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

@ThornAmongstRoses

Why don’t you check with the school and next year your little one could have matured and be ready to enjoy it.

They do have a pre-school attached, for children to have a year there before starting reception if the parents wish, but the hours don’t fit our childcare needs so it isn’t an option.

You can get childminders who will work around that so do your drop offs/pick ups. You can then use them for either when your child goes full-time.

I think there are two separate issues around deferring summer born children, and it's the blurring of these which prevents any real progress on the matter.
The headline is the idea that being oldest in the class is better than being the youngest. The problem of course is that somebody has to be youngest, and this creates a lot of opposition from the parents of whichever group that will be. There is simply no easy solution, other than an arbitrary cut off.
But being oldest or youngest is not the only issue. Summer borns are often judged on their readiness to cope with reception, but the problems often arise on the jump to year 1 at just 5 as opposed to nearly 6. This problem has an blindingly obvious solution, which is to extend the early years foundation stage by a year so that no kid has to sit still and shut up before the age of 6. Many countries do this with zero negative effect. Childcare would not be affected, it would essentially be two years of reception instead of one. I think the benefit to kids would be huge, especially summer borns. But it will never happen because the government is obsessed with formal learning and tests, and parents can't get past arguing who should have the burden of being the youngest.
Based on my own memories of summer birthdays I planned both my kids for summer. Approaching school I now regret it bitterly. I was able to defer the oldest to get her a very much needed 4th year of play, but I feel sick thinking about what the ongoing consequences will be and how we will manage to defer the youngest when the time comes. It's a rotten system.
And yes, obviously some kids can't wait to get into the book learning. Lucky them, the system is a perfect fit. But they are a statistically insignificant sample.

I did this with my ds. He started reception at just turned 5 (compulsory school age) and had two years in school nursery. It was the best possible thing for him. He has thrived and managed the difficult transition to year one quite well. The school were extremely supportive and agree that he is doing much better as a result (he really wasn't ready for school at just turned 4). I personally don't think mahy children are, reception has become increasingly formal over the years since my oldest children started school.

I did this with my ds. He started reception at just turned 5 (compulsory school age) and had two years in school nursery. It was the best possible thing for him. He has thrived and managed the difficult transition to year one quite well. The school were extremely supportive and agree that he is doing much better as a result (he really wasn't ready for school at just turned 4). I personally don't think mahy children are, reception has become increasingly formal over the years since my oldest children started school.

My thought is may actually be doing her a disservice by doing this as she could get very bored.

That is the biggest worry.
I found out the other day via telephone parents night that my DS is reading books now that he'll cover in school in two years time. .
At the end of P1 he come home with "a book for my little brother". Ekk! The book was a picture book meant for him but he'd already relegated it to baby brother.

I really do wonder if we made the right decision to defer. But at the same time he's still a chaterbox who struggles to focus. Would he have done better in the year above???

if shes not struggling i dont see the point

my nephew august baby started jsut turned 4 he was absolutely fine top of his classes all through primary

my niece october born struggles more and just turning 5-so you see it depends on the individual not when they were born

@Bikingbear

My thought is may actually be doing her a disservice by doing this as she could get very bored.

That is the biggest worry.
I found out the other day via telephone parents night that my DS is reading books now that he'll cover in school in two years time. .
At the end of P1 he come home with "a book for my little brother". Ekk! The book was a picture book meant for him but he'd already relegated it to baby brother.

I really do wonder if we made the right decision to defer. But at the same time he's still a chaterbox who struggles to focus. Would he have done better in the year above???

You need to go in and fight for differentiation. I've had September borns in my class reading and writing a couple of years above their level. I don't just shrug and give them the same work as everyone else regardless. My parents had the same issue with me thirty years ago because I started school able to read and the school still wanted to send home picture books. Took a couple of meetings with the teacher to sort out

I simply just don’t want her disadvantaged because she was born two weeks before the start of September

This is where I don’t understand op. Why do you think she will be at a disadvantage, sure some kids are, they are not ready, but your child is displaying nothing to make you think this.

And by making her start later you’re making her miss a later year. That could be a huge disadvantage to her. Enormous. Because what she learns then is so much more important and she might need that year to progress

There is nothing your daughter is displaying that would indicate she can’t do this or it would be detrimental, you just keep saying things like “she is tiny” “she’s so little” . Which is not remotely relevant

I’d understand if she was not used to being away from you, suffered seperation issues, was missing her milestones, but none of this applies, so it seems the only reason you’d consider doing this to her snd giving her a later risk, is because she’s small and when her birthday is.

