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?

I doubt that the numbers of neuro-typical April born children being deferred is absolutely minimal.

I imagine most children who are held back are July/August born.

And most importantly, EVERY parent of Apr—Aug born children are allowed to delay their child start until they are 5.

If a parent has any concerns about their child not being ready for school then they can delay their start.

If the parent feels their child is ready for school then they don’t delay their start.

It’s not about who is the youngest and oldest, who is the biggest and smallest but simply about the parent asking themselves, “Do I feel my child is ready for school?” and then acting accordingly.

You obviously thought she was ready for school…..and that readiness will not be affected by the other children in the class. Okay, so at this current time she may not be the biggest or fastest….that may change or it may not….but that’s life.

You felt that she was ready for school so instead of comparing her to other children just bask in her own achievements and encourage her to do the same.

One of my kids started school late so up to 13 months older than his classmates. Never won a race in his life.

The other is bang in the middle of his year group and a champion runner. Also the tallest in his school, including the year above and the staff.

TLDR: you're talking bollocks again OP.

One of my kids started school late so up to 13 months older than his classmates. Never won a race in his life.

This made me smile as I’m pretty sure I will be saying the same about my son in the future 😂

It’s not about who is the youngest and oldest, who is the biggest and smallest but simply about the parent asking themselves, “Do I feel my child is ready for school?” and then acting accordingly

Absolutely this.

I was born early in the school year and as a young adult, wished I was born later in the year to give me extra 'gap years'.

In my school, several children were often moved up a year for one term to even out class numbers. I was one of them but so was a girl who was born in August so she was sometimes in a class with classmates who were almost two years older than her. She was bright and tall though. Mixed year classes aren't unusual in rural primary schools anyway.

Can someone please explain why an 11 month age gap between Lucy and her oldest peer is so unacceptable she has to move year groups but a 13 month age gap between Lucy and my DD is completely acceptable?

Both children are developmentally normal in every way.

Because it’s not about the gap!

I didn’t start my son at 5 because I wanted him to be the oldest. I just wanted him to be ready for school. School isn’t a competition, it’s about each child achieving what they are capable of. I don’t care if he is at the top middle or bottom of his class in terms of his ability, I just want him to do his best. And starting him at 5 allowed him to be his best.

I have no idea how his school mates are achieving, I hope they are all achieving what they are capable of, but I don’t compare him to everybody else.

They have to do what's right for their own child. Why should a younger child struggle in their school years when there's the option to delay school entry to give them a better chance? Their are children in my son's year who get extra help at school after the pandemic because they need it. I could be awkward as say it's not fair but there would be no point because my son dossent need it. Its the same with you, you decided your child didn't need to be held back but Lucys parents decided she did, it's not about what's fair, it's about giving each child what they need to thrive.

Because her parents decided to research the negative effects of being a summer born and didn’t want to take the risk?

And you did the research and were happy to take the chance?

Or you didn’t research it so didn’t know it was an option?

At the end of the day why does it even matter why Lucy’s parents made the decision they did?

You felt your daughter would be fine in her age appropriate cohort and Lucy’s parents felt she would struggle.

They made their choice and you made yours.

Why on earth are you making this into some kind of competition?

Any non- school race or competition would just be based on actual age. My dc do swimming comps and swims in a different category than her best friend because , while in the same year group at school, they were born in different calendar years.

I agree, it's nothing to do with the gap, it's about Lucy as an individual and her readiness for school. Why do you think you know better than her mother? Here in Ireland, you have to enrol your child between 4 and 6. So in theory you could have 2 years between kids in the same class. In practice, most people, because there is no stigma around starting at 4 vs 5, they end up just making the choice that suits their individual child best without worrying about what other people think and it works well. I've never heard someone worry about child being oldest or youngest, a lot seem to end up starting school aged between 4.5 and 5.5. There are always going to be children stronger, smarter, faster, more creative than your DC but you just use it as an opportunity to help them build resilience.

My DD will be 4 first week of Sept and is very bright but socially she is not there yet. She'll be starting school next year. By your logic that is fine but if she'd been born a week early she must go? Why?! Because some old rule said so?. Most August babies I know go at just turned 5, not at just turned 4, because their parents made the decision, as is their right, that they weren't ready. So OP I think you are BU, Lucy's mum took an option that was available to everyone, one that she felt was best for her DD, exactly as you could have done but chose not to. I think you are getting too hung up on arbitrary former rules, which to most people looking in, don't make much sense.

It’s not about the age gap, it’s about the research that shows that summer born children do not on average perform as well as older children in their year group.

Lucy’s parents made the decision to defer and ensure that Lucy would not be disadvantaged by being the youngest in the year - it seems to have been a sensible decision which is working well for Lucy.

