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

Selective grammar and private schools go by age. It’s actually a huge disadvantage for your child if you defer them for grammar as they would have less time to come up to scratch compared to other kids. So you don’t tend to see this situation in wealthier areas.

You also don’t see this in Indian and Chinese areas where deferring itself is seen as failure

The physical size is just a visual representation of the vast difference that age can make at 3/4/5 years old. The differences are not only physical but developmental and emotional.
ps before you say it I’m well aware that physical size is not just age related and you can have a tiny 5 year old and a huge just-turned-4 year old, for example.

No they don't always go by age. There may be some age weighting but most often the child sits the test with their class and the age weighting is treated the same as a September born child. I am in a wealthier area and deferral happens to improve the chances of a child getting an 11 plus place all the time.

So? It's not a competition.

If your child is achieving at a decent standard academically and has friends, why does it matter if someone else is 15 months older and doing even better?

If your child isn't achieving at a decent standard academically or doesn't have friends, it still makes no difference who is doing better, schedule a meeting with the teachers and work out a plan to support them.

A child who starts school too early is not only going to feel like they stand out as below everyone else, they are also going to disrupt everyone else's learning. One or two children who are a bit more advanced is way better for the rest of the class than one or two children requiring constant support simply because they are too immature for the environment.

It didn’t make any difference to private schools in my personal experience.

And do we really want to take our lead from the Chinese education system? I certainly don’t…

You are making the assumption that deferring kids will automatically be in the top set though whilst trying to make the point that's why it's unfair.

My personal experience of deferring and many friends who have done the same is that their child isn't in top sets in their deferred class. It's simply that they are somewhere in the middle and not struggling with school which in turn means that the teacher has more time available to help the ones which are struggling.

Yeah and also the younger kids in the class BENEFIT from the typically more grown up behaviour of the older kids. Teachers absolutely would not cope if all the class were 4

I haven't made that assumption but in the same way that September born kids have been proven to have an advantage academically, children who have been deferred will have this advantage amplified further. So maybe a child in the middle set would have been in the bottom set if they were with children who were all born within 12 months of each other. That means some other child is in the bottom set that should actually be on the middle set of deferring wasn't allowed. I have first hand experience of academically advanced children being deferred and I will never ever be convinced that this isn't happening. I think people on threads like this underestimate how far parents will go to ensure that their child has the absolute best start even if this is at the expense of other children. The system should be reformed so that this isn't allowed to happen and children have a more equal playing field at school.

What on earth are you talking about? A normal Reception class starts with all children being aged 4 and the teachers cope just fine. You don't need some five year olds sprinkled in to regulate the class.

Anecdotally I have noticed that deferred children exacerbate social issues in the class. There already is often a stark difference between how the younger and oldest kids socialise even though both groups are behaving in a developmentally appropriate way but normally the two groups have enough in common that they can bridge the 12 month divide. A kid that is 16 months older than a just turned 4 year old has a third more life experience and this can make the gap too big to close. The deferred kids certainly aren't a benefit to the younger kids and cause a whole host of problems in the playground and classroom as both have very different skills and wants and needs.

As mum to late July baby and step mum to August born I don’t see any point in delaying. Both were very ready for school. I also know quite a number of July/August born kids and none have been at a disadvantage, though I’m sure I’ve read that most professional football players are Autumn born! Unless there’s another reason the cut off is the cutoff.

The vast majority of parents will not defer a summer born child who is developmentally on par with their year group. Maybe you get some crazily pushy parents who will hold them back to make sure they are top of the class, but it's much more likely that a deferred summer born will just be less far behind than they would have been.

It's not a level playing field because it's not a playing field at all. All the kids are going at their own pace, some will be doing really well, some not so much. Some are left-handed and will take a little longer with orienting their letters the right way, some speak English as a second language and need to catch up with their vocabulary, others might have learning difficulties or disabilities and need extra support to overcome them. Some have really involved parents who read with them every night and invest in their education, and/or went to high quality childcare, some will have spent most of the last 4 years zoned out to Cocomelon.

Your child isn't going to win a prize for being top of the class, neither are they going to sat in the corner with a dunce cap for struggling.

Exactly. It's not "I want my child to thrive, screw everyone else" because education is not a competition. To the extent that we treat it as such, we've lost our way.

It's "at what point is my child mature enough to benefit from their education and have a positive start to their school life?"

All children are entitled to this and it's a fault in our system if deferral is necessary to provide this.