I'm not going to vote either way as there's no 'right' answer. I would say:

Rather than intellect, in the early years I find that being older benefits emotional maturity a good deal.
She may well be more confident starting at an older age.
Tests like 11+ and SATs adjust for birth month.
Effect of being younger is still statistically significant across the whole cohort (ie, there will be summer borns that are exceptions) at GCSEs but it's pretty low by A-Level.
A good nursery/ pre-school should challenge her enough to prevent boredom or stagnation.

This is a good study I found.

And by making her start later you’re making her miss a later year.

This is a misconception. There's nothing to say that she won't remain with her adopted cohort throughout- she doesn't have to rejoin her original cohort at any point. For her to be made to rejoin her original cohort they have to prove it is in her best interests to do so. Which is isn't- how can they justify fining parents for term time holidays because every day is important while then saying it's fine to actually skip a year?

The op has specifically stated she needs to miss a year.

@BigBigPumpkin OP’s post at 16:04 yesterday. She may be able to fight this but the school’s starting position is that a year would have to be skipped later.

[quote CheetasOnFajitas]@BigBigPumpkin OP’s post at 16:04 yesterday. She may be able to fight this but the school’s starting position is that a year would have to be skipped later.[/quote]
The school is wrong, but that's fairly common and nothing to worry over unduly at this point.

Op I’m interested in whether you don’t think your child will be ready to start school because she will have only just turned 4 and as an individual you think she will be able to cope, or whether you just don’t want her to be the youngest?

Would you send her if the school age was 1 year older for everyone?

On an individual/personal level, I can understand why someone might not want there child to be the youngest, and you say you think this would put her at a disadvantage because of when she was born

But on the flip side of this, if deferring a summer born becomes the norm, then her birth date becomes an advantage and just puts the spring born children at a disadvantage instead. On a population basis it solves absolutely nothing and as I said upthread, just makes the youngest children in a class younger by 15-16 months and not 12. Makes no sense.

I don’t want my daughter to start in September because of how young she will be. It’s not about wanting her to be the oldest in the class, or not wanting to be the youngest, but because I think (as backed up by research and statistics) that starting formal education at such a young age will put her at a disadvantage. And I don’t mean that in terms of putting her at a disadvantage specifically against her classmates, but at a disadvantage across society.

Research has shown that children who start school just after their 4th birthday so struggle, and these struggles can last through Primary and be seen in Secondary school too.

It’s that simple. I don’t want my daughter to have to struggle - why would anybody want their child to have to struggle in school?

And yes she’s meeting her milestones now as a newly turned 3 year old, but that doesn’t mean that even if she also meets the milestones of a newly turned 4 year old when she starts school, that she is able to keep up with children who are potentially a year older than her.

As many posters have said, most newly 4 year old will be ready for Reception...but reception is mainly just playing. But the jump from Reception to Year 1 is a big one, especially in terms of what they are academically expecting the children to do. When children start Year 1, I imagine there would be a visible difference between the children who had just turned six against the children who had just turned 5.

Again, I know there are many exceptions and there isn’t a blanket rule that those who start school after just turning 4 will struggle, but there’s a lot of research out there that says the odds aren’t in their favour.

Even if my daughter was going to school into a class of 30 children, 20 of whom were Summer Born, I would still defer her. This isn’t about me having some kind of competition against all the other children, it’s simply about the fact I want to avoid my daughter struggling if I can.

I think you are doing the right thing, and I think in your position I would probably do the same. People will tell you anecdotes that differ, and it may differ for your child, but the research on this is established.

At such an early year, a year is a massive age difference. Children in the class will have been beginning to walk and talk when your DD was born.

I am sure your daughter will be fine regardless, but if it was me, I would defer. Even if it meant paying for a year of additional childcare fulltime (which we would be able to do, but a push), I would consider it time and money well spent.

Know that people have different opinions, but I agree with you.

@arethereanyleftatall

Fgs, just own it op. You want your child to have a better chance to be top of the class.

I’ve been on this thread from the beginning and have seen nothing to suggest this is true. And it’s been repeated time and time again that there is no link between academic ability and say, digital dexterity - I’d say the vast majority of people who defer don’t do it because of academic reasons. And I’d also add that this thread supports that, what with all the genius summer-born advanced readers/Oxbridge applicants 😂

From your last post OP I’m not really quite sure why you posted in the first place. You seem to be quite clear in your mind that no child should start school at just 4, so with that in mind, you’re going to defer your child’s place.

