Summer babies kept back at school

[ThisCollie]

So I probably am. In DD's year 2 class there are 3 children who have been sent to school a year later on account of being a summer baby.
All 3 children have caused trouble from day 1, especially the oldest lad, who on top of things seems bright.
Aibu to think that this happens a lot, because they are bored and would be better off in the year above?

YABU - the parents know best and this is just a coincidence.
YANBU - this seems to happen a lot and could be a factor.

In Scotland the youngest child starting school is 4.5 and we don't have whole classrooms of bored, naughty children.
Just turned 4 is ridiculously young in my opinion. In fact most parents of jan & Feb borns I know (so 4.5 when starting school) defer them so they're 5.5 when starting.

Why then the big push from parents of summer born children to stay back, rather than just starting a year later but with their cohort, missing out reception year?

Why should they miss a year of education?

As a late August birthday I'm very glad this trend wasn't around when I was born! I started a top university just 3 weeks after I turned 18 and never looked back.

We should be supporting the youngest rather than making decisions that will affect them for the rest of their childhood, potentially always

I did it with my eldest, it’s not for everyone but it definitely helped our child immensely, as they also have SEN and speech delays so it was just one less challenge for them to contend with. We received some resistance from the school to begin with however they have openly told us in hindsight it was definitely the best decision for our child. If anyone is considering it I would really recommend joining the “Flexible School Admissions for Summerborns” Facebook group.

As for the OP, I’m not sure your anecdotal evidence of 3 children is enough to make such a sweeping statement

I believe summer born refers to born from April who have the right to start school a year later, so the difference can be more than a couple of weeks. For example in my son's year 1 class there is a May born child who would normally be in year 2. She is as far as I am aware disruptive though, but is ahead physically and academically.

I suspect if there is a pattern it is in part because of the underlying reason that parents choose to start school out of cohort.

That is because missing reception is most detrimental of all.

My other dc os y4 and the 2 kids on the class to have read 50 books are winter bd (1 being the year group eldest). They are also fastest on ttr.
But it's not even that - it is interests too. So i cant give dc say books for 11yo but the eldest in the year would be ok with that.

I think children kept back are perhaps more likely to be quite coddled etc, given they aren't starting school with their peers. If it's for a specific reason which means that child won't cope, fine, but a lot of the time, from seeing people do this, it's because they just feel it's too young, or they (understandably) want an extra year with them. If their parents feel strongly enough that 4 is too young to start, then a higher proportion will likely also feel it's too young to be firm in behaviour/boundaries etc. And I expect a lot are bored, because some will be nearly 5 and a half (you can defer from April born) , and they are in a class with 4 year olds.

OP, I relate completely.

One problem is that "summer born" means anyone born 1 April to 31 August - that's almost half the year group that can be held back, if parents choose to. Some children can be 17 months older than the the youngest in the class!

I was all for flexibility for summer borns when I first heard about it, because I thought it was addressing children born at the end of August who might really struggle. But extending that to cover children born Apr-Aug is just taking the piss. It encourages competitive parenting and sows confusion for teachers.

My summer ‘should’ be starting school this august, just 9 days after his 4th birthday, but
me and DH have decided to send him next August instead.

I don’t think late summer borns are ‘bored’ as they are potentially only 2-3 weeks older than the children in the class who have September birthdays.

I can’t imagine a time when September/October borns are told to skip reception as they’ll probably be bored.

@Babyboomtastic

I think children kept back are perhaps more likely to be quite coddled etc, given they aren't starting school with their peers. If it's for a specific reason which means that child won't cope, fine, but a lot of the time, from seeing people do this, it's because they just feel it's too young, or they (understandably) want an extra year with them. If their parents feel strongly enough that 4 is too young to start, then a higher proportion will likely also feel it's too young to be firm in behaviour/boundaries etc. And I expect a lot are bored, because some will be nearly 5 and a half (you can defer from April born) , and they are in a class with 4 year olds.

Yes, this is also my perception.

If this was a thing, wouldn't we all have heard more before now about September-born-children having worse behaviour (on average) than summer-borns?

Possibly they were already struggling with behaviour in nursery/pre-school, and parents thought that it was mainly because of being young in the year, and that another year of nursery might help. It wouldn't be such a silly idea if you have a 3 year old who isn't very good at sitting still and listening.

Or it could just be coincidence.

@lanthanum

If this was a thing, wouldn't we all have heard more before now about September-born-children having worse behaviour (on average) than summer-borns?

Possibly they were already struggling with behaviour in nursery/pre-school, and parents thought that it was mainly because of being young in the year, and that another year of nursery might help. It wouldn't be such a silly idea if you have a 3 year old who isn't very good at sitting still and listening.

Or it could just be coincidence.

No, we wouldn't, because the ability to hold back 'summer borns' has only been available for a few years in England. Not much research yet. Plenty of anecdotal reports eg the OP and from teachers though.

