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

I've read every one of your posts, OP, and it still seems that your decision is primarily being driven by The Research and not your daughter as an individual.

You do a child no favours by making their path too smooth. I'm not suggesting that anyone deliberately puts their child in tough situations but as parents we are sometimes guilty of underestimating our children. They are capable of much more than we think but sometimes they have to be given the opportunity to show us.

I've read every one of your posts, OP, and it still seems that your decision is primarily being driven by The Research and not your daughter as an individual.

I probably do base a lot of my parenting decisions on research. It’s all about making informed decisions isn’t it?

If there are any Summer Borns in the year then that means their parents are happy for them to be there.

Not necessarily. Even with the 30 hours funding, some parents will be unable to exercise the choice to defer because of the financial consequences. Others will not be as well informed as you and your husband and may not be aware that it is even an option.

I fully understand why you are considering deferring your child, but it is unrealistic to think that those who don't defer have made the explicit choice not to.

Have you definitively found out how secondary admissionswill process this? Guidance currently states 'apply for admission if born between 1 Sep YYYY and 31 Aug YYYY'. What about if you move to another area and the secondary admissions process will not cater for 'held back' summer borns? The impact on a teenager's self esteem feeling that they are in the wrong year group becasue they were 'held back' could be immense.

Not necessarily. Even with the 30 hours funding, some parents will be unable to exercise the choice to defer because of the financial consequences. Others will not be as well informed as you and your husband and may not be aware that it is even an option.

But why am I responsible for that?

Parents can’t be expected to not exercise their right to the choice just because other parents can’t?

But why am I responsible for that?

I don't believe the PP was implying you were in any way reposinsible for the decisions made by other parents. They were meerly pointing out that other parents may not be happy with their child starting school at 4, but weren't in a position to defer.

I’m not sure if you mean to or not, but as a parent of a summer born who decided not to defer, your comments come off quite critical of us as a group. As if we didn’t care enough for our children to defer them, as if this is unequivocally a better choice for all children.

As I’ve said in all my posts on this issue, it’s a personal decision. But I do find it odd that you can’t see the wider implications of your world view here.

You seem to suggest that just turning 4 is too young to start school and therefore it’s a no brainer for all who can defer to opt to , unless they are completely sure a child will thrive regardless.

But the policy of deferment is intended to be the exception rather than the rule (whether you agree with that or not). Otherwise the admissions booklet would simply say: if your child is born between 1 April and 31 August you can apply this year or next.

If all people who could defer did, it would have a very different consequence for classes than if people only deferred if they felt there was a real need not to keep within the defined age group.

I get the sense that quite a lot of people here would prefer it if all children started school at 5 or have two years of reception.

But if we accept that this isn’t on the cards, I do wonder if increased deferrals due to people simply preferring their child to start nearer 5 than 4 could lead to a tightening of the rules which could impinge on children who have a more obvious developmental reason to defer.

I’m not sure if you mean to or not, but as a parent of a summer born who decided not to defer, your comments come off quite critical of us as a group. As if we didn’t care enough for our children to defer them, as if this is unequivocally a better choice for all children.

That’s genuinely not my intention, so I apologise if that’s how I come across. Some people are more than happy for their summer borns to start school and others not - there is no right answer and it’s just personal choice.

Just because I think it’s too young doesn’t mean I have any negative feelings towards parents who don’t.

But I’m sorry if I’ve made you to feel like I am being critical of you, I really wouldn’t want to cause any offence to anyone.

There has been a lot of talk of OP's DD being held back a year but the reality is that in comparison with the oldest in the group she will only have been held back a couple of weeks.

We spent several years in a different system where it was commonplace for children to repeat or jump a year. I remember a classmate of DD1's repeating a year. She was always too young in the year, struggled academically but more importantly she struggled emotionally and socially. Once in the repeat year she looked so much happier.

But if we accept that this isn’t on the cards, I do wonder if increased deferrals due to people simply preferring their child to start nearer 5 than 4 could lead to a tightening of the rules which could impinge on children who have a more obvious developmental reason to defer.

Or the opposite, which is what Scotland is going for, where formal education starts as late as possible for everyone. So a few years ago Feb birthdays would be the youngest in the year group. Now you can defer as early as September, which means there’s potentially a 17-month gap between the oldest and the youngest. I’d say deferring a September birthday would be quite rare but I’m glad parents get to decide over an archaic education system.

