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.

I think a year in reception is not appropriate for a chronological y1

Even if they are only 1-2 weeks older than the September children in the same Reception year?

Or do you think that the September/October borns should skip reception and go straight into Year one because a Reception environment isn’t appropriate for children who have recently turned 5?

[quote Bumbelinaaa]@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[/quote]
Yes, I meant if you don't defer

I thought summer borns starting late were only allowed to go into year 1 with their regular school peers. To my mind this would be an even worse disadvantage as they would miss reception.

Can they go into reception now with the younger school year cohort? My son is an August baby so this would be helpful to know.

@Biffbaff

I thought summer borns starting late were only allowed to go into year 1 with their regular school peers. To my mind this would be an even worse disadvantage as they would miss reception.

Can they go into reception now with the younger school year cohort? My son is an August baby so this would be helpful to know.

Yes. If you use FB the group on there ‘Flexible Admissions for Summerborns’ will give you all the guidance you need.

Even if they are only 1-2 weeks older than the September children in the same Reception year?

They might be 1-2 weeks older, equally they could be 5 MONTHS older, as you can defer from April borns.

It wouldn't be such an issue if it were only late summer borns that could defer,but as it is, you can have a child that turned 4 the last day of August being taught with 5 1/2 year olds. It widens the age gap hugely, and that is a real problem for the youngest in year.

Sport is one of the last considerations in my opinion. Emotional well-being trumps everything else.

@undermycatsthumb

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.

Oh yes please to kindergarten stage so kids start school aged 7!! Not going to happen for my own DC unfortunately, but would be fantastic for the next generation 🤞

My DD was born 30th August and is the youngest in her reception class, I considered deferring her after reading threads on here where almost every poster said they didn't regret it. She used to cry when I dropped her off at preschool so I was concerned she wasn't emotionally ready. I asked preschool if they would support my application but they wouldn't and said in their opinion she was ready for school. I took their advice and I'm glad I did as she loves attending school, is confident, has lots of friends and is in the top of 4 sets for reading and maths. She hasn't once cried at drop off.

I agree that it seems unfair that people can defer from April, particularly as I suspect some parents only defer because they want their child to be top of the class rather than 'just' meeting expectations. I think there should be a requirement for corroboration from preschool, GP or HV before deferral is granted.

I know of it being an issue with grammar school entry. Child was actually a year too young she’s moved up a year (early September birthday and very bright) and couldn’t sit. Obviously she could have waited a year repeated year 6 and sat 11 plus
but she went private staying out of year into yr 7. I can imagine parents will face issues getting permission for a child to sit when they are not in usual year for age.
Child was out of year deferred in DD’s private school (so started reception at 5 - August birthday and little English) when she moved to state in year 4 she was not allowed to be out of year and went straight to yr5 skipping year 4.

They might be 1-2 weeks older, equally they could be 5 MONTHS older, as you can defer from April borns.

I would be really interested in the numbers surrounding this in terms of how many parents of April/May babies defer their child?

And I’m talking about children who are perfectly healthy and neuro-typical.

I can see why some parents would choose to do it if their child had been premature, or had health problems that related to delayed development or delayed social skills etc, but I don’t imagine many parents of healthy, NT children defer them just for being being born in April/May.

I may be wrong though

I think youll find its actually no problem for the youngest as - they likely dont know. Do you honestly think you can pick out a child 6w older.

If you use height you would have 50% in the wrong year groups.
And really why would learning be much different. Similarly to height the average would usually end up similar but unlike height being youngest or out of depth stunts them.

Children do know. My DD came home from reception first or second day saying X was older and I said oh was it her birthday this week no August. Likewise whole school knew Y should have been in class below.
Sports advantage of being older applies in UK too majority of premiership players are Autumn born. Bigger/faster/more co ordinated and so get picked for school team and then picked up by academies etc. Obviously nothing like stakes in USA but it’s a reason white boys with college educated parents are most deferred group in USA and it must factor into some parents reasoning here, no one wants their child last one picked in PE. Look up red shirting.

O completely understand why some children are held bk I was going to ask about my dd being held bk. Her birthday is August so youngest in the class she was 5 in the August then alot of her classmates were 6 in Sept and Oct so yes near a year older. It annoys me when teachers say she not where she should be well you are comparing her to children near a year older. Thankfully she's doing really well now and is back on target with everything so holding her back might not of been best anyway.

These threads are always full of indignant summer borns who were the cleverest ever and that this is all rubbish. But despite being the top in their school at everything they have no idea what "statistically significant" means. Maybe being kept back a year would have helped...

DD has a friend who is less than 3 hours older but that friend will be a school year above. I breathed a huge sign of relief when midnight rolled round and DD still hadn't arrived!

The difference isn't just academic. Athletes are more likely to be Autumn born with more Premiership Footballers being born in Sept-Oct. Summer borns on the other hand are more likely to be diagnosed with learning difficulties and to be bullied. One US study found that being the youngest in the year for black boys could make up to a 20% difference in the chance of being incarcerated than if they were the oldest.

