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

Perhaps education professionals, presumably having awareness of amd access to the same academic studies that parents do, should be lobbying for ALL children to start formal education later.

Will never happen. They want parents back in work ASAP and don't like subsidising childcare. They'll just trot out that study that says for the most educationally disadvantaged, starting education early is advantageous.

@BigBigPumpkin

Perhaps education professionals, presumably having awareness of amd access to the same academic studies that parents do, should be lobbying for ALL children to start formal education later.

Will never happen. They want parents back in work ASAP and don't like subsidising childcare. They'll just trot out that study that says for the most educationally disadvantaged, starting education early is advantageous.

And by 'they', I mean the government.

I think it depends on the child. If you think it's a good idea, do it. It's good the school are supportive. I have a friend who regretted not deferring her child and in her case, I think she is right as her DS was emotionally very young for his age.

However, school does seem to be "slower" where I'm from in Covid times. DS has recently started reception and although he could read and do basic maths before starting, he is still only learning some letter sounds from the alphabet at school and simple counting etc. It sounds like your daughter would cope fine.

I hadn't realised children who deferred would jump a year later on - does that not just cause an issue further down the line or have I misunderstood?

@emmathedilemma

Check the policy first - some operate the policy *@OverTheRainbow88* mentions whereby if you defer they start in year 1 rather than reception which seems like it would be more harmful than starting at just turned 4! If you can defer and start reception then I would go for it. Some kids are ready and others just aren't. England starts school earlier than most countries in the world, including Scotland where everyone is at least 4.5 when they start.

The difference in Scotland is children start primary 1 with around half still aged four.

There is no .reception year.

Op I wouldn't automatically refer unless the child needs it. I've seen very bored children in nurseries as they were deferred solely on age.

I hadn't realised children who deferred would jump a year later on - does that not just cause an issue further down the line or have I misunderstood?

This is apparently what the OP's prospective school is saying (and is an oft-used defence by schools not wishing to allow delay) but is absolutely not the expected norm; doing so would have to be proven to be in the best interest of the child (and I'd not want to use a school that thought so).

@Oooooooooooooooooooooo

Yeah, we should focus on what's easier for teachers not what's best for children.

Perhaps education professionals, presumably having awareness of amd access to the same academic studies that parents do, should be lobbying for ALL children to start formal education later.

While they are not, individual parents are not in the wrong for protecting their children from the worst impacts of a disfunctional education system.

Maybe I phrased that wrong. It’s not just “harder on the teacher”. The dysfunctional system doesn’t work because a year is too big a gap. Deferring your own kid, and then Making the Problem worse, does nothing except help yourselves. And I say this a someone who wrote their PGCE dissertation on this issue, who has an August born dd who is slower than her peers to hit milestones

It will depend on the child, their emotional and cognitive development. Check with your LA though as I foster a child and he has special needs. He has a learning disability and he had a delayed start and joined reception s year later than his peers. He stayed with the same cohort until year 2 and was in a mixed year 2/3 class. He was just about Keeping up with his cohort group. Then at end of year school made him move up into year 4 so to rejoin his age peer group. I tried to fight this but school convinced his SW it would be better for him. It was a disaster. Year 4-6 had a separate playground so he was separated from his friends. He could not cope with Year 4 work and started to cry every morning he had to go to school. I tried to get him back to Year 3 with his friends but school refused and he got a new SW who also tried to get decision reversed but school refused and said Year 2/3 class was full. In the end we got him removed and he was assessed and now attends a special school. He never got his school year back though. It has taken 4 years of 1-1 tutoring after school 3 evenings a week to help him catch up. Be very sure this won't happen to your child. It was harder for me as I am not legal guardian of foster child as SW is and first SW just agreed with whatever school said.

