To Decelerate School Entry

[Bl00dyH3ll]

My daughter was born 26th August due to start school September 2022. I just don't know what to do 🥺. She's small for her age and I worry that she will visibly be the youngest and struggle. Statistically speaking she's likely to be at a disadvantage, who wants to deliberately place their child at a disadvantage? A year is a huge difference! Children in her year group would have learned so many skills when she was being birthed, from words to walking! I can absolutely see the difference in a September/October baby from the previous year, yet no difference between her and October babies who are 2 months younger. As a summer baby, I was all good academically but fell short socially so I just feel she's likely to fall behind in one of these areas.

No developmental issues and is perfectly fine at nursery with children her age, aside from speech regression last March when the nursery closed and lockdown began she didn't say a word for 6 months, not even mummy but her speech is now spot on. I do worry about her ability to deal with change and pressure at this young age. Another concern is potential covid restrictions and I don't want her first year to be tarred by the current crap.

Gosh, why couldn't she have been born on her due date - 1st September!

@arethereanyleftatall even so, it is only natural to care more about your own child, not April born Olivia who's parents their own decision.

@BeagleMomma thank you for your opinion, it's good to get perspectives from people who work in education/early years.

A few people have said some children they have worked with at nursery would have benefited from an extra year and I'm always going to go with my gut and do what benefits my child the most 😊

I agree with you, it is only natural. Which is kind of why I think deferring shouldn't even be an option. It's already disadvantaged olivia born potentially 16 months later than their peers whose parents don't understand the rules that I'm concerned about.
I much prefer the idea of no one starting till 4.5.

@arethereanyleftatall I'm glad the rule is in place, there is a reason the legislation was passed. My daughter is end of August she will be no older bar a few days than someone born beginning of September is older than April.

I would likely not even consider it if she was born April/May/June. An April born in the following year will be at no more of a disadvantage than usual compared to September borns if my late August child delayed to their year, my daughter would be at a higher disadvantage remaining in her cohort.

April borns can delay too but then I see your point with the even bugger age gap but not when it's August.

[quote Bl00dyH3ll]@arethereanyleftatall I'm glad the rule is in place, there is a reason the legislation was passed. My daughter is end of August she will be no older bar a few days than someone born beginning of September is older than April.[/quote]
But if she was starting with my daughter she'd be more than a year older (also late August)? I'm so conflicted!

My oldest is an august baby and I wish I had deferred her entry for a year. She's 13 now and she has struggled socially all the way through

Re the children who struggled being youngest (August borns), can I ask what they were like starting school? Were they quite confident then took a backstep? Did school negatively impact them from the off or was it gradual?

Op, I get it and I really do. Both mine are summer birthdays plus they have sen so I was really anxious. Dd is the youngest in her year group. It really does make a difference when some children are a year older.

I considered keeping them back a year, I really wanted to but I was discouraged by the school they were going to and professionals involved. They said it was best she was in the year with children's she's been to pre school with.

I decided to stick to the correct year group and I am so glad I did after the anxiety about them starting. They both really surprised me and they have made huge progress. School really brought them on.

I considered part time for Dd but she cooed with school very well and it wasn't needed. She was the youngest in her year . DS did go part time for the first term.

It's your decision of course. But even though Dd is the youngest in her year 1 class, she still looks so much older than the children in reception. They grow up so fast when they start school.

You need to weigh uo the pros and cons. Speak to the school you are interested in.

You still have over a year. It might not feel like it but it's still a long way off for your child! A lot can change in a year!

Schools expect several children to be summer birthdays!

One problem with delaying entry for kids that have no issues other than being summer born, is that instead of a year between oldest and youngest in class there will be up to a year and 5 months! My daughter is midAugust born. She has always been tiny for her age and at 3 I did worry about how she’d cope, although academically she was advanced so our concerns were her physical and emotional well-being. She started off just attending morning and by Christmas was desperate to do full days. She has been absolutely fine in all regards and is one of the top in class in maths and was free reading by middle of year 2. However, she is still only six but is in the same class as several kids who were delayed for a year (some due to additional needs but other just because they could) who are already 8. The IFS did a lot of research into the effects of month of birth on attainment, and although there was evidence that summer borns did less well, they did not think that delaying entry was the solution. Summer borns are at maximum 6 months younger than the average age in their chronological year group, but once the class takes delayed entrants from the year above, the age gap starts increasing and teacher are having to cater for a much wider spread of ages.