In my opinion the answer is to have then start school as they do now but have a purely play based curriculum until age 7 or 8. Let them all just be kids a bit longer and build their confidence, physical and social skills before formal learning begins.

My 17 year old is having a problem now because most of his friends have turned 18. So being an August birth has its disadvantages when going to the pub with his mates.

Re school. He took longer to catch up and had an individual education plan but is a grafter and at high school overtook his peers. Fingers crossed he will get the results he wants to go to uni on his birthday on 10th August.

@HowToMurderYourLife

These threads are always full of indignant summer borns who were the cleverest ever and that this is all rubbish. But despite being the top in their school at everything they have no idea what "statistically significant" means. Maybe being kept back a year would have helped...

DD has a friend who is less than 3 hours older but that friend will be a school year above. I breathed a huge sign of relief when midnight rolled round and DD still hadn't arrived!

The difference isn't just academic. Athletes are more likely to be Autumn born with more Premiership Footballers being born in Sept-Oct. Summer borns on the other hand are more likely to be diagnosed with learning difficulties and to be bullied. One US study found that being the youngest in the year for black boys could make up to a 20% difference in the chance of being incarcerated than if they were the oldest.

In my opinion the answer is to have then start school as they do now but have a purely play based curriculum until age 7 or 8. Let them all just be kids a bit longer and build their confidence, physical and social skills before formal learning begins.

I agree, but I'd say if you did that then compulsory school age should be the age that the 'formal' teaching starts and not earlier.

If all started around 7, we could just scrap deferral system altogether.

Trtrrononl

How ridiculous to assume someone holds their child back because they don't want them to be the youngest!

My DD's birthday is 29th August and so will literally have turned 4 a few days before starting school IF we send her.

Waaaay more likely these particular children (not all summer borns who start at CSA) were immature socially which is part of the reasons their parents felt they would be better off starting a year later. There is no reason for any child to be bored in reception. You could put a 7 year old in most reception classrooms and they'd have a great time because they'd access the resources at their level.

@HowToMurderYourLife

These threads are always full of indignant summer borns who were the cleverest ever and that this is all rubbish. But despite being the top in their school at everything they have no idea what "statistically significant" means. Maybe being kept back a year would have helped...

DD has a friend who is less than 3 hours older but that friend will be a school year above. I breathed a huge sign of relief when midnight rolled round and DD still hadn't arrived!

The difference isn't just academic. Athletes are more likely to be Autumn born with more Premiership Footballers being born in Sept-Oct. Summer borns on the other hand are more likely to be diagnosed with learning difficulties and to be bullied. One US study found that being the youngest in the year for black boys could make up to a 20% difference in the chance of being incarcerated than if they were the oldest.

In my opinion the answer is to have then start school as they do now but have a purely play based curriculum until age 7 or 8. Let them all just be kids a bit longer and build their confidence, physical and social skills before formal learning begins.

Absolutely agree.

As long as the option is not just available to white middle class people, I am not sure it's an argument for not allowing it. Yes, research shows particularly boys do better, but then again there are real issues with boys' attainment. Why is deferment for some kids a bad thing, in that case?

My view is it needs to be accessible to all (so no postcode lottery, as there has been since 2015) regardless of uptake. Financially, I am not sure of this argument holds as you can claim 30 hours preschool care until age 5.

I accept that there may be some people do it to play the system but I have not met or read any of these people in years of reading threads like this and being on the Facebook group.

Sports advantage of being older applies in UK too majority of premiership players are Autumn born. Bigger/faster/more co ordinated and so get picked for school team and then picked up by academies etc

I do not know about the school team, as I said I deferred not knowing if he would be eligible to play on a school team against other schools. I am not sure if this is clear. For external sports, my son plays in his normal cohort (sports own e.g. FA rules).

Yes, kids know but they don't care or fixate on it in my experience.

And I agree Thorn. Sport was the last thing I was worried about!

There are two children in my dd’s class who are a year and 4 months older than her, so not just a week or two older than September born kids. One is super bright, though definitely bored and was deferred for a year simply because it is allowed in our county. The mum thought age 4 was too young for school. I was on the fence about sending mine at just turned 4, but she’s thriving and above average in most are areas despite being summer born. It very much depends on the child. Another August born is very disruptive and badly behaved in class but I don’t think it has anything to do with her age.

You may noylt thinks so and maybe not but

• my own dc was sent out of class multiple times in yr r

But hardly at all in yr 1. Desoite the work and sitiing still. Generally there have been fewer behaviour issues in the year group as they have gone up the school so all 4 challenging kids it was age related (though they were nov/jan/mar and jun). So either the reception environment too overwhelming/too full time Etc

My csa child has had 1 issue.

I do feel dc1 bad rep followed up the school. (With parents/teachers etc). And led to some punishment that was severe for the 'crime'

@Nats1984 your post is really upsetting. You have zero understanding about the emotional well-being of children.