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

I don’t blame parents at all for deferring, no matter what the child is like. We start school ridiculously young in this country. Barely any other country in the world starts school at 4, and the countries with the best academic results in the world start school the latest (most of Scandinavia - age 7). A summer, or even spring born 4-year-old is barely out of toddlerhood, they belong in nurseries, not schools. My birthday is end of August and I was extremely shy, sensitive, and in no way ready for school. I spent the entire reception year terrified, crying for my mum - even though I went to nursery before that and remember being absolutely fine. I think it’s the psychological aspect of starting school that is scary for very young children - that’s what I remember anyway - feeling like it was very serious, I’d have to do “work”, there were lots of big kids around etc. I remember faking sickness at least once a week and begging my mum not to send me. It was genuinely quite traumatic! I grew out of the extreme shyness and sensitivity by 6 or 7, if I’d started school then I’d have been fine.
My DS is in reception and he’s got an autumn birthday luckily. He’s also nothing like I was, he’s super confident and outgoing. But if he was spring or summer born I’d 100% defer him. I appreciate that many people can’t afford to defer and that makes the system unequal. It’s the system that needs to change and offer fully funded nursery up to age 6 IMO (but as if!!)

If an additional years childcare didn't cost you anything at all, can you let the many, many parents on Mumsnet who are at breaking point over childcare costs know your secret. Thirty hours free funding (which everyone knows it isn't anyway) doesn't even cover an average working week.
School weeks are meant to be 32.5 hours, which is more than the 'free funding'. Even those two and a half hours makes a difference. Plus if you're really lucky you might find your school does a free after school club.
Some parents will definitely need to take finances into consideration if they want to defer their child.

My eldest has a late August birthday, delayed milestones and we now know autism and ADHD. I looked in to deferring for a year but it wasn't possible where we live unfortunately.

School has always been really difficult, but that would be the case no matter DC age.

PP mentioned it being really useful being the youngest when doing college etc. That has absolutely been our experience, DC did a levels and wasn't even 18 picking up the results and has now decided to study animal management at the local college. I don't have to pay anything for the first year due to DC still being 18 when it finishes.

🙄🙄 😂😂

It absolutely is part of the school!

My children have experienced private nursery and school nursery and they are very different. When they went to school nursery they were part of the school community. They had to be using the toilet in order to go. They wear the same school uniform as all the other kids. They start writing, phonics, doing activities that prep them to go into reception. They take part in the same school activities, book fairs, school fairs, their teachers work across the whole school. They start acclimatising to a school day. You report absence to the school office and they run on the same term schedule. It’s the same hours as a school, or maybe a half day. You cannot compare that to a private nursery that is based in a hospital building. Maybe if the doctors or nurses were doing some of the caring you could, or the kids were doing some ward rounds 🤣 Absolutely ridiculous.

This hasn't been govt guidance for years. Many years. You are now very out of date.

Please be very wary of any supposed research discussed with you by school teams. As far as I am aware I am the only person who has looked in detail at the supposed summer born research issued to the Head Teachers Union. Perhaps 10 years ago. It included UK research from studies when I was at primary school; I am now retired. It included US research - totally different education system; it even included an UNPUBLISHED PhD dissertation ( quite frankly if it was good why wasn't it published). It all added up to a hotch potch of research that didn't amount to anything. It was poor research to support a stance. Add on to that the Sutton Trust/ Education Endowment Foundation (funded by the govt to the tune of £125mill) who only care about poverty. Great but the lifelong impact to summer born is not a poverty issue, so their statements on research are biased. I have some credibility in that I am an accountant, data manager in several fields including education, but have some bias in that I have a summer born.child.

It absolutely is part of the school!

Which is not the same as "starting school at 3" as the poster stated

It's attending nursery in a school building not starting school at age 3.

@socialdilemmawhattodo

I worked in schools for 20 years (the last 10 years solely in early intervention). That's why I'm intrigued to see this supposed research mentioned as there has been nothing new of note brought up in recent years by anyone around me, and haven't heard any bonbon the grapevine since I left 3 years ago.

And I get asked semi often about deferrals as I deferred one of my summer borns but not the other so people get curious about why one and not the other.

I've done the school census for years and know the drivers for school funding. Age isn't one of them unless technicality for Y13. No teachers in the English system ever get close to understanding data or funding. They don't need to because qualified people like me do. I do hope you haven't been putting off parents of summer borns for this reason.

Why would it matter? My child won't be held to the standards of a 10-year-old, they'll be held to the standards of a reception class curriculum - that doesn't change, regardless of how many 'older' children are in the cohort.

