To be shocked deferring by a year has become this common?

[Killiam]

My DS is 4, his birthday is august 28th, he started school this year.
Today I went to a session at his school where parents were invited in to see what they have been doing etc.
After I was talking to some parents and they noted more than once how tiny he is, I said ah well he has just turned 4 so makes sense. This is when I learned of his class of 24 kids, 4 of them should have started the year before 1 June birthday, 2 July and 1 August. The next closest in age to my son is a June baby so no other July or August babies born his year at all!
DS seems to be doing well but when I asked the other summer parents why they decided to defer they basically all said they just felt their kids needed more time, nothing the separates them from DS.
DS does cry most days going in and couldn't write his name or anything before starting.
The school is in central London and is very diverse but lots of Eastern European and Asian parents and Ive learn that in most of those countries 6 or even 7 is a more common. starting age so I wonder if that plays a role?

AIBU to be shocked it is so common to defer now? Starting to wonder if I made the right choice!

On the contrary:

1. Parents claiming universal credit will have 85% of their childcare paid for the additional year and will still get 30hrs of free childcare until the child goes to school at 5.

2. Parents earning under £100k still get 30hrs free childcare and tax free childcare.

3. Parents earning over £100k will have to pay the cost of the additional year in full.

Deferring to 5 is a far more expensive choice the higher your income is, if you use childcare. It is far, far cheaper (even proportionate to income) for lower earners to do.

There is never an easy answer for children at both ends of the school year. Years ago my August born friend had one year less at primary than others and was still a little behind academically than the autumn children when starting secondary. The autumn children were always the brightest as they had more time at school.
My September born DC was bored at home at rising 5 and could only go full time several weeks after his 5th birthday. He went to a large school with a mixed age intake of July to September children. He was upset when most of his friends went to a new school a year before him. He was then put in a mixed class of 2 year groups with children 2 years younger than him.

Love a good bunfight at the intersection between class and education.

If I was feeling provocative I might suggest that dyslexia is another middle-class myth, but that would be derailing 😁

I wonder if there would be grounds on which to get a judicial review on that? It would make for an interesting case.

It was explained to the parent back when he was due to start in reception. We showed them the LEA guidelines which explained that moving from KS2 to KS3 could mean the child being put back into the “correct” cohort.

Oh dear oh dear. So glad you’ve spent so much time on this. I’m not going to do the same. It would be a complete waste of my time. You haven’t used any logical arguments. It would be easy to pick apart almost every single line here. But, as I say, it would be a waste of my time. You clearly feel bad. Why not deal with that.

Are you familiar with families with two working parents, or indeed working single parents?

It is common because in Eastern Europe one starts serious school at 7

All very well and good in primary - get to high school and suddenly it's a bit weird that there's a 15 year old in a class of 13 year olds. Your child is going to stick out like a sore thumb. Ditto when they hit university and they're the oldest by a mile.

Really wouldn't do it. They all level out by about Year 4 anyway. I actually had the opposite problem, my DD was bored rigid with nursery and easily could have gone to school the year before...equivilent of you all worrying about sending your just turned 4 year olds in. She could have gone in at 3 no issues. Turned 4 in the November and was clearly too old to be in the nursery class.

So deferrering a year is gaming the system but you call other posters 'sensationalist'?!

When has removing parental choice ever benefitted the less privileged?

What evidence do you have that deferring a summer born disadvantages anyone? Is it possible, that its good for everyone?

I think it often depends on the breadth of age across the class. My son's school, the majority of the one class are the older 6 months the majority of the other (his class) the younger 6 months. He's one of 7 August babies in a class of 28.

I remember, a long time ago, being much smaller and younger than my classmates as a late July baby. But then all but 4 children in our class of 30 were born between September and January.

I wish it were more common to group (at least in the first few years) children together a bit more closely in age. There's a huge difference in just 6 months, let alone a year when you're under 7.

Why would a Judicial Review have any effect?

"A Judicial review is a type of court proceeding in which a judge reviews the lawfulness of a decision or action made by a public body.

In other words, judicial reviews are a challenge to the way in which a decision has been made, rather than the rights and wrongs of the conclusion reached.

It is not really concerned with the conclusions of that process and whether those were ‘right’, as long as the right procedures have been followed. The court will not substitute what it thinks is the ‘correct’ decision."

The fact that admission out of chronological age group is at the discretion of an Admissions Authority is due to the law stating that parents have a right to request, schools have the obligation to consider, but that parents do not have the right for this.

And for other posters, yes, we can and do get 16 year olds educated out of year who decide that they are not coming in anymore. Some will become NEETs, some get jobs with training, but they do not have to stay in school if they decide they do not want to. Which is the main concern for Admissions Authorities and Heads - that you get to the end of Year 10 and they leave without qualifications.

This used to be quite common - starting the younger ones mid-year - but it stopped for a reason. It just compounds things if the youngest ones get the least time in school.

Its interesting...

It's only white mc educational success that's frowned on.

