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

Also, sorry, I am in a snark this morning, but saying that your child has just applied to Cambridge means nothing whatsoever (except, I suppose, that they are capable of filling out an application form, which I have to observe isn't really above what you'd expect of your average 17 year old). Now, getting in might be an indication of intelligence!

Former early years teacher here. I taught a child born on 31st August - so it literally doesn't get any younger than that - and he was absolutely fine. My ds was born in August and deferring had never entered our minds.

A decent school will think of each child as an individual and work to educate and nurture them as best as possible. I see no reason to delay this process and early years is so strongly connected to learning through play, something no child is too young for imo. Each to their own though of course.

My son is an Aug baby and he was very young for his age. He started school in the correct year and although emotionally and maturely he appeared younger to me.. no one else seemed to see it as an issue.
Most girls especially (from my experience) are more than ready for school and will grab the chance to learn with both hands and relish the opportunity to learn and I personally don't feel (from your posts) that your daughter will struggle anymore than any others.

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.

You are not unreasonable to consider it for your child. Every child is different, and many benefit from a later start.

FWIW DS started Reception this year, a week after he turned 5. He is confident, happily waves goodbye every morning and is self-sufficient in class. He can’t read, but was ‘ahead’ in numbers. His school have treated him like any other child, and he does Year 1 Maths (along with a couple of others). At his parents evening, his teachers said she believed he has really benefited from his additional year and started school ready to learn. A year ago, he didn’t have the independence, confidence or patience for school.

People go on and on about the early "school" starting age in the UK without realising that very few places have no early years education settings! In the US most children will go to prek K and kindergarten from age 3 or 4, where the atmosphere is comparable to
preschool/nursery/reception in the UK. In france maternelle starts much younger than our reception. Swedish children go to preschools from age 3 or even before and most will be reading by the time they start "school" at 6.

Would people gripe about the uk system less if the reception year had the same play based EYFS curriculum it has now, but got grouped with preschools in terms of location?

I dont think people realise children in Scandinavia aren't at home with mummy until age 6

My child is mid august born , i considered deferring but didn't in the end , at the time she would have gone straight to year 1 which i didn't want .
I remember a case in the press recently where a family challenged their council / lea over the year 1 start and won so after deferral their child started in reception .
I don't know if this is now everyones legal right or just a one off fight .
Looking back i think at times it was clear there was almost a year difference between my daughter and her classmates when it came to maturity, she was the youngest in the year , but to me this wasn't considered by her school.
She is fine and has lots of friends , doing well ,but i can't help but feel her 2 older winter born siblings had the better deal .
I wish they would bring back an easter start , i think this would be helpful to a lot of children and their families .

@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.

Same, this thread has been a real eye-opener. I’d say even more so knowing how it is now, there’s been a real push to start them as late as possible in Scotland (one off the top of my head is the Give Them Time initiative) as well as the widespread introduction of the 1140 hours. It seems really strange to me that they can start so soon after their 4th birthday in England!

@ThornAmongstRoses

Do you think YOUR child will struggle in school? Do you think SHE would benefit from another year in nursery?

I’m not sure that as he’s just turned 3 I can make a confident statement about how he will cope academically when he starts school.

A friend of mine had a Summer Born and deferred his start so when he started Reception he had just turned 5. He was really good at maths and about 6 months into the school year he started joining the Year 1 class for math lessons and then went back to his reception class. She said it was really good the school recognised he was able at maths and act in this rather than him just be bored doing maths in Reception.

He’s currently in Year 2 and is doing really well compared to his Peers and his teachers have now asked his mum if come next September would she like him to jump up to Year 4 and miss Year 3.

It is positive they are being fluid about it as it shows that the decision you make at the start doesn’t have to be final and there is the opportunity for the child to move up if the teachers think they are able enough.

This is exactly why though you need to be very careful about making the correct decision for YOUR child.

THis tells me they made the wrong one - the social aspect of all of this is completely missing because in effect he either stays where he is with all his peers and works behind or has to go up a year and miss all the curriculum

I am August and would have hated being in the year below. DD best friend was August and was fine

DS has a friend who was due in October and was 6 weeks early and he deferred absolutely the right decision. He has a good friend who is August 27th who I think in many ways would have benefitted academically from being below. But his mum has a weekly tutor to shrink the gap. By now (Year 3) the social differences have all but disappeared

What I have noticed though is what seems a large gap at the start of school evens itself out by the end of Primary school and is not really there by the time Secondary starts

DS is an August-born child and I wish we'd done this. He was a sensitive, young boy and really struggled with the older boys physicality and attitude / confidence all the way through primary.

Trust your instincts I'd say. Your DH is well-placed to make a judgement.

You'll always get the ones who brag "all eleven of my children were born in August and were ABSOLUTELY FINE!"

@Di11y
No-one ever worries a 1 September born will be bored etc

I have 2 bright september borns (i am september born as well)

There were a lot of other september and october borns in the class! They were not bored, however the problems came in year 6 . They were not bored in year 6 , really enjoyed their sats, but they both needed the indepence and challenges that secondary school brings

I’d add though, while I’m in favour of deferring regardless, you can’t possibly know whether or not you’re correct once you’ve made the decision. They probably could start school and be absolutely fine, maybe a bit tired or a bit unhappy at first, but generally most kids are. I’d say there’s very little harm in having another year of nursery and boosting any academic interests at home - four is still very little and if it gives them a bit of extra space to get used to the idea of school then that’s no bad thing.

