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.

@maryjosephandtheweedonkey

Surely this would also apply to the early September birthday children too then??

Well exactly. A child born in the first week of September is a year older than a child born the last week of August.

A good teacher will always ensure that children are working at a level appropriate to their abilities, and age is often not the main factor in that.

pinkblueberry it is a thing now parents in England can start 4 year olds into reception a year late. It’s not widely done but parents have fought for it. Previously is a parent delayed start then the child missed all or part of reception.

@Pinkblueberry

It’s not same as them being September born as their parents have deliberately made a choice to hold them back. This is rare in England and will usually have been done because they are not ready i.e behaviour concerns that make parents think better having another year in nursery.

This isn’t a thing - unless you are schooling privately maybe, I’m not sure if they allow it. The government definitely doesn’t fund extra years of education for children who have parents who don’t think them ready for school yet.

Actually they do. If you choose to defer your child's school place, you can claim your 15/30 hours per week until your child reaches compulsory school age (the term following their fifth birthday). That’s what I did with my summer born when we deferred their reception place. They will essentially be treated as if they were September born.

There’s wide difference in take up of deferral in USA and Scotland due to levels of deprivation and parents education levels. There’s definitely a sharp elbowed element to deferral sometimes - white boys with college educated parents are most likely to be deferred in USA. I’m sure their parents say oh he’s young and would benefit from a year in kindergarten to anyone who asks not we are hoping he’ll get a sports scholarship at College.
In England it’s still very unusual to be deferred and most will have a reason eg premature, nursery flagged they are not school ready.

@Bumbelinaaa I know you can defer but that does not usually give you an extra year of education as I said - if you wait to start when they turn 5 they still join their original year group. An august born child who starts at 5 will simply miss a year of reception.

No that used to be the case but isn’t any more in England pinkberry
It’s only done occasionally but parents can legally start 5 years olds into reception if they are summer born and they stay with class until leaving age. There was a campaign. I believe some local authorities are more helpful than others.

When I was a kid my LA changed the cut-off date for the school year group. A boy who was already way ahead of the class in things like reading and writing was kept back a year, thus putting him a long way back. As a teen he got involved in a life of crime and was then in and out of prison. Of course no one can say these were definitely linked (as many other factors would have been involved) but I’ve always wondered.

[quote Pinkblueberry]@Bumbelinaaa I know you can defer but that does not usually give you an extra year of education as I said - if you wait to start when they turn 5 they still join their original year group. An august born child who starts at 5 will simply miss a year of reception.[/quote]
Yes you can. And I did.

By defer I meant my child started reception the September after their 5th birthday which was in August. This was a year later than standard practice for their date of birth.

They therefore got an “extra” year early years/nursery education than normal for their birth month. Although it would have been the standard amount for September born child.

I know you can defer but that does not usually give you an extra year of education as I said - if you wait to start when they turn 5 they still join their original year group. An august born child who starts at 5 will simply miss a year of reception.

This is not the case.

The child may start a year later but they will still start in reception. They do not start in year 1.

[quote Pinkblueberry]@Bumbelinaaa I know you can defer but that does not usually give you an extra year of education as I said - if you wait to start when they turn 5 they still join their original year group. An august born child who starts at 5 will simply miss a year of reception.[/quote]
That’s not the case. The admissions guidance changed in 2015.

Gosh there is a lot of misinformation on here. In England (not sure if rules differ elsewhere) if your child is born April or later you can:

1. choose for them to start a year later (skip reception and start in year 1)

2. request deferred entry to reception (enter reception a year later than they otherwise would have done).

Deferring entry is only agreed by the education authority if it is believed to be in the best interests of the child. It’s, as some people her seem to think, an open invitation for parents to hold back their coddled precious little poppets.

The only person I know who has deferred had a child born very late August with quite a significant speech delay. Parents had to have a detailed discussion with the school to agree this, based on assessing the girl’s needs.

Pinkblueberry that is definitely not the case in England any more. School Admissions Code gives the right for Summer born children to start in Reception at Compulsory School Age.

