you mean? Some hassle perhaps, but the work many parents have been doing in recent years is laying the groundwork to make sure parents can decide what to do in their child's best interests without so much hassle so I'm optimistic that is improving.

If you mean financial sacrifice, then again no in my situation. The 30hrs funding continues, the "tax free" childcare continues, until they begin school. The cost of childcare around school hours and in school holidays would be pretty much identical to the cost of nursery with the Government subsidies. And actually far less than between the end of maternity leave and when the 30hrs kick in at age 3 - that is the hard part financially! Especially if you have two close in age.

You’re inferring a subtext that isn’t coming from me, @Mousepad20. I think that deferral should be more easily available.

I think it depends on how you feel she's doing, OP. I was born in mid-August, started school at 4, but I could already read and was quite advanced for my age. I would have been very bored being held back a year. I went to Oxford from a state school in a pretty deprived area and have a doctorate now, so it obviously never did me any harm! A friend of mine was actually born in early September and, because she was so obviously clever as a child, her mum asked for special permission to have her put in the year above that she should have just missed the cut-off for.

On the other hand, if you don't think your child would cope, that's a totally different matter and only you can know your child.

Goodo, @EmilySpinach, apologies if I was a bit over sensitive.

Unless your child has some specific disability/extra need, I would start them at the right time.
Unfortunately, someone always has to be the youngest. While it may be an advantage to your child, if people start deferring their summer borns, they are ultimately increasing the disadvantage of the majority of summer born children who end up at school with children over a year older than them.

I’ve finally managed to catch up now the children are in bed - I’ve also got a 7 year old son.

I don’t think that deferring would put my daughter at an advantage - it’s no different to children who turn 5 shortly after September.

As has been said - parents being able to pay for private schools and pay for tutors is what could be classed as putting some children at an academic advantage over others - far more so than me not wanting my child to start school until she turns 5.

I have not heard of Outliers so I shall have a look into it, as I shall do about the issue of not actually having to skip a year as my husband was told.