Unfair to defer summer borns

[ifyoudont]

Dd was born late august, is the youngest in her year but instead of rest of her class being just under a year older than her , there’s 4 children who are nearly a year and a half older because they were born April -august the year above and deferred.

Somebody has to be the youngest and somebody the oldest but surely the fairest way is to keep the age difference within a year.

Dd is doing well academically and socially and only really struggling during playtime and PE as she is smaller. A boy in her class has early May birthday but because he was deferred instead of being 3+ months older than her is 15+ months older and the biggest and strongest in the class leading to several incidents where he has injured her.

A family member has a baby due in June and is already mentioned deferring them without knowing how advanced or behind they are going to be.

I definitely do think there are a few exceptions where it can be necessary but it seems to to be often done just because it can. Maybe there should be be stricter guidelines and some sort of test required?

AIBU? If so what am I missing?
I don’t hear people share this opinion often and haven’t shared it with family member

Thankfully that stupid policy was changed nationally and standard now is that they go into reception and stay with that cohort all the way through.

Children being deferred because of being not ready essentially missing a year was one of the the daftest education policies ever.

They just recommended that he repeats the year as he has missed so much learning and won’t cope with year 1. He has fallen asleep every day in the afternoon, he hasn’t been able to grasp phonics at all can’t read can’t write and for some reason won’t speak at school at all (chats non stop at home!). He has been referred for assessment for ASD so that’s also a factor but I wasn’t even aware it was a possibility they have said that he needs to repeat the year to have a strong base for the rest of his schooling and to catch up early on.

Parents that don't deferred their children are disadvantaging them? Deferring isn't always a 'leg up'. There are many potential disadvantages of deferring that are often ignored by only focussing on statistics. I thought the whole point was that parents should be encouraged to do what is best for their own children, not be made to feel that sending their children to school within their normal age group is doing them a disservice regardless of anything else.

An 18 month age range within a class is absolutely fine. It is standard in Ireland, where kids can start between 4 and 6, with the majority starting at 5.

If a child is injuring yours it’s nothing to do with them having been deferred.

If you have a summer born child and don’t want them to be the youngest in the class (whether by 12 months or by 15 or 18 months) then the option is there for you to defer them. If you don’t take that option it’s not really open to you to complain when others do.

It should be a question of parental choice because there is a massive spectrum
of school readiness at that age. I’ve got a May born boy and an autumn born girl and the difference in what they were like socially, emotionally and academically when they started school was absolutely staggering, even though they are both likely of equal or similar intelligence. School is about so much more than this.

YABU. It's not the fact that the other child is a bit older that your child was injured; it's the fact that the other child hasn't been taught how to behave properly and the teachers aren't managing the class well if there have been several instances of your daughter getting hurt.

However, I've just seen that the law has been changed, which is ridiculous. It might not make a difference to those children now, but once they are older, that year will be significant.

It was an absolutely sensible decision to clarify the law.

It's made zero difference when they're older to any child I know that's done it. Why would it? They're a few months older, not years.

Parents can only decide what it best for their child, with the guidance and agreement from the school/authority. You have no business deciding what is or isn't best for other's kids, just as they don't get to decide for yourself.

If you think your child is will cope fine in her current year, then good. If you think there may be an issue, talk to her teacher.

My child is a 31st August kid. He started off the smallest, and had to keep up for a bit, but he was just fine after a couple of terms. Most kids adapt fine, but if they don't, you have the option to defer - which in my opinion is a good thing (even if my kid didn't need it).

The differences reduce but they don't disappear. It's there in GCSE results (key stage 4) https://ifs.org.uk/publications/when-you-are-born-matters-evidence-england

I wanted to defer my kids (August born) because i had heard so much about kids being at a disadvantage when the youngest. I didnt do it in the end due to personal circumstances however both my children were/are close to the top of their respective classes. In fact, we are seeing in our classes the opposite, the older ones in class are struggling.

In village schools mixed year groups are in the same class so an even bigger gap. For example year R, 1&2 sharing. I think it’s fair for summer borns some just are not ready. Plus it’s personal choice. In some schools no one will be held back in a year group others a few it just varies. I have a summer born and the jump from reception to year 1 was huge. More learning through play is needed.

Data shows that summer borns, on average, do not catch up with peers. There’s evidence of this at degree level too.

Fair enough That makes sense. It must be a new thing Only time I've heard of repeating the year is in American high school stuff where it was a source of shame

I can only go by my son’s school, they refused to allow him to go into reception if deferred. So it must be up to the schools discretion

I don't know about anyone else, but I wouldn't have been happy with my parents if they're kept me back a year and I'd have been doing my A levels around my 19th birthday....

Same.

For those of you saying there no point. Please see below.

Headlines…

Two national surveys suggest that being summer-born is linked to a slightly greater risk of being bullied. TellUs data suggest that August-born young people are 6 percentage points more likely to be bullied than those born in September in years 6 and 8, falling to 5 percentage points in year 10. LSYPE data indicate that summer-born pupils have a higher incidence of suffering extreme (and rare) levels of bullying.

Summer-born pupils are also significantly more likely to be identified as having a special educational need than their older classmates. At the end of Key Stage 1, August-born pupils are nearly 90% more likely to be identified with SEN than September-born pupils.

New analysis for this paper reveals that month of birth also shows consistent effects on attitudes to school and higher education, with younger children and their parents reporting less satisfaction and tending to rate their outcomes as average rather than good.

assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/5a7b29e5ed915d3ed9062971/DFE-RR017.pdf

Yes I was the same didn’t even know it was an option . I knew about deferral and chose not to and I did regret it once I realised he was struggling but I assumed he would move up and just need extra support .

Could she redo a year? Some kids in my DCs school have done this.

They should have explained to you why it would be in his best interests to miss a year of school if you decided to start him the term after he turned 5. I can't think of any reason why this would be in a child's way interests, and this is why 88% of requests are agreed. It is up to the admissions authority for the school which year they place him in but the decision can be appealed although it's more difficult to do so if the school is an academy and the governing body is it's own admissions authority.

Completely agree. It’s ridiculous

Wow this is a thread full of misinformation. To the OP as you have a summer born child then you could have also delayed admission and sent her to school at CSA into reception with agreement from the schools or LA.

I'm an August born and wasn't delayed, also went to grammar school which standardise testing so did benefit from being one of the younger ones. My DD is very end of August born and is delayed start into reception so will be just turned 5.

My reasons were simply social and developmental and she was born early. The attitudes on this post is one of the reasons I worry about her later admission, I haven't given her any unfair advantage I've used the options available to me and chosen what I think will be the best outcome for her.

Fair enough but then you are going to get people assume ALL us August born people will have issues and it's not necessarily the case. I was top of my class marks wise all through what you call primary school ( we had class positions in tests on our reports) and never been shy or unconfident. The one girl who tried to bully me soon got hit back and left me alone ( I have 3 brothers lol) The only downside was art the other end of school being young to get first job and having to borrow someone's else's id to get into pubs

That's the difference between a personal anecdote and the stats on a bigger population (see the report posted above)

As I stated I've no issue with what was reported but doesn't mean from a personal level we all want to be labeled as more " behind, and weak vulnerable" whatever just because we are were born in August. It's a 12 thbof the population your are speaking about

I don't feel great about this whole deferral thing, I get that some kids really do need it, but children can be vile and I remember certain kids (my sister included) being teased for being stupid because they were "down a year"

I have a summer birthday and it never bothered me, aside from having to wait longer to start driving lessons. But I never cared about drinking or going to nightclubs, if I'd been in with that crowd it probably would've upset me more.