August babies shouldn't be allowed to move down a year

[SapphosRock]

My DD has a late August birthday, she is 6 nearly 7 and about to go into Year 3.

A friend in her class (let's call her Lucy) has an early August birthday but was allowed to move down a year. She is already 8.

No special needs, her mum just decided she would prefer her DD to be the oldest in the class rather than one of the youngest.

This has impacted my DD in a few ways. She is good at sports but being the youngest means she doesn't often win. On Sports Day Lucy came first in the year 2 running race. My DD came 4th so missed out on a medal.

Lucy had a sleepover for her 8th birthday and invited the girls in DD's class. Most went but I didn't think DD was ready for a sleepover as she's still only 6 so she missed out on a fun party.

Lucy got the biggest speaking part in the Christmas play as she is the most confident and articulate.

AIBU and precious to think Lucy should have been kept in the correct year group?

My dc are both some of the oldest in their year, not August though. One of them is quite advanced for their age the other is behind and neither of them have ever come first in a sports day race. My friends August birthday dc in the same year group is way ahead of many kidsnin their year. Surely your dd has other friends and there will be other sleepovers when she is ready?

Sorry, OP. You do sound awfully jealous.

Your DD is not entitled to a medal and it wasn't her who stopped her going to the sleepover, it was you.

Even if your DD had been born in a mid school year month there would likely have been kids more and less clever than her and who came above and below her in sports day events.

Stop comparing your DD to other kids and let her flourish at her own pace. What other parents/children do is not your business.

If its a problem that it is mostly middle class families who take this option, then isn't the solution to publicise it? For nurseries and health visitors to discuss it with parents. For school application booklets to be up front about it. For easily accessible about how it interacts with childcare funding and the benefits system.

Saying we should take this option away because disadvantaged children don't take it is levelling down. We should make sure that those who need it and face disadvantage can access it.

This. ^ 4 IS too young, and it should, be 6 IMO. Doesn't stop parents teaching and educating their little children with the basics! WE used to with our DD, when she was three to four y.o, and she ended up being very bright academically, and a high achiever. (#sorrynotsorry for stealth brag.)

Also, the school day is too long. 8.20am to 4pm my DD's school day was in secondary school. PLUS she had homework. No wonder then that she fucking hated secondary school. Her attendance was good and she did well, but she disliked it, mainly because of the long days, and the bloody homework EVERY NIGHT!

Secondary should be 9.30am til 3.00pm, and primary, 10am til 2.30pm Other countries manage with shorter school hours, and home-school people only 'teach' their kids 3 or 4 hours a day. I know several people in Scandinavia whose children had shorter school days, (10am til 2.30pm with one of them,) and their (now adult) children became high achievers and are intelligent and well educated.

My DD is a LATE JULY baby @SapphosRock and like your DD, SHE was not kept back a year, yet she was at the top of her class for everything. You do sound bitter and jealous that you made the wrong choice for your child.

Also, you are trying to make out there are TWO YEARS between your DD and this 'Lucy' when there is only ONE year and a couple of weeks. And the 'there was a sleepover and she missed out coz she's only 6' line is just daft. She is only just over 12 months younger than Lucy! She could still have gone. Unless your DD is very immature and babyish, and the other girls are quite sensible and mature for their age. That would be the only reason to not send her to this sleepover.

I've read several comments here about how keeping summer borns back benefits the middle classes. If you're in a grammar school entry intake area (and this is what you want for your child of course!) this might not be correct.

The local grammars in our area base their year entry on age only, so if your child is held back a year due to late summer birth, they'd have to take the entry exam at the same time as children with an additional year of schooling - clearly not a benefit there!

All children are different.
My DD is an October baby but always struggled more both socially and academically than her summer born friend.

I'm old enough to remember when schools had 3 intakes for reception. Those who had their 5th Birthday between September - December started in September. Those with Birthdays between January - April started in January. Then the ones with Birthdays between May - August didn't start until after the Easter holidays so only had one term in Reception.
That system was scrapped a long time ago (I started school in 1980!)

