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.

@a8mint

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

A chronological year 1?! What does that even mean.

Really? Cos my adult child is one of the most self assured, confident and savvy young women you’ll ever meet. My stepchildren were brought up similar and are very relaxed and successful too. My 4 year old May born already does 5 longer days at nursery than he will at school and I don’t think he’s cried about being left since he first started nursery at 8 months. Of course there are children who are sensitive but mine aren’t , they fail at something they shrug their shoulders and try again, they’ve never been pressured to be ‘good’ at anything , exams were taken with a ‘good luck but it’s not all that important attitude’ and yielded fab results because they weren’t nervous . My just turned four year old has slightly delayed speech as part of a hearing problem , he’s definitely outgrown nursery though and is ready for new adventures. He will undoubtedly be the lowest performing in the class for a year or two but I promise you he couldn’t care less and neither do I . He’ll enjoy it that’s all that matters.

The best thing that can happen is the roll out of the kindergarten stage so children don't start any formal education until the age of 7.

My typically developing but shy child is starting reception at 5 years 5 months - let that blow your minds!

While it has become the norm, it is of no benefit to small children to rush into phonics, reading and strict routine, all of which stifles creativity and imagination. There are numerous studies demonstrating that play needs to be the primary occupation of children up until age 7 or 8. We have got it wrong in this country, because the powers that be want you to dump your kids at school while you return to the workforce to pay your taxes. Don't be frightened, or more likely jealous, of those who step away from the path you've been told to accept as normal.

@ThornAmongstRoses

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

Stats are available on the government website. For 2020 just 5% of CSA applications were April born and 8% May born. 13% were June with the remaining 74% being July and August thus a few weeks difference with the oldest in the year

I think the trend of keeping summer born kids back is not helpful. At the end of the day, the cut off has to be somewhere, all that happens is the children born in may or whenever become the new youngest and are correspondingly arguably disadvantaged. I think it should be only allowed where there's a clear medical reason - eg children born prem who slip into the year above and clearly aren't yet ready to start.

The current system is stupid, as it's by choice you can end up where a parent of a June child can choose to delay a school start, that child can end up in a class with August children of the intake below.

My daughter is a very late birthday and was premature, so should have been born 2 months into the year below. She's also tiny physically for her age. I don't plan to delay her, because cognitively and socially, she'll be absolutely ready and keen to go, and would be bored left behind a full year, but it bothers me that she could be in a class with people effectively 16 or 17m older than her gestational age.

I dont think it should be parental choice, I think it should be recommended by health visitor/nursery key worker/doctor.

it is of no benefit to small children to rush into phonics, reading and strict routine, all of which stifles creativity and imagination. There are numerous studies demonstrating that play needs to be the primary occupation of children up until age 7 or 8.

Not all children are the same! I know of lots who've been beginning to read by 4 and it's been off their own initiative. Children who love books and stories and are read with often regularly want to learn themselves. Reading doesn't stifle imagination, it helps develop it! My son is 4 and a half and likes to read simple books, and loves counting and number games. I was exactly the same and due to birthday had to wait until I was almost 5 to start school and was desperate to go earlier.

Where are these studies suggesting "play" needs to be the primary occupation of children until 7 or 8? Please provide links to quality peer reviewed material.

The reality is in any cohort there will be some children who are less academically able who will find learning harder than their peers. They will do so whether you start at 5 or 8, and need more support and help, we should be focussed on providing that support, not delaying them.

The best thing that can happen is the roll out of the kindergarten stage so children don't start any formal education until the age of 7.

Maybe for yours, not for mine!

Sorry but what planet are you on? Not a realistic one that's for sure. Struggling children do not get the support they need in school, let alone those with mild needs. Mild enough to be overlooked - but significant enough to have a long term effect on their eduction and mental health. If a child can start school later, be more independent, meet class expectations, AND need fewer resources, who exactly is missing out there? What are your objections to that scenario? Is it because you are worried an older child might outsmart your child? The thing is, as you say, all children are different. This isn't about your child being ready at 4 and therefore everyone should be. It's about those who aren't, and are therefore disadvantaged.

