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.

@BarbarianMum

You know, it's not about being bright, it's about being ready for school. You can be very bright and not be ready - physically, socially or emotionally.

Lots of local authorities in Scotland now say it's about the school being ready to meet every individual child's needs. Get out clause to not have to authorise discretionary referrals, basically....

It isn't as easy as parent choice. We had a couple of children at very end of August who were also immature for their age whose parents wanted them to defer a year and start reception a year later.

The school and council needed some solid proof that this would be in their best interests before they authorised it. The children in this case did benefit hugely from the extra year in preschool as opposed to going a couple days after their 4th birthdays.

There’s so much research out there now about how being a summer born can be of huge detriment for the duration of their education. It’s not just about if the child is ready for reception or not, it’s about looking at the child’s education long term.

[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]
This is not true Ds had a whole lot of reasons why we delayed his school start - speech, toiletting, physio, occ therapy, sensory problems. He was essentially a baby still. He started a year later in Reception, where he still required an awful lot of support. That extra year not only gave him time to make more progress towards, more importantly it meant he got an extra year of additional interventions tailored to his needs. He is now Y2 (should be Y3) and when compared to other Y2s sits beautifully among them. Delaying was the best thing we could have done. He has not missed a year of Reception.

However, we have been told that usually they like to get children back to their age cohort before starting high school. But again, it doesn't have to be the case It's child dependent

Kids vary a lot developmentally at that age, and some are not ready yet for the expectations of school. This would be less of an issue if school started at five, six, or even seven, like other places, but at four many won't be ready to do things like beginning to read, or sitting and listening for periods of time, being together with so many kids, whatever. Some are still wanting a nap at that age and find a full day far too long.

Classrooms can accommodate some range but that doesn't mean that it will lead to the best outcomes for every student to start at the same age.

Kids that start younger or are late developers comprise a lot of the students I get for remedial reading tutoring. They tend to miss the foundational elements as they just aren'r developmentally ready, and by the time they are, the class have passed on to other things, or they pick up bad habits - often encouraged by parents and teachers because they appear to be reading, but they are actually missing the skills.

Parents tend to have a better sense than anyone else if their child might be better off to just wait a bit.

However, we have been told that usually they like to get children back to their age cohort before starting high school. But again, it doesn't have to be the case It's child dependent

I really don't understand the point of this - if the student appears to be needing to move along, sure, but why bother otherwise? At 40 no one looks back and says, oh, my life was ruined because I finished school a year later.

It's neater on the computer systems. Seriously, that's it.

A SENCO at a school I worked at once told me (after ds had his start deferred) that in her opinion it is depriving those children of their human rights. So there is an ideological side to it too. One class I taught had 8 year olds plus one child who wasn't any more than 18 months developmentally. It did neither him nor any of the other 29 children in the class any good.

However, we have been told that usually they like to get children back to their age cohort before starting high school. But again, it doesn't have to be the case It's child dependent

I think this is what worries people.

It’s difficult because when the child moves up to secondary school the parents have another battle to fight because it’s not an automatic right the child will start in Year 7 with their peers, but possibly be sent. straight into Year 8.

Thankfully, with all the changes in guidance this now doesn’t seem to be the case because if a secondary school wants to take that action they have to prove why it’s in the child’s best interest to completely miss Year 7. I’m not sure many secondary schools can provide a reason for that question...

Thankfully my local authority has told me that my deferred son (starting next august instead of this one) will stay in his cohort for the duration of his education - but despite thus reassurance, a part of me is still worried about the secondary school transition.

I would not worry Thorn. I am three years on from you. The cohort my August born son is in is the right cohort for him and that's not going to suddenly change in year 6. I have a letter from my LA stating this is the year he will stay in and if you have too, there is no way anyone will force your son to miss year 7.

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.

I am in the UK and my son plays sports out of school in his correct cohort, which are age based. I am not sure about at school, it's the one thing I am not sure about at secondary school. I decided the pluses for him socially outweighed whether he was eligible to play in the school football team. I have never heard anyone getting a HE scholarship for sports in the UK.

So I don't think this is a factor here for most parents who choose this route.

So I don't think this is a factor here for most parents who choose this route.

Absolutely.

I had one person say, “but have you thought about the possible implications of him wanting to play in school sports team?”

And I was thinking, do people really think I’d forego my son’s emotional, mental and educational well-being just so that he doesn’t have to miss out on playing football?

It’s a really strange argument.

My DC1 would struggle sooo much if he started at just turned 4. He is a bit of a late bloomer.

Conversely I can see my September born DC2 being skipped ahead at some point as she is very advanced and holding her back If she had been an August baby would have been very detrimental to her as she needs the challenge.

I wish school in general Wa a more Montessori like child lead. With children progressing at their own pace

@ThornAmongstRoses

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.

Admittedly I only know about this second hand (seeing a friend go through this process with her child) but I thought the comparison that was made was against the child starting reception with the normal cohort, not with missing reception entirely?

But either way, my observation of the process seemed to be that the education authority demanded a lot of evidence and it was far from a forgone conclusion. You make it sound like the education authority effectively has no sway in the matter?

(Genuinely curious about this, as I say I am not a great expert)

[quote 4fingerKitKat]@ThornAmongstRoses

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.

Admittedly I only know about this second hand (seeing a friend go through this process with her child) but I thought the comparison that was made was against the child starting reception with the normal cohort, not with missing reception entirely?

But either way, my observation of the process seemed to be that the education authority demanded a lot of evidence and it was far from a forgone conclusion. You make it sound like the education authority effectively has no sway in the matter?