@Pl242

Exactly

@ThornAmongstRoses

I don’t want my daughter to start in September because of how young she will be. It’s not about wanting her to be the oldest in the class, or not wanting to be the youngest, but because I think (as backed up by research and statistics) that starting formal education at such a young age will put her at a disadvantage. And I don’t mean that in terms of putting her at a disadvantage specifically against her classmates, but at a disadvantage across society.

Research has shown that children who start school just after their 4th birthday so struggle, and these struggles can last through Primary and be seen in Secondary school too.

It’s that simple. I don’t want my daughter to have to struggle - why would anybody want their child to have to struggle in school?

And yes she’s meeting her milestones now as a newly turned 3 year old, but that doesn’t mean that even if she also meets the milestones of a newly turned 4 year old when she starts school, that she is able to keep up with children who are potentially a year older than her.

As many posters have said, most newly 4 year old will be ready for Reception...but reception is mainly just playing. But the jump from Reception to Year 1 is a big one, especially in terms of what they are academically expecting the children to do. When children start Year 1, I imagine there would be a visible difference between the children who had just turned six against the children who had just turned 5.

Again, I know there are many exceptions and there isn’t a blanket rule that those who start school after just turning 4 will struggle, but there’s a lot of research out there that says the odds aren’t in their favour.

Even if my daughter was going to school into a class of 30 children, 20 of whom were Summer Born, I would still defer her. This isn’t about me having some kind of competition against all the other children, it’s simply about the fact I want to avoid my daughter struggling if I can.

You keep on citing studies. But those studies will take all children from all backgrounds and abilities. You’re both university educated and are obviously highly engaged and therefore your dd would be one of the children at the top of the stats.

Teachers have come on here and said don’t do it. But you’re determined seemingly. And what if she gets bored at nursery then bored in reception because you’ve deferred her. Then she’s made friends in her class and is academically but emotionally not able to make the jump from yr2 to yr4? She will then have to make a whole new set of friends. You could be setting your dd up for a very difficult few years.

I am a teacher and I would do it. You aren't really holding her back when there is a week in it. As long as you are sure it won't cause problems with the local admissions processes that is (which it shouldn't but sometimes does). It isn't just about whether she is ready for school the week after she turned 4. The benefits of being a year older when she takes public exams will stay with her for life.

@Pl242

From your last post OP I’m not really quite sure why you posted in the first place. You seem to be quite clear in your mind that no child should start school at just 4, so with that in mind, you’re going to defer your child’s place.

I have to agree. You're obviously set on deferring, so it seems odd for you to be doubting your decision because of a throwaway comment from your brother.

I also think that more time playing at a young age and less time sitting still learning things that are at the edge of your developmental ability is important for the development of good executive functions and, ultimately, pays dividends beyond academic results. But then I would have all children in a play-based learning environment until the start of Y2.

It’s your choice but I wouldn’t. I’ve been where you are! Both mine are summer birthdays. It wasn’t so much of a thing when DS was starting but with Dd I considered it. In fact I was dead set on her starting a year later (sept 2019). She is a July birthday, second to youngest in her class and also speech delayed.

But I decided to send her when she was due. I’m so glad I did. She was starting school with the children she went to pre school with which helped greatly.

School really did her the world of good. Schools are well equipped for all range of birthday times.

The previous year starting to Dd had the vast majority of children with summer birthdays!

My daughter was the youngest last year yet I see the little ones starting this year (some of which into a few weeks younger than Dd if September birthday) and she seems so much older and wiser than them!!

It’s your choice but if it was me I would send her next year. But I know how you feel I wanted the same for so long.

Tbh my children’s school aren’t keen on it.

You can also consider part time admission (DS started part time). Or maybe even 4 days. A little girl as my children’s school only went 4 days a week and had Fridays off. Not something I would opt for but a possibility.

I am a teacher and I would do it.

What age do you teach out of interest and do you see any differences?

My friend is an Early Years teacher and she she told me that there can be very wide gaps in abilities between Summer Borns and the other students, that can be noticed as high up as years 3 and 4.

My husband is a teacher - teaches from Year 3 to Year 13 - and he is also very pro the deferral because of what he notices in his school.

It’s so hard because something inside me is telling me that deferral is the right option, but then whenever I read a post on here about possible downsides to deferring I just start doubting myself again.

It’s difficult because it’s a choice you have to make with no real idea whether it’s the right one or not, and only the use of hindsight can tell you if it was.