I was aware but I don't understand why a parent would do it just to make their child one of the oldest. It does feel like pushy, middle class sharp elbows.

Like I said before I do understand if the child was premature or has SEN.

Lucy is a lovely kid btw and clearly thriving. I'n sure she would be absolutely fine in year 4

Parents generally don’t do it to make sure their child is the oldest, they do it to ensure their child is ready for school. Some kids are at 4 and that’s great, but many aren’t. Summerborn kids are far more likely to be diagnosed with SEN, are less likely to achieve top SATs, GCSEs, A levels and are less likely to be accepted at top universities - all because they started school too early.

I am no interested in whether my son is the oldest or the youngest. I don’t see school as a competition, and I don’t care about his achievements in relation to others. I only care that we have him the best opportunity to thrive and to achieve whatever he is capable of.

Interested in why you didn’t make the same decision OP?

Sometimes I think there should be a lot more flexibility tbh, as to when children are ready for school.

Scotland seems to have a good idea in that although they start school mid August, the cut of is March (I think). So kids are between 4.5 and 5.5 when they start school.

Bold fail, sorry

I'm old enough to remember when schools had 3 intakes for reception.

Yes me too!

Im November born, and when I started I was the youngest girl in the class (there was one younger boy). For some reason this was seen as a reason to pick on me by other girls, so not a good start to school!

I disagree. A child who turns 13 on 1st April is in a class with a child that is 11 until the 31st August.

I think that is a big deal.

I have 2 August DC's one beginning and one right at the end, as in he only just made the cut off for that year group.

I honestly don't think their year group or the fact that they are one of the youngest in the class impacts on their educational or physical abilities. My DS is one of the youngest in his class with some of his peers turning a year older than him just 2 weeks after his birthday and he is still on parr if not excelling beyond them academically.

Honestly I think this is more to do with individual abilities as opposed to being the youngest or oldest in the class.

I’d been wavering on trying to delay my late August born’s start and this post has convinced me it’s a good idea.

I think that it's ridiculous that children born in August can go in the year below unless there is a specific reason for it (e.g. if they were very premature) but there should be medical evidence to support it. If everybody did it, then July would be the new August and on and on it would go. Someone's got to be the youngest. I bet the people who get their children moved are very middle class pushy parents too so it doesn't do much for social equality.
One good thing about living in a grammar school area is that if parents do this their children won't be able to go to grammar school so this will put parents off doing it unless there really are good reasons.

I sent my just turned 4 year old with additional needs to school and the school have been great he’s ahead of some of the other academically and the staff have been great with the other issues too. It was a major worry though.
my august born youngest is about to start preschool, she has just turned two. On the visit day we met the other children who will be in her year group at school and they seemed like preschoolers already, potty trained, talking, etc. mine whilst doing well still looked very baby like. I have found the staff brilliant with the summer borns and but not so much other parents

YABU and you know it.

If education specialists agree on what age is suitable and move the starting school age for all children, then fine.

The problem is the inconsistency of the current situation. Some parents will defer, others won't, often for excellent reasons, and those children, who are entitled to a school place the september after their 4th birthday, should not be disadvantaged by having kids 15 months older added to their cohort.

Preschool is underfunded, in many areas theres no such thing as a "free" 30 hour place and no entitlement to a lunch, so many parents have to consider if they can afford to defer a child starting school.

Furthermore, plenty of children are totally ready for school as August borns (mine!) but doesn't mean they should be being compared with children with the maturity of year 1.

My DD will be fine compared to her cohort, children from september to august. I'm less convinced she can manage with children 15 months older but why should I have to hold her back when she's ready to start with her peers?

Interested in why you didn’t make the same decision OP?

DD was born full term, developing as expected, achieving as expected. Why would I when it would disadvantage the younger kids in the class she moved into?