They aren’t really older than the sept children in the class by any noticeable margin, so probably isn’t their age.

Nothing wrong with talking to the school about them though!

I wonder if one day there will be scope for sending September and October borns a year early by the same reasoning?

My son is August born and the oldest in his class, as we delayed his entry by a year.

He’s not disruptive or badly behaved, in fact he’s quite the little rule-follower.

Neither is he molly-coddled by us, noted or whatever else people may judge. He’s doing well at school (Y1), takes learning in his stride, and is doing far better than he would have done if he had gone a whole year before he had to simply because it’s the norm.

Stop judging other parents for making what they feel is the best decision for their kids, and worry about your own.

Of course YABU. Very strange opinions on this thread.

As a PP said, in Scotland, the earliest a child can start school is 4.5. Many January/February parents choose to defer - it is NOT holding back - so their child starts at 5.5. The council provides automatic funding for an additional year of nursery for January and February borns. Every teacher I've spoken to on the matter has praised deferral. Clearly, they are not worried about having classrooms full of 'bored' 5.5 year old starters!

It has recently been agreed that, from 2023, September, November and December borns will also be automatically given an extra year of nursery funding (you can already get this in many instances if you apply to the council) i.e. it will be possible for children in Scotland to start school at almost 6. I think this is wonderful.

If you look globally, we start school in the UK extremely young, and we don't have anything positive to show for it. Why are we not emulating better school systems overseas? I'm so glad to live in Scotland and be able to give my kids that extra year of play.

As usual most of you are underinformed and talking absolute rot. Even when presented with the opportunity, most people still choose to not defer their summer born children. I wish it was as easy for other people to defer if they need to( that's defer not 'hold back' 🙄) It was the best thing I could have done for my child who is thriving not surviving. If you're noticing shitty behaviour in summer born deferred kids that's down to the individual kids and parenting obviously. Leave your confirmation bias at the door and educate yourself

Csa are no more in a class 'of 4yo' than aug borns are in a class 'of 5yo'its a range of generally 12m.
With the average 4y6m in sept. Though probably slightly older but not because of csa kids more because everyone has been aiming for sept borns for the last few years so there are more born sept -dec.

The advantage is not in becoming top it is more in avoiding being incorrectly placed in the bottom. Where you dont even learn the whole curriculum.
If aug born you would obviously need to be advanced at least 12m to be top.
If you were 12m behind you would be below the bottom of the year below.

Op i bet you wouldnt even have noticed if you hadnt been told.

Also the work level is set for the eldest - not the youngest. Or even the average. The curriculum has changed a lot since we were at school. The gcse maths is more like an AS level.
Let alone the fractions etc in primary.

Something like 1/3 summerborns dont reach the reception eyfs levels - even with being in school.
I think it wouldnt matter if
Sumerborns did catch up by the important exams
If it dudnt affect their perception ilof their abilities.
If targets werent set from reception and ks2 sats which encourages schools to help to students keep at the same level - meaning the eldest are pushed to exceed.
They group by 'ability' even in yr r.

I've never seen children in the 'wrong' year group in any of the 14 years I've had kids in school. I can, however, confirm that there are little shits in every class, and they're usually boys at that age. I don't think age comes into it.

@tentimesaday

"No, we wouldn't, because the ability to hold back 'summer borns' has only been available for a few years in England. Not much research yet. Plenty of anecdotal reports eg the OP and from teachers though."

There's been plenty of evidence about the differences in academic success of autumn- and summer-born children, before there was the ability to hold back summer-borns.
Similarly, if there were significant differences between the oldest and youngest in the year on behaviour, surely that would have been evident in the same way? We'd have heard that being the oldest in the year was an advantage academically and a disadvantage behaviourally.

What we might not have evidence on is whether it is "holding children back from their expected year group" that makes them worse behaved. However I would have thought that most just-turned-5s would not have to be aware that they were in the "wrong" year group.

I’d assume additional needs OP. They weren’t ready for school so delayed. The parents hoped issues due to being young in year but as got older issues become more apparent.
My DC went to a small private primary school classes of 10-15. Lots of children had additional needs. My DC has a physical disability. Parents trying to ensure needs accommodated when they aren’t severe enough for 1-1. So a small class size and teacher and ta does assist especially when young. Reason parents search out small village schools etc - saying dc wouldn’t cope in class if 30. But it can only mask so long and as the dc get junior age issues become more apparent.

@motogogo well I'm a late August birthday and really wish this option had been around when I was little. Goes to show we are all different eh?

YANBU - I think parents try to give their summer children an advantage, but they end up being bored. My dd is a July baby. She is bright. No way I would put her back a year just so she could be the oldest.

My summer born is both super bright and very well-behaved (not just me saying this - he's been described as a "joy to teach" by every teacher he's had!)

I did ask his nursery teacher if I should keep him back and she advised against it, saying he'd be bored. She was quite right!