Come over to the chjnese/Indian thread where we celebrate the educational achievements of children from these backgrounds. And even discuss how to emulate it!

I deferred ds because the nursery he attended recommended we did while his Echp was being sorted out.
Ds attended nursery for an extra year.

LEA guidelines….

I was a late July baby and went at 4. I don’t think holding back was an option then. I had no problems keeping up and ended up top of the class.
Interestingly, the youngest girl (late August) in my year at secondary was insanely intelligent and is now a neuro surgeon! It certainly doesn’t have to hold kids back.

It is now time for current Y6s to be applying for secondary school. The school that mum really wants her son to go has said he can join NOW and go into Y7 (missing the rest of Y6) or hope there is a place in Y8 next September. They will not accept him out of cohort. No school HAS to accept a child out of cohort.

This secondary school is behaving illegally. It doesn't surprise me given some of the shockingly thick and incompetent people who get appointed as Head Teachers, the complete lack of understanding of the regulatory framework among senior school staff and LA staff and the woeful lack of enforcement by the regulator. But nevertheless, this is not a legally compliant policy and the parent should immediately lodge a tribunal claim, which they will win.

Your school should be intervening on his behalf with the secondary school in question and referring them to the guidance from the Dept for Education which specifically states a child should remain in the cohort in which they began school, unless it can be demonstrated that moving cohort would be in the child's best interests (which is going to be the case pretty much never, and certainly not during a transfer to secondary school and being dumped in YR8 so the secondary school have no leg to stand on).

Presumably your school have educated this child for the last 7 years. You have a duty of care to him. You should be on the case of the Local Authority, meeting the secondary school's Head Teacher to educate them on their legal responsibilities to resolve this on the pupil's behalf, and supporting the parent with preparing a tribunal case if necessary and providing unequivocal statements to present to the judge that this is illegal and that it is not in the child's best interests to attempt to do this to him.

Honestly, the behaviour from so-called "professional people" in many schools is so shocking. They break the law whenever they feel like it. It's like the wild west. In any other profession you'd be immediately suspended and then struck off from the profession, and fined for such behaviour. It's imperative that any decent staff remaining in the profession stand up to those breaking the law and advocate on behalf of the children these idiots try to victimise. I hope you are doing so.

I delayed my August born dd. I had her early for medical reasons. She is in year 5 now and still by far the smallest and very immature for her age. It all depends on your own circumstances. I got a extra year of nursery funding as it goes up to age five. She will never turn 18 in sixth form. It was a no brainer

What happens when all these children reach GCSE and A level age? Are they able to start 6th form a year late too? I’d imagine that being held back a year seems more of a disadvantage when you are 15/16/17/18/19.

Yes, they generally stay with their cohort throughout their school career.

Personally I think more formal education could wait until 6 or 7, when most children - perhaps especially many boys - are that much more ready for it. Seems to work fine in plenty of other countries.
That’s not to say that they couldn’t still start reception at 4, but with play-based preparatory activities.

I can’t imagine how common this actually is. Surely it’s just the same as the fact that right now primaries don’t have to put a deferred child into reception and can put them straight into Y1 but the vast majority don’t because it’s not in the best interest of the child.
I mean, what sort of head teacher is arguing that it’s in the educational best interests of a Y5 student to skip Y6 and go straight into secondary?? It’s completely stupid.

@HideTheCroissants many LAs have no idea about the law, either.

They can write all the illegal policies they like, it doesn't override legislation and regulations. Parents can take them to tribunal and they will win and the LA will be forced to comply with the law and change its policy to be legally compliant.

Many primary Heads were so clueless about the law change many years ago when deferrals were implemented that they and the LAs tried like this to implement illegal policies to prevent parents exercising the right to defer. When taken to tribunals they lost and had to change their policies and educate themselves on the laws they are required to comply with. Now most accept deferral requests from a simple tick box, even those who previously fought parents about it.

These Head Teachers at Secondary are similarly incompetent and haven't bothered to keep up to date with the legislation governing their role, which should be a sackable offence in itself. The children first deferred at primary after the change in law in England are starting secondary in the last few years so many of these secondary Heads are clueless. Over time, once they've had it beaten into them by the Dept for Education and lost tribunals that they have to follow the law they will learn just as stubborn primary Heads did. But in the meantime primary schools should be intervening for their pupils with any secondaries attempting to adopt illegal transfer policies.

Presumably your school have educated this child for the last 7 years. You have a duty of care to him. You should be on the case of the Local Authority, meeting the secondary school's Head Teacher to educate them on their legal responsibilities to resolve this on the pupil's behalf, and supporting the parent with preparing a tribunal case if necessary and providing unequivocal statements to present to the judge that this is illegal and that it is not in the child's best interests to attempt to do this to him.

We are providing as much help as we can, as is the local authority. There are secondary schools that will happily accept this lad into Y7 next September. However the school mum would prefer is always over subscribed and the legislation DOES allow for them to say no.

I posted a screen shot from Lewisham borough upthread. Here is one from Croydon…