Maybe you could get you're daughter into a running club and get her to train harder...then she might get that medal that you are desperate for her to win....

Holding the system against one child here doesn't seem very fair. OP, your DD and her classmate are both still young and who wins races shouldn't be a lifetime issue.

My saddest experience at school was that for some reason I had a best friend at primary who was in my year even though normally she should have been the year below. I was born in the summer, not August and she was born in September the same year so less than 3 months between us. But at the end of my last year of primary school my friend didn't move to middle school with me. Middle school was the equivalent of what is now called years 5-8, with secondary starting in year 9 at 13. I also assumed that her dad had finally won an argument between her parents and sent her to a Catholic school (mum had resisted this), but I'm not sure this was the case. Many years I later got in touch through FB and discovered that my friend was at the same university as me (year below, but still....) and that her family had moved to the other side of the city so would have gone to a different secondary school even if not a church one.

Weirdly I hadn't been able to start school until after I was 5, and I don't think this was my mum's decision. 3 years after me my dad's 2nd daughter from his 2nd marriage started at 4.5 in Reception. I was desperate to learn to read and came home crying with disappointment on my first day because they hadn't taught me/us. At that point my mum decided to ignore advice to wait for school and started teaching me herself, and I was quite a confident reader of chapter books, with a reading age in advance of my actual age, within a few months.

Someone posted that in Scotland it's different. I don't know about deferrals, but I think that both the school year and school ages are a little bit different from England and Wales, as school year is August to June rather than September to July, school start is mostly from about 4.5 rather than everyone beginning in September after 4th birthday. (I was born and brought up in Leeds and now live in London).

My experience of this has been pretty awful to see. There are a few summerborns in DD’s year and those children are all already advantaged due to their socioeconomic backgrounds. The little ones who haven’t been held back are now even more disadvantaged as there is an even bigger gap between them and the oldest children.

There is a fair bit of resentment similar to the op’s point towards those who are now ‘superadvantaged’ from those in the middle and I feel quite sorry for the children who should really be in the year above. DD is quite tall and I was asked several times when her birthday is by other parents. After her party (which clearly showed she was in the correct year) other parents were a lot more friendly. I’m just glad she is bog standard middle of the year and average ability as the resentment is really quite horrible to see without being on the receiving end.

I feel the basis for your post is unreasonable. However when Lucy turns 18 all her friends will be turning 17 and unable to drink. She’ll be the oldest starting at university (if she goes) etc. I have a mid August baby and am very glad the option to allow me to keep her back a year was not possible. My daughter has ended up doing very well in education. Yes it was a tough start but with a little support from us, her parents she’s flown. So I do agree that it should not be allowed as it may hold them back educationally AND its unfair on them later in life, something Lucy’s parents may not have considered. I just don’t feel your basis for the thread is just.

Children with August birthdays are at a disadvantage under our education system. IMHO. This mum made a decision to help her daughter.

It's always going to be that there is a massive development gap between the oldest and the youngest when school starts so early. My DD is July so went to school at 4. Yes it's too young in my view, and the September kids definitely had an advantage. But things even out as they grow up, and for sports just get them involved in things other than the typical school sports to build their confidence.

You made your decision, they made a different one. I'm afraid you need to suck it up and not berate yourself or others for the situation.

BTW - I think you were bonkers over the sleepover. If she wanted to go you should have let her. Worse case? You need to go pick her up if it doesn't work, not the end of the world. But by doing stuff like removing her from parties due to her age you are the one making this a big deal.

Also a lot of statistics on summer born attainment pre date EYFS and are affected by:

• the old policy of starting summer borns later in reception, meaning they missed out on one or even two terms. This has since been suggested to have actually worsened the issue/widened the gap.
• pre EYFS when reception was aligned to ks1, now within EYFS it's a more gradual transition to a school environment.
• lack of awareness of summer born impacts leading to summer borns being "written off" too early, when now it is more consistently considered.