My friends has August born twins, they weren’t really sure they would be ready so they applied for their places, but only for them to do half days until Christmas, then slowly increase.. they’re now starting full days when they get back from this half term because they’re doing so well and really happy and enjoying it.
Maybe consider a similar approach? Take the introduction nice and slow, half days for as long as you need and then if she actually does really well you can adapt from there :)
My daughter is August 30th (she’s only 2), so I get where you’re coming from, and it’s so hard knowing almost a year in advance, they can change unbelievably in a month let alone a year so it impossible to know exactly what the situation will be!

Instead of being 52 weeks between oldest and youngest there’s for example 57, but now Sarah’s mum thinks she’ll defer because she was born at the start of July and then Johnny who was born on the 20/6 June too. Now there’s 62 weeks from oldest to youngest

According to Admission Policies for Summer Born Children, parents of children who were born between April and August can request a delayed start. I was very surprised to learn that children born that early in the year can request it, I genuinely thought it was just for July and August born babies.

At the end of the day though, if the DofE acknowledge that being Summer born is enough of a reason alone to request deferred starts, then they must acknowledge/agree that starting school so early can be detrimental to the child.

I do get what people are saying about the sports but I don’t think I would put my daughter’s potential sporting options at a higher priority than her educational outcomes when making this decision.

Although she is able to meet her milestones she just seems so, so young. I just can’t see how in 10 months time she will be mature enough to start formal education - never mind doing it alongside children who may be up to a year older than her.,

I can see what you are saying and we were the same. My ds is a week away from being the year below.

We did lots with him and we could have argued keeping him off. He had glue ear and people were still struggling to understand him when he went to school.

He has thrived and is making incredible progress. His speech and social skills are amazing. I went to parents evening this term expecting to see how far behind the other he was but he is holding his own.

He loves school and is reading and eager to keep up with his pals.

Don't write it off!

Every child is different so it's great this is an option now. I was very close to doing it with August born daughter, I really am so glad I didn't though. She's one of the top in the class for reading and has not struggled at all. I think being in nursery another year would have been boring for her.

On the other hand, my friend has a little boy who is August born and she is definitely deferring him as he will definitely benefit from it. It's all down to the individual I think.

@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.

I mentioned the secondary school thing above saying that you will have to apply to a secondary for their correct cohort so when the deferred child is in year 5 and this isn't just about primary schools letting you defer and I remember why it is an issue.

It is something like GCSEs are only counted for the school in the year the child turns 16. Therefore they do not want to set a precedent for children to enter secondary aged 12 and throw out their results statistics for league tables.

@ThornAmongstRoses I think this is why they are reluctant in secondary for deferred.

I mentioned the secondary school thing above saying that you will have to apply to a secondary for their correct cohort so when the deferred child is in year 5 and this isn't just about primary schools letting you defer and I remember why it is an issue.

You were right to doubt it.

I joined the Facebook group that people have recommended and yes, the child can remain with their ‘adopted’ year group throughout their education.

I would need to apply for her secondary school place in Year 5 as opposed to Year 6 and then ask for a delayed start so she would start with the year group she was already being taught with.

I looked into secondary school deferment very briefly. A MNetter who is an admissions expert (represents parents at appeals for schools etc) said in 2018 that there would need to be a change to the admissions policy for secondary schools to specifically state that children who deferred entry into primary would stay in their adopted year group.

It doesn't say this currently and so they start when a child turns 11. There is no way they will change their policy.

I know you look at your child and they seem really little and statistically there are things that are supposedly stacked against them but it just looks at one aspect of a child, their birth date. There are winter born children who don't excel.

My sons are teenagers but I volunteer in a primary school in KS2 and do intervention work to bring children up to speed with stuff.

The vast majority of parents who defer their child are middle class and highly educated. Your Dh is a teacher, you know that small things such as reading with your child and just helping them learn their spellings and times tables goes such a long way. I have worked with the same children for 3 years, the number of times I have said you need to practise your times tables is ridiculous. It is literally holding them back in maths. The quicker you can answer questions the more answers you can get and the higher your score is. The more questions you can get through the more practise you have at a particular topic.