@ThornAmongstRoses

Do you think YOUR child will struggle in school? Do you think SHE would benefit from another year in nursery?

I’m not sure that as he’s just turned 3 I can make a confident statement about how he will cope academically when he starts school.

A friend of mine had a Summer Born and deferred his start so when he started Reception he had just turned 5. He was really good at maths and about 6 months into the school year he started joining the Year 1 class for math lessons and then went back to his reception class. She said it was really good the school recognised he was able at maths and act in this rather than him just be bored doing maths in Reception.

He’s currently in Year 2 and is doing really well compared to his Peers and his teachers have now asked his mum if come next September would she like him to jump up to Year 4 and miss Year 3.

It is positive they are being fluid about it as it shows that the decision you make at the start doesn’t have to be final and there is the opportunity for the child to move up if the teachers think they are able enough.

So really he should have gone at the normal start time for his age, as he is obviously capable of working within the normal range. The problem with missing year 3 out and re-joining the correct year is that he will leave his friendship group in the lower year, and will need to try and establish new friendships in his new year group.

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.

I really think the cut of for starting school in September should be 1 June, as then any child starting reception would have to be at least 4 and 3 months - but im sure this would create further issues for some children.

I would defer or do part time school, whether the school will get onboard with part time school though is another matter.

I have an August dd who is now 28 but I can still remember her falling asleep at 4.30 and not waking till the next morning during November of her first term. I got in the habit of making tea for as soon as we got hoe so she had something to eat before possibly falling fast asleep

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?

with hindsight, I should have just taken dd out of school some days of the week and let her absence be noted and not bothered worrying - nothing can happen as legally they don't have to attend school until they are 5

@Pumperthepumper no.

I have DTs that were due in September but born 29/8. They're now in y3. I considered deferring but their nursery / pre school said they thought they would be fine. They have been. They're in a class where 2/3 of the class are Sept / Oct born and I think that's really helped them. Emotional maturity was more of an issue I think but then their teachers have always said they forget they're pretty much a year younger than a lot of the class. Both are reading well ahead of expectations and one is ahead for maths too. The other is as expected. I was so anxious but everything has turned out okay for us.

I'd be less worried about the academics than about the socialisation thing. If she's socially ready, I'd send her. The academics can easily be caught up as they go. But if they're not socially ready, then that's harder to manage.

I think this is a really interesting discussion. I only have one DD, 3, Sept. born, so no skin in the game at the moment - but before having her I was adamant that she needed to be winter-born if at all possible, the gap would be vast otherwise, the research...

Now, with actual experience of a dozen or so kids we're close to, I think it's much more down to the individual child. If I look at her friends, children now aged 2.6 to 3.5 or so, there is enormous variation that doesn't seem to correlate to age - some are physically incredibly agile, others hesitant; some giving one word answers to questions and even that at a stretch, others are spouting whole sentences in two languages. At this point I'm leaning towards birth month being just another factor in the mix.

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

DS was born in late August and had only just turned four when he started reception
Tbh, I wish it had been possible to keep him in nursery for another year

While you are not being unreasonable, as someone who works in a primary school, you can certain ASK, but are unlikely to GET. Or not in the way you want anyway.

You are under no legal obligation to start your child at school until the term they turn 5, but neither are the school under any obligation to start them off in Reception. They are likely to only be offered the Year 1 class, with their age peers. Those children will have formed friendship groups and will have matured in a way your DD just can't do at home. Unless you are able and willing to "teach" the Reception curriculum to your DD at home, including learning to read, your DD will go into Year 1 at a real disadvantage.

While I can see the benefit of holding them back, and why parents want to do it, very few schools will do it (apart from in very unusual circumstances). Personally, I think it's more hassle than it's worth, and actually puts your child at a disadvantage long-term.

I'd be less worried about the academics than about the socialisation thing.

My DD has just started Reception at CSA (so just turned five). She could absolutely have started last year academically (she is ahead in phonics and numbers) but was not emotionally or socially ready. Even now she's pretty much the only one getting upset going in - her targets are about being brave and speaking up rather than 'homeworky' things.

DP is a teacher and always 'planned' for an autumn baby because he says on balance there is a difference, but she came early.

@NoIDontWatchLoveIsland

People go on and on about the early "school" starting age in the UK without realising that very few places have no early years education settings! In the US most children will go to prek K and kindergarten from age 3 or 4, where the atmosphere is comparable to preschool/nursery/reception in the UK. In france maternelle starts much younger than our reception. Swedish children go to preschools from age 3 or even before and most will be reading by the time they start "school" at 6.

Would people gripe about the uk system less if the reception year had the same play based EYFS curriculum it has now, but got grouped with preschools in terms of location?

I dont think people realise children in Scandinavia aren't at home with mummy until age 6

What makes you think people don't realise? I thought it was fairly well known.