Regarding reading, a child who actively chooses to start to learn to read is CLEARLY different to the standard reception group, which are children sitting round on a mat repeating phonic sounds with absolutely no context.

Google studies yourself, or are you so biased that would break your mind? Or, if that's too hard - just read about Scandinavian school systems.

I've read about them. I've also got scandinavian friends who've told me a lot about them and have suggested that many children are reading well before age 7 despite the later age of starting "school".

The reality is that systems where "school" only starts at 7 almost always have nursery systems that are compulsory and considerably more formal than preschool and nursery settings in the UK (preschool in Finland is compulsory from age 6 and includes learning to write letters as well as various other teacher led structured activity. The fact that it isnt called "school" doesnt mean the children don't start the basics of reading writing and numeracy at a similar age to children in the UK.

The standard reception group in the UK is not "children sitting round on a mat repeating phonic sounds with absolutely no context." What planet are you on! The EYFS is play based and child led. A tiny proportion of the day is formal instruction.

The point that you are so wonderfully missing is that children starting to learn letters at 6, or those who are self initiating reading, are in a much better place to learn. They are not being forced before they are ready. I visit different schools on a daily basis. The DAILY formal instruction is too much for some (not all) younger children in reception. To the extent that they struggle to attend, achieve and be happy. Not to mention the enormous leap to mostly table/mat based work in year 1, which is actually where most summerborns really struggle. So yeah, remind me what was your issue with giving these kids more time to mature and be ready?

Also, I've never heard another parent say professionals only can make the decisions about children's best interests. As a paediatric specialist I know a lot about child development, our education system etc. But I do not know everything about individual children. Parents are the ones we look to in order to learn how the child is really managing - are they masking difficulties until they get home? Are they struggling in other areas unseen by professionals? How can a GP or health visitor decide what is in an individual's best interests when they have most likely seen the kid a few times in their short lives? How can a nursery worker when they don't live with the child, where there is a huge range of experience/expertise among workers, and personal bias inevitably skews their recommendation?

Clearly this is somehow triggering for you, although I'm yet to work out why. Someone else's child starting school a bit later than a random cut off point has literally no impact on you or your kid. Your kids coped, which is irrelevant to other kids. Others need, or are afforded by their parents, more time to develop naturally and arrive at school when they're more ready. You do you, and leave other summerborn parents to decide what's best for their kids.

Maybe up to the end of KS1 teaching should be organised in terms rather than years. At the end of each term, instead of all 30 kids being promoted to the next term, a small number of place swaps could be be made by the school, so that each class would potentially contain children from 3 different "years", but who were in general closer in ability to each other than if year-groups were strictly enforced.

Plenty of examples in here about how children started school at barely 4, and were perfectly fine.

The thing is... Many summerborn children started school at 4 and thrived. Many did not. and this is where your mileage may vary.

Parents know their children best. In our case, our DD (4 in July) has been in full time nursery since she was 1. She is quite bright, chatty and inquisitive, but is behind emotionally and to an extent physically and we do not consider that she will be ready for school at 4 and a few weeks for those reasons. She has become legendary in her nursery for her meltdowns. They are becoming less and less with time but we are not there yet.

When she starts Reception at 5 in Sept next year she will be fully ready to learn.

This is not about a child being one of the youngest in class. (Someone has to be), but about being ready for school at 4 and a smidge..

@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.

Exactly this.

This is why we delayed our DD.

@ThornAmongstRoses

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.

Most sports bodies will allow children to compete with their cohort.

For example, the Football Association now allow this as long as a child is not more then one year out, so to speak. You just need to fill in a dispensation form of some sort with your local County FA.

To be honest maybe a child who can keep up with kids 12m older is more concerning. Dc1 can and is years ahead in some things. But it is possibly this gap between achievement and emotional level. Which has been increased by being with older kids and learning harder stuff. Which has pushed her to not getting on with peers to this extent.
It's not going to happen to everyone. But similarly my school group was aug/aug/jul/nov.
As an aug but in the top sets i wasnt in any the same as my friends. (Possibly we were all immature).
In fact another dc was accelerated as a sept born didnt do well enough at alevels and ended up repeating.

