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

Sorry, I should have said more. I was posting in case others reading the thread would benefit from that information. Would a school nursery have been able to accommodate him? Childcare for children with SEN / developmental delays (not saying this applies to your nephew but just a general comment) is a huge challenge.

The last update was in November 2024

How new are these policies?

The last update was in November

It is the Headteacher ad the lead professional who has the biggest say in whether they accept the deferral or not, so it is absolutely to do with school.

IMO it should only be used as an absolute exception for children who are significantly unwell or have significant educational needs.

I went through the school system starting in 68

Born end of Aug 64

I spent one term - 12 weeks - in induction ( no nursery ) then the rest of the year in the next class up, then followed on till the end of Primary

I was 10 years and 3 weeks old when I went to a secondary of 2000 girls - I was the youngest. I was in a class with 11+ girls - and they started their 12th birthdays at the Christmas

Yes, looking back I was very disadvantaged . I didn't have a thing in common with anyone in my year, they were starting periods, looking at boys, reading Jackie , going to discos , whilst I was still going out to play in the street and still on a curfew of 8pm

Secondary was lonely . But I was ok with the school work, I kept up with classes and did ok

Little sister has a Christmas birthday and things had changed a lot , she stayed a year on in primary and went to secondary as one of the oldest and had a totally different childhood

The admissions authority makes the decision. Where I live the admissions authority is the local authority for most schools. They can consult the head teacher if they wish to but are not obliged to.

No nursery at his school

Older doesn’t always mean bigger. I’m in scotland so rules are different. my January born daughter could have started school in August at 4.5 years old. I didn’t want her to go to school that early. I wanted her to thrive not just survive. Best thing I could have done for her socially and academically. She is the oldest in her class but is actually the smallest by far.

Right. Maybe another school would have been an option, I really don’t know but just wanted to make the point that deferring is possible for non-summer born children too. It’s a shame more children don’t have access to childcare that meets their needs.

It was never given as an option.

Given by who?

Schools nursery staff etc. No one ever said it's possible to defer

That’s a shame. I hope he’s doing well where he is. I think it would be better if information about deferrals was shared widely so that families could choose what will work best for their children.

Does that also apply to academies?

The admissions authority makes the decision. For academies that may be a multi academy trust?

Yes I agree it is unfair. Here in Scotland every child who is not 5 on the first day of the school year can be deferred and automatically get an extra year of nursery funding. As more and more people are deferring just because they can, its having a huge impact on the education budget but it also means that there are children who are turning 6 a few days after starting school who are in with 4.5 year olds. It also means that some of the deferred kids can have 3 full years (12 terms) of nursery funding and the non deferred kids get 5 terms and they are in the same class!
There is also a growing number of parents trying to get older deferrals (children who are already 5 at the start of the school year) and although it isn’t happening very commonly yet more and more are successful at this so you can even have 6.5 year olds starting school.
The trouble is that an 18 month age gap is huge at that age and even at things like p.e these older kids have an advantage whereas before you’d only have 11 months age range in a class. It also makes the younger ones look like they are behind or immature when they aren’t, they are just being compared to children who should be in the year above them!

I'm voting unreasonable - it's obviously child dependent but boys are often miles behind girls for school readiness and can spend most of the first year struggling with the routine/social relationships. If a summer-born child is ready to start in the September after they turn 4 (as they usually are), then that's great. I've seen loads of summer born children who are absolutely ready to transition.

I deferred my child because he wasn't ready. He dropped down the weight centiles as a baby due to allergy and he was extremely slight and very introverted. He hung back in any group situation and was getting pushed around by older kids at nursery.

We also deferred to improve his resilience and to promote better mental health outcomes. We have a strong family history of neuro divergence/schizophrenia and bipolar, all affecting the men of the family. Deferring him until compulsory age was the best decision for us as he is much more confident socially and able to stand his ground around other children, no longer napping and feeling school ready.

This.

Ive read up on it, due to having a summer born, and it’s supposedly quite hard to defer as it is at the discretion of the school and instead of going into year R they would be in year 1 with their age group.

That said, I do think parents know their kids best. I don’t know anyone with a child who had deferred so it can’t be that common, but if a parent can see that their toddler is much further behind their peers it might be beneficial to keep them an extra year.

I was born in Scotland where it is the norm to start at 5 and in lots of European countries children start school a lot later.

Im sending mine at 4 because despite being summer I feel she is ready to move up. If I didn’t then I wouldn’t.

It sounds to me like you have just been unlucky and there are coincidentally a lot of summer borns at your school.

I was a big fan of this idea initially however apparently the research isn’t showing positive results. I haven’t seen the research myself, but being a teacher, colleagues have told me that, research is showing that delaying start/moving children out of year group, is actually a disadvantage for most socially and emotionally. Most schools I know of now are actively discouraging, it unless additional needs of some kind. I think it was poorly thought out, both in terms of the spread of age groups across school years ie now often 16 months, and the impact on social activities ie parents believed their children would be able to be in football teams etc that matched year group not actual age. I think the whole policy will be reviewed soon and it will just be a few July/August children with additional needs that have a delayed start.

No, not at him being ‘happy and thriving’, just at his ‘sporting prowess’. It’s like me claiming to be the fastest runner at a 5 year old’s birthday party. It would be true but it wouldn’t be a fair race would it?

I’m very happy he’s happy and doing well. Of course I am. But he’s doing well in some sporting areas primarily because he’s older/taller. So, yes, I do an internal eye roll at my sister alluding to the fact he could ‘go pro’ in his sport. Outwardly, I’m very supportive.

I'm very interested in seeing this 'research' and the source of same?

Ive read up on it, due to having a summer born, and it’s supposedly quite hard to defer as it is at the discretion of the school and instead of going into year R they would be in year 1 with their age group.

This used to be the case.

However, since the issuing of the last clarifications - which outright state that it's an obvious disadvantage to a child to miss a year of schooling - children who defer now routinely go into YR and stay with that cohort.

Be interested to see the research you mention as all of the schools round here appear to be of the opinion that when it's as common place as it is in Scotland it'll become a non-issue.

It's only an issue for some schools atm because it's new and has a knock on for numbers the next year if a couple of parents request it one year, but none the next.

The usual case for most areas is they basically start in Year 1. Some areas may start them in Reception with a younger class but will move to their age cohort before the end of year.

It may have been the case previously, but the updated guidance means that will become a rare occurrence as it's accepted that missing a year of school is not in any way beneficial