Parental input into education is huge and should not be underestimated.

forgot to add @ThornAmongstRoses

My DS is an August born. We didn’t defer as he had a real thirst for learning and on that side of things seemed ready for school. I’m certain another year of nursery would have bored/frustrated him.

He did struggle a bit on the physical side of things - getting himself dressed for PE was a bit of a struggle! And it was also emotionally quite challenging for him, as he seemed so much less mature than some of the other kids. However, as deferring is usually fairly rare, there were plenty of other summer-borns in the class. He wasn’t the only one by a long stretch.

Oh I should also say that I was put ahead a year in primary school - skipped year 2 and went into year 3 - as I was bright but then when my “adopted” year all left I had to stay behind and it was really really hard for me

I can absolutely understand why any parent would want this for their child. Statistically it's clear the oldest children thrive.
I cannot for the life of me understand why the government (so without a vested interest in an individual child) allow this though. It ultimately makes things worse for the disadvantaged children, widening the gaps even further. Now there'll be a summer born child of a family who don't know about this/can't logistically manage it anyway, potentially 17 months younger than their peers. That is worse for them.

I read the most significant factor in a child's attainment us their mothers education. So if you want to use statistics, yours (and that of your oh) are more determinant than their age.

I find it sad to impose on your child to 'miss' one year based on statistics that might not apt to your child. If she was a bit behind socially, emotionally and intellectually then that would be a good reason, but it's not the case.

I'm alate Aug child, it's never caused me issues and was never even mentioned. I was small for my age, so especially smaller but I liked it. I would have really hated to think that I should have been a year ahead and could have finished school a year earlier.

@arethereanyleftatall

I can absolutely understand why any parent would want this for their child. Statistically it's clear the oldest children thrive. I cannot for the life of me understand why the government (so without a vested interest in an individual child) allow this though. It ultimately makes things worse for the disadvantaged children, widening the gaps even further. Now there'll be a summer born child of a family who don't know about this/can't logistically manage it anyway, potentially 17 months younger than their peers. That is worse for them.

But you could say the same for tutors, private music lessons, sports - I can’t believe anyone here encourages their child to hang behind at sports day to let the less sporty kids win, or tells them to do badly in exams so the grading scheme becomes more advantageous to the lower-ability kids.

This isn’t aimed at you, arethere but there’s a real snide vein through this thread with ‘well, I was the youngest but very clever so if your kid is thick you might do it’ - deferring has very very little to do with academic ability. Nobody is talking about the social aspect, or the confidence they gain with age, or how their abilities improve with things like improved dexterity.

Deferred my child (scotland) so he started school age 5.5 instead of 4.5
Best thing I ever did.
More confident, went in smiling instead of crying like he did at nursery every day, found making friends easier and is the top of his class which does wonders for his self esteem. As soon as you have done it you will breathe a sigh of relief and wonder why you spent so long questioning yourself

It ultimately makes things worse for the disadvantaged children, widening the gaps even further.

Why would a child starting just after their 5th birthday make things worse for disadvantaged children?

@ThornAmongstRoses

It ultimately makes things worse for the disadvantaged children, widening the gaps even further.

Why would a child starting just after their 5th birthday make things worse for disadvantaged children?

Oh, it wouldn't. By that logic, no one should read with their kids at home either, as it widens the gap between those that get read with and those that don't.

I really regret sending my late August burn child in after just turning 4. The teacher makes no allowances for him being the youngest. All the pressure is on me to get him to catch up. He was meant to be born in September and I’m gutted I wasn’t able to keep him in longer. He round be average ability if in the year below and now it looks like he’d destined to be at the bottom. He’s only year 1.

I don't believe this constant narrative that a child will be bored in nursery for an additional year either. Perhaps I'm naïve, however, surely the childcare providers will be able to tailor their experience to suit their needs. No? Why are they suddenly different to a child that is only a little older in the grand scheme of things?