My daughter is a summer born and she started at CSA. We loved having the extra year at home to play and by the time it came to start reception she was ready to go.

*It’s NOT an open invitation, that should read

4fingerKitKat

Sorry, you’re wrong. The admissions authority has to give a best interests decision as to why a child starting at CSA would be better off starting in year 1. Blanket policies are unlawful.

@FontyMcFontface

4fingerKitKat

Sorry, you’re wrong. The admissions authority has to give a best interests decision as to why a child starting at CSA would be better off starting in year 1. Blanket policies are unlawful.

I think that was what I meant (or I am missing a nuance?)

"I wish we lived in Scotland! The attitude to school starting there is so much better."

MeadowHay it's not as great as it appears in Scotland unfortunately.

It all depends on the child! Off the top of my head, I can think of two of my summer baby students who fit into either category. One struggles socially and academically, is smaller than others and is just starting to join in with class routines and meet the behavioural expectations in the setting. He would have thrived with an extra year to grow.

Another child is literally hours away from the cutoff for the younger year group is one of my high flyers and would have floundered with an extra year to grow. She looks 5 going on 6, is strong academically and is very mature and well-spoken for a reception child.

Holding back children, even with recent changes, is still an incredibly difficult and arduous process. After 8 years teaching reception I firmly believe that nearly all summer-born children will do well with the correct intervention (many schools run interventions getting children up to speed with their peers. However, you see one or two each year that could have benefited from another year in nursery. I wish nursery settings and parents had the option to join forces and advocate for children who could use an extra year as some of these children really struggle throughout their time in primary.

[quote Pinkblueberry]@Bumbelinaaa I know you can defer but that does not usually give you an extra year of education as I said - if you wait to start when they turn 5 they still join their original year group. An august born child who starts at 5 will simply miss a year of reception.[/quote]
No, this has now changed.

[quote Pinkblueberry]@Bumbelinaaa I know you can defer but that does not usually give you an extra year of education as I said - if you wait to start when they turn 5 they still join their original year group. An august born child who starts at 5 will simply miss a year of reception.[/quote]
No my summer born started At 5 in reception.

My child is the eldest in class (deferred) and he can be a PITA, as can the kid from the council estate, the indulged posh kid etc. All lovely at times and annoying at others. It’s eSy to point to behaviour and say it’s because of x but doesn’t mean it’s true.

@HarrisMcCoo

"I wish we lived in Scotland! The attitude to school starting there is so much better."

MeadowHay it's not as great as it appears in Scotland unfortunately.

I think the thing is it’s not uniform. I’ve friends in the central belt and it’s nigh on impossible to defer a November or December born. Where I am the school are supportive if you want to defer and write you a statement no problems having school nursery funded an extra year etc.

I would say that means pretty much everyone defers though so the kids are from November to November which can make it tricky for those moving in who were young for the year somewhere else.

Deferring entry is only agreed by the education authority if it is believed to be in the best interests of the child. It’s, as some people her seem to think, an open invitation for parents to hold back their coddled precious little poppets.

If the education authority refuses a deferred start they have to state why it is in the child’s best interest to miss the entire year of reception. I’m not sure how that can be in any child’s best interests.

Being summer born alone is now a recognised reason to allow a deferred start.

The child doesn’t not have to have any medical or developmental deficit in order to be able to start reception a year later. Being summer born is reason enough.

@newnortherner111

The three youngest children in my class at school all went on to university and two have had successful careers (no idea about the third, could well have done).

I think the best approach would be to provide additional help to summer birthday children if needed, not keep them back.

Your language is very dated and inaccurate. In addition your anecdotes are not data, particularly on the life-long impact of starting school at a proportionately significant earlier age to a peer group. Summer borns in England and Wales now start school at compulsory school age (the start of the term following their 5th birthday). Reception was brought in as a school year so these children started school at 5.

If your children started school at an earlier age, then you sent them to school early, not the summer borns being kept back.

All of this problem has arisen because of the absolutely unacceptable attempt by previous governments to effectively change the school starting age to 4 to force more women back into the work place.

@Coldilox

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.

🙌 hear hear!