There's no leader board, the objectives of the class are not tailored to what the most able child can achieve and everyone else must fall in line so I don't know what this mythical 'advantage' is.

I really don't know why people get so upset about it. Focus on your own child and carry on.

haven't heard any bonbon the grapevine since I left 3 years ago

Haven't heard anything...

This new voice software is shit.

Bonbon the grapevine sounds like a bloody dodgy dancer 😂

The average life long impact to summer borns has been known now for well over 20 years. All came about in the uk when it was decided that YR for pre - compulsory school age would be the norm. Ie children starting school,not nursery, at age 4. It was a distortion of the very fake Sir Jim Rose review, where his evidence (which wasn't allowed to be shared with the general public - i asked to see it and wasn't allowed to), contradicted with his conclusions, and then the recommendations. None of this is about gaming advantage, unless of course you are the usual lovely parent of an autumn born who funnily enough seems unable to see the advantage their child has automatically.

Are you campaigning for that? Then if not shut up. It's not gaming to give a summer born at least some chance to catch up with the well documented advantage of autumn borns.

I'm a tiny bit older than you, also summer born, but at least we started in the term following our 5th birthday. We also hadn't been put into full time nurseries since a very young age.

It didn’t cost anything extra compared to a year at school. Any child got the exact same hours as the hours offered to reception children, 9am to 3.30pm. We didn’t pay any nursery costs at all. We had to cover school holidays etc but nothing we wouldn’t have had to cover for a child attending reception.

In case I wasn’t clear, deferring for a year carried no additional cost.

Children start school very young in the UK compared to most countries. Personally I think they should be at least 5. DTs started at 5 & 2 mths & DS at 5 & 9 mths ( he was deferred). We’re in Scotland, couldn't Imagine sending a bately 4 year old yo school!

I think one of the major reasons for deferal is that schools are asking kids to do things that many aren't developmentally ready for. If we don't want to see parents making the choice to defer kids than the class work needs to be appropriate to the range of kids in the class, which can vary a lot at that age.

Our youngest is an August baby. He’s almost 3. he’s reading already, but has other autism signs. We don’t know yet if he will be better in his year or deferring, and only time will tell. We will likely let the school/specialists decide at the time. Parents choosing it without awareness of their child’s abilities and before birth is just nuts.

I the the issue is that some at the end of August end up starting school af 4 years and 2 days. A lot of people feel this is way too young. This could be “fixed” by simply making it those who turn 4 before January or March rather than September, meaning the youngest you would ever be staring school would be 4 years 5 months. You’d still start school in September, but the cutoff is later so you don’t start as young.

I must admit it never crossed my mind to defer my 2 "summer" born kids.

My eldest is mid August and was prem, always (and still is) on the dinky side but developmentally and socially good so wasn't on my radar to.

My youngest is May and likely autistic but no development concerns. The nursery wasn't the right setting for him so deferring him would have done more harm than good.

I'm April and it blows my mind I am considered summer born 🤣

That's brilliant for your child.
My son is august born, he was born 4 weeks early. If he was born closer/ due date then he would of naturally started school 2025.

It matters because having an older child in the mix would change class dynamics socially. They are more mature and tend to accelerate the maturing of the group.This can be really difficult for the younger children in the year. Older children will also tend to be more advanced academically and this will increase the range of abilities that the teacher has to cater to. Not all teachers and schools are equally good at doing this and ultimately this can detriment the class if they are having to meet the needs of a child that is too old for the class.

Sports Days and other competitions will be very hard to run fairly. A 10 year old would win everything unless you intervened but how could a teacher intervene to make it fair for everyone? If you are in an 11 plus area then children are often literally in competition with each other for places in grammar school and the older children will have an enormous advantage over non deferred summer borns.

I absolutely will never be told to focus on my own child and carry on when the system needs to change. Sorry, but that it is a terrible attitude to advocate and one that I absolutely won't adopt just because you don't want the advantage that is effectively being given to deferred children to be scrutinised.

‘Humble town’, where no one would consider what is best for their child sounds delightful.

By your definition I’ll proudly be pretentious if that is your description of someone who reads about child development and different education systems, is aware of the guidelines in our own system and works hard to advocate for my child and what is best for them (and by extension their peers and school).

Happily pretentious by your definition. Humble town sounds like people more worried about what everyone else thinks of them then they are their own kids.

You don't get to dictate what people do and don't campaign for? If the deferral system is so fair then it can stand up to a bit of debate and scrutiny.

Deferral doesn't give the summer born children 'some chance' to catch up. It simply shifts the advantage to the deferred summer borns and increases the disadvantages of the non deferred summer borns and next youngest.