@VertigoGo

One problem with delaying entry for kids that have no issues other than being summer born, is that instead of a year between oldest and youngest in class there will be up to a year and 5 months! My daughter is midAugust born. She has always been tiny for her age and at 3 I did worry about how she’d cope, although academically she was advanced so our concerns were her physical and emotional well-being. She started off just attending morning and by Christmas was desperate to do full days. She has been absolutely fine in all regards and is one of the top in class in maths and was free reading by middle of year 2. However, she is still only six but is in the same class as several kids who were delayed for a year (some due to additional needs but other just because they could) who are already 8. The IFS did a lot of research into the effects of month of birth on attainment, and although there was evidence that summer borns did less well, they did not think that delaying entry was the solution. Summer borns are at maximum 6 months younger than the average age in their chronological year group, but once the class takes delayed entrants from the year above, the age gap starts increasing and teacher are having to cater for a much wider spread of ages.

The school year where I am is 1st sept to 31st august. So a child that turns 4 on august 31st is expected to start school the following day with children that could be turning 5 within days. There is a huge jump in independence, motor and language skills and emotional literacy between most four and five year olds. Not to mention that a lot of the 5 year olds have had twice as long at playschool. My little daughter was coming home miserable and overwhelmed, tearful and falling asleep. It was too much and I do believe it did her no good to start so young

I think four is too young for formal education for most children. However, including sixth form, we have 14 years of schooling, so if we were simply to raise the starting age then we would have adults of 19 in secondary education. There's a difference between that, and starting 12 years of schooling at six after two years of preschool. I think it would be better if every reception class was developmentally appropriate for just turned four year olds, adapt the schooling to fit the children.

FuckingFabulous I absolutely agree that 4 is too young generally. However my younger mid August child was absolutely ready for school at age 4 and two weeks. She only had three months at pre school and that was just three mornings a week. From another perspective, her older sister was in nursery and pre-school from age 6 months. She is one of the oldest in her year and started reception at almost 5. She hated being dropped at school and was always exhausted and found it hard to make friends, struggled in several areas academically. She’s bright but emotionally immature despite being Autumn born.
It very much depends on each individual child and their needs. This would apply whether they started at 4 or 5 or 6.

@kowari. I think it would be better if every reception class was developmentally appropriate for just turned four year olds, adapt the schooling to fit the children.

I agree...if we had informal, free-flow play-based learning until age 7, it would be much easier for the just turned 4s to cope (and better for all children generally in my view). But that would require significant investment and higher staffing levels, I suppose, so unlikely to happen.

But that would require significant investment and higher staffing levels, I suppose, so unlikely to happen.
If children simply started a year later, say a change to age five, then four year olds would still need nursery funding.

But I suppose the issue is that school is cheaper than nursery due to lower staffing issues. So it costs less to have 4 year olds in school.

costs not issues

[quote Jellybabiesforbreakfast]**@kowari. I think it would be better if every reception class was developmentally appropriate for just turned four year olds, adapt the schooling to fit the children.

I agree...if we had informal, free-flow play-based learning until age 7, it would be much easier for the just turned 4s to cope (and better for all children generally in my view). But that would require significant investment and higher staffing levels, I suppose, so unlikely to happen.[/quote]
Reception is free-flow, informal, play-based learning. It’s more like nursery than school in terms of the approach to learning - I think the intention is that it is a transition year where the children continue with a more play-based curriculum but also get used to the expectations and structure of school i.e. following instructions, helping themselves to lunch, getting changed and so on.

Anecdotally I have heard that while many summer borns are fine in Reception, they can struggle with the step up to more formal learning in Year 1 at just turned 5. I agree that there should be a slower transition to the “sit at a desk and write” type of work so children have longer to learn through play. This would help the younger ones in the year who struggle with sitting still, motor skills etc. because of their age.

I taught in reception and always remember a little girl born on the 31st of Aug. A girl said to her "you are so tiny." She replied "i am tiny but i am fierce." Her parents were so worried about her being behind, she did brilliantly, met all the levels.