(Genuinely curious about this, as I say I am not a great expert)[/quote]
No child has to be in education until the term after their 5th birthday. For a summerborn that is a year after their ‘normal’ cohort starts. The right to start at compulsory school age (term after 5th) is indisputable, so if a parent is certain their child won’t start until CSA what becomes disputable is whether the child joins their ‘normal’ cohort in Y1, having missed Rec, or is permitted to start Rec with the year ‘below’.

The process differs from authority to authority. My LA says it is up to the headteacher, I didn’t have a single refusal from the 7 heads I spoke to, we had no evidence of anything except his date of birth.

I’ve only heard of this happening in private schools, not state. I honestly had no idea state schools could demand a child was kept behind a year. My DD was born in mid August and she’s the youngest in the class but also one of the brightest, it’s never affected her. She’s in a special group for advanced children. She’s in year 4 and always been bright, it’s never phased her. One of the tallest in her class too.

I think some posters are quite naive about the reasons for deferring ... in an ideal world it would be purely about 'readiness for school' but this isn't always the case.

There are lots of deferred children in DS year (Scotland). Some were deferred for because it was in the child's best interests (additional needs) but in other cases it was because:

• research shows that deferred-entry benefits children, especially boys, academically
• it was easier to keep the eldest at nursery with siblings so that logistics were easier
• keeping child in same year as their friends
• planning to move house to better catchment area in next year

Maybe it's a particular issue where I live but I think the research shows it is more middle class, higher income families that defer - possibly because there can be a financial impact

The education authority have absolutely no say in when a parent decides to send their Summer born child to child to school - that is the parents legal choice to make.

So if a parent says they are sending their child to school after their 5th birthday there is nothing the authority can do about it.

The only part they play is saying whether that child starts in reception or whether they have to immediately go into Year 1.

If they say they would put the child into Year 1 they have to provide reasons as to why this is in the child’s best interests.

So effectively, they have to give an argument as to why a child missing out on the entire reception year is what is best for the child.

And like I said - I’m not sure that any school could justify that.

The process differs from authority to authority. My LA says it is up to the headteacher, I didn’t have a single refusal from the 7 heads I spoke to, we had no evidence of anything except his date of birth.

It’s usually with Academy schools that the final decision rests with the Headteacher. With schools under the LA, although the Headteachers opinion is taken into account, it’s generally the LA who have the final say.

Like you, I had no problem. I spoke to the Headteachers of three schools (all Academies) and none of them had an issue with my request at all. It was a very simple process.

ThornAmongstRoses in my LA it is up to the head. My child is at an LA controlled school. Our LA did have a blanket approval policy until (I think) 2018 - it was simply parental request, they’ve now moved to headteacher agreement. This is why I’m not worried about secondary school! There are quite a few kids ahead of us so the secondary school will be used to it by the time I come along.

The summer born DC don't get as much preschool funded time do they? I have 1 summer born and so he was entitled to preschool funding from the September and started school the following September. So 3 terms.

My March-born got 4

And my September/October born got 5 terms in total.

I think that's right anyway

My mum was horrified that I didn't delay my summer born. But she was Scottish and neither my brother nor me started until we were 5 (both summer born). I think we skipped but at that time there was an extended period of part time anyway/not starting until Easter etc so it wasn't significant.

@ThornAmongstRoses

The process differs from authority to authority. My LA says it is up to the headteacher, I didn’t have a single refusal from the 7 heads I spoke to, we had no evidence of anything except his date of birth.

It’s usually with Academy schools that the final decision rests with the Headteacher. With schools under the LA, although the Headteachers opinion is taken into account, it’s generally the LA who have the final say.

Like you, I had no problem. I spoke to the Headteachers of three schools (all Academies) and none of them had an issue with my request at all. It was a very simple process.

The process varies depending on LA and I think the majority of LA’s just say it’s down the to headteacher of the school you are applying for (it was in my case). Personally I applied to 4 schools and 2 agreed to deferring. However I am a member of the Flexible School Admissions for Summerborns” Facebook group and have seen some people really struggle with getting schools and/or LA’s to agree, with both LA’s and schools being totally ignorant to the need to justify their refusal. It’s definitely not an easy process!

I think some posters are quite naive about the reasons for deferring ... in an ideal world it would be purely about 'readiness for school' but this isn't always the case.

I agree that there are many reasons but I don't agree with what you say about an ideal world. I deferred Feb born DD because there is a wealth of evidence that suggests that it is beneficial for children to start school later, not just academically but socially, emotionally, etc. Also that children should learn through play at 4/5.

In my ideal world, all children would be deferred! I think, once the automatic autumn deferral comes in, there won't be many winter birthdays that DON'T defer as being a just 4.5 year old in a class with a 5.11 year old is really a big difference. So, over time, the starting age will migrate towards all children in Scotland being at least 5 by the time they start. It was interesting to see both the Lib Dems and Greens campaign on a kindergarten stage here, with school starting at 7 - the Scandinavian model has such positive outcomes, so why don't we try to adopt it?!

At 4.5 DD was writing, reading, swimming, able to get up and make herself breakfast, had a wide circle of friends - she was ready in all facets for school. Nonetheless we deferred her, as did all my 'Mum' friends with Jan/Feb babies defer theirs, and most of the Jan/Febs in her nursery. Was she bored at nursery in that extra year? Of course not!! She was reading in the reading corner, making art, growing vegetables, playing wonderful games with her friends, singing, putting on plays, visiting local woods, and engaging in all the other activities that a good nursery provides.

My summer born started a year late and skipped reception. I think a year in reception is not appropriate for a chronological y1

@ArianaDumbledore

You still continue to get the 15/30 free hours until they start reception even if you delay/defer, they are basically treated as if they were September born