@ThornAmongstRoses

I've read every one of your posts, OP, and it still seems that your decision is primarily being driven by The Research and not your daughter as an individual.

I probably do base a lot of my parenting decisions on research. It’s all about making informed decisions isn’t it?

Not at the expense of considering your child as an individual, no.

I probably do base a lot of my parenting decisions on research. It’s all about making informed decisions isn’t it?

Not at the expense of considering your child as an individual, no.

I do consider my daughter as an individual and it’s just a case of I either delay her or I don’t. Research shows the odds are not in her favour so I have to decide what to do with that information.

Like I said earlier, just because she can meet her 36 month old milestones (as per the ASQ assessment), that doesn’t automatically mean she will able to okay to start formal education a week after turning four years old.

I probably do base a lot of my parenting decisions on research. It’s all about making informed decisions isn’t it?

Well yes, but it’s also about the individual child.

Look op, you want to defer her and keep her going to a child minder for another year, just do it if that’s what you want.

But there is no cost to parents unless they purposely chose a SB to save nursery funds. If they had had a Sept born they would have paid exactly the same as a deferred Aug. A non defferred aug just saves you money.
Variation at individual level is so big i would be surprised if teachers could put kids in order of birthdate.
Attention/behaviour /concentration are probably most important.
I actually think it is probably less helpful with sen than it is for children who might struggle slightly forany reason.

Not RTFT but it's the best thing we ever did. Here is Scotland the youngest a child is is 4.5 years, right up to 5.5 years. Our DS3 was a couple of weeks before cut off so I was never going to do anything else. DS2 was a few months off of the cut off but I saw how he struggled socially in the first year of primary, and he missed nursery so much. He was always extremely academic but that doesn't mean kids don't struggle socially or emotionally. The change in him by P2 was phenomenal- I think he was just ready by then.

Similariy, DS3 is academically solid but he would have really struggled socially, starting at 5.5. He's now P4 and I couldn't imagine him being a year Higher.

Scotland are now considering a change si that all kids will be 4 and 8 months as a minimum- not much but progress.
I'm all for the Scandinavian model of Kindergarten age5-7 and school 7+. Poland and many other countries are age 6.

*He started at 5.5

YANBU but you will find it hard to get anyone else to agree with you even your preschool or nursery.

I applied to delay DS as summer born, but his preschool wouldn't keep him, they said he needed to go to school and would be too old for preschool. Interesting as he would have been 4 weeks older than a child born on the 1st September, but whatever !! I couldn't find anywhere that would take him for an extra year and I felt him being home with me all the time wasn't ideal. Well tell a lie,I could only find one place and it wasn't a good preschool and a long journey. So in the end I sent him with his cohort after doing a lot of extra work with him over lockdown. He's doing ok academically in reception, he's not advanced, but certainly not behind ( it's early days) school but struggles with the emotional maturity. One factor for me was my DS is very tall and looks older than he his ( could pass for 6 rather than 4, although his speech would give him away) , so I also felt delaying him would be obvious.

I wish there was more support for delaying / deceleration into reception.

@ThornAmongstRoses

I’m not sure if you mean to or not, but as a parent of a summer born who decided not to defer, your comments come off quite critical of us as a group. As if we didn’t care enough for our children to defer them, as if this is unequivocally a better choice for all children.

That’s genuinely not my intention, so I apologise if that’s how I come across. Some people are more than happy for their summer borns to start school and others not - there is no right answer and it’s just personal choice.

Just because I think it’s too young doesn’t mean I have any negative feelings towards parents who don’t.

But I’m sorry if I’ve made you to feel like I am being critical of you, I really wouldn’t want to cause any offence to anyone.

Thank you. I do appreciate that and realise that you’re posting here genuinely to help decide what is best for your child and I am sure you will make the choice that’s best for your family.

I still think we’re looking at the issue from opposite end of the telescope perhaps though. I do get what you’re saying. That it’s not down to you to feel/be responsible for any impact your decision to defer may have on summer borns in your daughter’s deferred intake that didn’t choose to defer.

But personally I’d have been less happy with my decision not to defer had I found a significant proportion of children in my daughter’s class to be 12-17 months older than her. I’m not talking about a sole child from the previous August who’s two weeks older than the otherwise eldest in the intake.