I suppose i mean if your sb child is bright enough to be top anyway, they may still be friends with the kids closer in age which leaves them with the more immature ones.

@undermycatsthumb

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.

Thats interesting, because the current situation is effectively that the december born boys (I have one of these) become the youngest- all the jan/feb boys defer (not all the girls) so about 1/3 of my son's class were almost a full year older than him.

@NoIDontWatchLoveIsland

it is of no benefit to small children to rush into phonics, reading and strict routine, all of which stifles creativity and imagination. There are numerous studies demonstrating that play needs to be the primary occupation of children up until age 7 or 8.

Not all children are the same! I know of lots who've been beginning to read by 4 and it's been off their own initiative. Children who love books and stories and are read with often regularly want to learn themselves. Reading doesn't stifle imagination, it helps develop it! My son is 4 and a half and likes to read simple books, and loves counting and number games. I was exactly the same and due to birthday had to wait until I was almost 5 to start school and was desperate to go earlier.

Where are these studies suggesting "play" needs to be the primary occupation of children until 7 or 8? Please provide links to quality peer reviewed material.

The reality is in any cohort there will be some children who are less academically able who will find learning harder than their peers. They will do so whether you start at 5 or 8, and need more support and help, we should be focussed on providing that support, not delaying them.

I take it you have no direct experience of raising children who have additional needs and you need to battle to get resources they need? I know of several in this situation. No parent should need to jump through hoops.

Delaying start should be up to the parents.

Thank you for your post somanybogies. You summed it up well, better than I could.

All the professionals working with ds are saying We should defer his entry to reception because he can't talk and is struggling to grasp the concept of PECS.
I never thought about it before it was mentioned by the people working with ds

@lillylemons

All the professionals working with ds are saying We should defer his entry to reception because he can't talk and is struggling to grasp the concept of PECS. I never thought about it before it was mentioned by the people working with ds

Sending him to a specialist ASD or language and communication unit may be better than simply deferment. Which is the defermentto? Mainstream or specialistunit? . What kind of nursery is he in? Are they experienced in PECS? What diagnosis? Ds ACtually did better with aAC device but the basic concept of PECS was there already

Delaying start should be up to the parents.

100% agree.

If children don’t need to legally be in school until the term after their 5th birthday then parents completely have the right to make their own choice about when their child starts school.

It’s got nothing to do with not wanting their child to be the youngest in the class, it’s about for a lot of children they are not ready (socially or emotionally or academically) to go to school at just turned 4 years old.

I’m sitting next to my 3yr 9m old child and there’s just no way I would be happy to send him to school in three months time.

One of my DC is summer born and we're considering what to do. All of the research shows that summerborn children are disadvantaged throughout their time at school and even beyond this. I've not read any research that places them at an advantage and the only counter argument seems to be ' well I was summer born and I've done brilliantly in life'. Of course summer born children can do just fine with their normal cohort but it is quite clear that they are statistically likely to do much better if they go the year afterwards.
I think it's wonderful that the OP's school is so forward thinking and accepts summer born children out of cohort. From what I understand, this can be quite a battle in some areas

My DD is one of the youngest in her year but top of the class (yes I do know that, how I know isn't relevant). I considered keeping her at preschool for an extra year because she showed absolutely no interest in letters, numbers or reading for herself. She's also a bit of a retiring type rather than forceful. Her best friends at preschool were Sept and Oct children. But she could read by the end of the first term in Reception because she had a fantastic teacher and was surrounded by children who were interested. Her year is boy heavy (literally 2:1) and the behaviour is dreadful. So I worry about her emotionally as you worry about your DD but from her experience I'd put it down to boys rather than summer born kept back. (not all boys are like that but they are in both DD's classes)

I think with sb you then dont know where they should fit in the year.
So say dc1 came out as 25th centile. But will they keep going higher or not. Will teachers realise they are capable of more.
The school don't really push them.
Same with sen it would be hard to tell if a child is behind due to sen or just young. Even if they do get diagnosed it is for say adhd over 6 so y2 already.