Few cases I know there usually an additional reason and August birthday.

Parents often aren't as forthcoming about diagnoses or developmental delays because people can be utter ignorant shits.

Also it can be very hard to get diagnosed. We've had concerns about DD1, late August, throughout her schooling and been fobbed off having to resort to giving extra support at home and now college has started her off on diagnosis path for few potential things as well as what we wondered - having seen a few odd behaviors.

In primary we found a math program that suited our purse and our children - they ran a prize/PR thing and DD1 got in local paper so school found out - she just gone up several previous static sets. It involved her doing extra maths work at home with support- another parent similar position - child gone up about three sets- told me it was cheating. She was TA and had been doing extra with her DD - but me doing it was cheating. This thread remind me of that kind of thinking.

These other parents have done research and for whatever reason decided it was best for their child - it has fuck all to do with you and your child and you are free to do the same.

It has been covered time and time again, over and over and over in this thread. It's not about the gap between oldest and youngest. It's not about being the oldest. It's about being ready at the start of the school process. Some children simply aren't ready to start school at 4. Others are. It's that simple. Very, very easy to grasp. For most people.

It’s not about the age gap, it’s about the research that shows that summer born children do not on average perform as well as older children in their year group.

Surely adding more older children to the group just makes the problem worse?

You're focusing on the wrong thing OP, it's not about the age gaps it's about the readiness of the child to start school before they've reached compulsory school age - which is frankly too young in England and if CSA was 6 instead of 5 I reckon there would be far fewer 'deferred' starts. The calendar gaps between individual children are a complete red herring.

My youngest is a mid August baby, his cousins are 2 and 3 months younger than him and I am considering deferring his school entry so he's in the same year as them. His cousins at nearly 3 are already leaps and bounds ahead of my littlest, they are potty trained and speaking in full sentences, know their numbers up to 100 and can follow instructions. The idea that he should be in the year ahead of them at school, when he's still in nappies now only 12 months from starting school, is frankly laughable at the moment. If he doesnt make huge progress over the next 12 months I will defer until he is at CSA - starting him early when he's not ready will actually disadvantage his entire class as he would take so much of the teacher's attention.
My eldest could easily have started a year ahead but it wasn't an option so he's had to have loads of additional input to keep him engaged - going in to yr9 now and has been working at GCSE level for over a year already.
I was the youngest in my class by over 4 months, some kids were 18 months older than me - it simply wasn't an issue as I was an early bloomer. Other kids aren't.

I'm focusing on my DD and her welfare, that's not the 'wrong thing'

I would say the opposite - you have older children who are ready for school and may need less individual attention from teachers and assistant thus freeing up time for those children who need it.

What problem do you see?

That's a good point @CoffeeWithNiles hadn't thought of it that way

So tell me how has Lucy being in the class disadvantaged your child? Please don’t use 4th place in a running race or your decision that she was too young for a sleepover.

Why does it?

If a child isn’t emotionally or socially ready to start school then that still stands regardless of how old the other children in the class are.

It’s about a child on an individual level, it is not about comparing children to each other.

When I was in the process of deferring my son if the teacher had said to me, “Actually, in his age appropriate cohort, 70% of them will be summer borns” that won’t have changed my mind because in my eyes, my son was not ready to start school at just 4 years old.

Even though 70% of the class would also have just turned 4 that doesn’t miraculously mean my child would then be ready for school does it?

Ok he would be the same age as the other children but he still wouldn’t be emotionally or socially ready to start school.

But your dd would have still been the youngest in the class if Lucy wasn't there. Lucy might have won the running race but what about the other 2 children who beat your dd?

My ds1 is the same age, 7 and going into y3 in September. There are 2 other children in his class who were deferred so they will be 8. Neither of them stood out on sports day despite them being the oldest in the year, one of them came last in every race. They are not more academically able either (I know this as am friends with both of their mums)

It sounds like you're upset that your dd is the youngest and are projecting it onto another child. But you could have deferred your dd. You will have to get used to your dd being the youngest, it's just one of those things. I was an august baby too and it was annoying in some ways, being the last in the cohort to be able to do certain things like learn to drive etc. just one of those things.

Children in your child's class starting school at their CSA does not impact on your child's welfare. Children in England have the right not to be forced to start school until they have reached CSA, it's not about keeping kids down it's about not forcing them up if it's to their detriment. As you can see from the thread, the vast majority of posters understand this too. But you weren't really asking if you are being unreasonable as you are already convinced you are not.

How has your daughters welfare been affected?

Surely she is the same person she is, academically, socially and emotionally as she would be whether Lucy was in her class or not?

Btw it was also your choice not to send your dd for a sleepover. FWIW my 7 year old probably won't be ready for sleepovers at friends for another year or two. And he has a February birthday.