That is where I do think it then becomes a macro issue rather than re individual choice. If people decide to defer because they just want to rather than because of an obvious issue that would prevent their child to join their intake then the impact of the original policy intervention will change. As I’ve said upthread this could potentially have various types of impacts.

That is where I do think it then becomes a macro issue rather than re individual choice. If people decide to defer because they just want to rather than because of an obvious issue that would prevent their child to join their intake then the impact of the original policy intervention will change. As I’ve said upthread this could potentially have various types of impacts.

But you can defer for any reason you like. So that probably will have implications on the age-range of a class if deferring August-borns becomes the norm, but that will then even out again over time. And we know that starting school later benefits them overall.

Oh btw I was granted the delay by my council on the grounds of a speech delay, just delaying for shits and giggles doesn't seem to hack it. Emotional maturity could be an issue they might accept, separation anxiety etc. Saying you can defer just because, it is not as easy in some places. Church schools are also tricky to get into too. Luckily the school I wanted it as council controlled so as the council agreed to delay then the council ran school had to take him. Academy or church schools can make up their own minds. In the end I sent him on time. My advice is to apply as if sending and apply to delay too. In April when the spaces were awarded I told the council I would not accept the delay and took his place on time.

Oh btw I was granted the delay by my council on the grounds of a speech delay, just delaying for shits and giggles doesn't seem to hack it.

I doubt any parent does it for shits and giggles

It used to be that you had to have a medical reason for the request (speech delays, separation anxieties etc) in order to defer but the DoE now say that simply being Summer Born is enough of a reason alone to request deferral.

Yes, you can defer for any reason, but the policy is not in place for that rationale.

Ie. In the admissions booklet it doesn’t say “we believe children do better starting school nearer 5 than 4, so if your child is born between 1 April to 31 August you might prefer to apply for x year intake instead of y”.

It sounds like deferral is tolerated rather than encouraged in many cases (I’m not saying that is right btw) but if deferrals become more common it will change the dynamics of it all and may lead to changes in the rules - could be a tightening on current rules or the opposite.

I suppose all I’m saying is that I made my decision not to defer on the understanding that the current deferral policy, although flexible, underpins a situation where most people do not defer. If deferral was more prevalent it may have impacted my own choice and I think it would impact the overall policy direction. I’m not saying that is a good or bad thing per se. Just that I don’t believe the current system was put in place to encourage everyone eligible to defer as a natural default.

@Pl242

Yes, you can defer for any reason, but the policy is not in place for that rationale.

Ie. In the admissions booklet it doesn’t say “we believe children do better starting school nearer 5 than 4, so if your child is born between 1 April to 31 August you might prefer to apply for x year intake instead of y”.

It sounds like deferral is tolerated rather than encouraged in many cases (I’m not saying that is right btw) but if deferrals become more common it will change the dynamics of it all and may lead to changes in the rules - could be a tightening on current rules or the opposite.

I suppose all I’m saying is that I made my decision not to defer on the understanding that the current deferral policy, although flexible, underpins a situation where most people do not defer. If deferral was more prevalent it may have impacted my own choice and I think it would impact the overall policy direction. I’m not saying that is a good or bad thing per se. Just that I don’t believe the current system was put in place to encourage everyone eligible to defer as a natural default.

I think that’s true but that doesn’t mean it shouldn’t be challenged. As I said upthread, I’m in Scotland so this thread has been a real eye-opener. Deferral is fairly common here so the idea that parents are doing it to be pushy, or so their kid is in the top group, or that they shouldn’t because it’s unfair on the younger kids, or that it could be damaging to the kid is just so alien to me. It’s generally accepted that kids who would benefit from another year (for whatever reason, confidence, dexterity, maturity) just take another year and that’s that. It seems like there’s a real backlash against it in England - but really only because the system hasn’t been adapted for so long that changing it seems a big deal.

I would defer. It's about physical coordination, emotional maturity not just academic stuff. Plus the pandemic.

4 is so young to start school isn't it? Do many other countries still start at 4? Where I am children are generally 5 turning 6, a 4 year old turning 5 would be the exception. My DD started the month she turned 6 and wasn't even the oldest in her class. My DS on the other hand started 2 months before he turned 5 and still in his final year of primary school is the youngest in his year group.
I would defer.