I come from a family with significant experience of being young in year, to the extent that when I realised my early October born eldest would be old in year I was concerned! She might have benefitted at least to start with, from being advanced a year. I strongly believe in allowing more flexibility and a broader age range in any year group as a result. But it's very hard to achieve that without some spare capacity in the school system.

My mother, although small as a child (rationing didn't suit her!) and a June birthday, thrived in a very small mixed class at first. When they closed her school and transferred them to the next town, she didn't understand why she wasn't in the same class with her friends but in fact two years back from some of them. She recalls learning not to work as she had nothing new for two years. Slightly similarly, my parents were recommended to have me put up a year when I was about 7 - but couldn't find a school willing to allow this. In year 7 my secondary school did want to put me up but my parents thought I'd miss too much and it was too late (I think they were right).

My youngest is July born, and we've had issues related to immaturity - but just being one year down would have had limited benefit, would have bored him academically, and when he happened to hit puberty early would have been extremely difficult. In fact when his first school (private) met him for an informal assessment in perhaps February or March, they pointed out that he could start as soon as he'd turned 4 (they didn't have a nursery class); and I said great but he won't be 4 until the summer holidays. There was a time when he was perhaps 8 or 9 when I used to remark that he was "3 going on 13". Now that he's 19 and approaching 2nd year exams at uni, we can see that if he were planning uni applications now he'd finally be ready to actually research courses and think about his future ... A single year of deferral wouldn't have been enough to help with that!

It's not good when parents end up thinking "all summer borns should be deferred", and in fact that attitude could end up jeopardising the benefits of deferral for those children who do need it.

I wonder if it’s a geographical thing. I asked my friend who deferred their child last night about who does it in her area and why. She lives in Brighton and said that there are a number of deferred children in their school and most people have done it to give their kids a ‘leg up’ (her words). I live in a less hippy place and only know of two deferred children in the school and they both have additional needs.

We know that not everyone defers their child for a perceived advantage but clearly some do, and from reading the thread no one is going to come on here and admit it are they?

Again. I’m in Wales. English rules don't affect me. And I’m in secondary so not involved in those sort of decisions. Why so unpleasant?

Life is not a competition. It is ok for different people to do things at different paces. Look at any university course and you will find students who have come straight from school, students who have had one or even two gap years and often mature students as well.

The "unfair advantage" argument is very odd. If it would benefit one child to slow down and take a step backwards in ultimately reaching their goal of achieving some worthwhile qualifications, then maybe that is what they should do. If your child can achieve their best at a quicker pace, good for them!

The ultimate aim is for each child to have a happy and fulfilling education, and transition successfully to an independent adulthood surely. All this talk about "advantage" and comparison is misguided.

This is laughably naive. Your child will literally win a prize for being top of the class in many schools. That's what academic and sporting awards are about! They will also have an advantage when it comes to selective secondary schools and joining academic streams. You only need to look at the number of parents paying for private education or tutoring to understand that a great number of parents place a huge emphasis on these things and deferring a year is another way of getting an advantage. It really isn't just the case that those with struggling children are deferring.

If you don't recognise that education is a playing field then you are hugely privileged and don't see the inequality laced throughout our education system. Children aren't all just motoring along at their own pace. There are advantages and disadvantages that are pushing some kids forward and holding some back. Some are outside of the education system's control but many are within the government's gift.

So actually contrary to what you suggest, your experience of school will be hugely different depending on if you're top, middle or bottom of the class. All of these things hugely impact self esteem and future prospects. There are only so many fantastic university places, great graduate jobs etc. Life is a competition and it starts young.

But that's what deferral does allows a more equal playing field for the youngest who research has shown time and time again struggle the most and have far worse outcomes?!

It's been common in Scotland a long time majority of parents don't see it as a competition it's about what is in the best interests of their child and that's not viewed in isolation of academic ability. Social aspects, ability to cope with exam pressure, changes to secondary are all part of what parents consider.

I’m in a difficult situation as me and my friend had our babies within 3 days of each other (end of August) and whereas I chose to defer my child, she didn’t.

So although our children are the same age, mine is in Year 2 whilst here in Year 3.

Her son is really struggling at school according to his teachers (both academically and socially) whereas my son’s teachers say my son is thriving.

What is interesting about this is when our sons are together, they are so similar in terms of their characters, they are both on the same colour band when it comes to reading, they both achieve the same results on their maths challenges etc, so they are pretty much identical in their personality traits and social skills, as well as what they are able to do and achieve from an academic point of view.

However, because my friend’s son is the youngest in his Year 3 class and being compared to what the older children are capable of he has already been labelled as “behind” and has actually been referred for “catch up extra sessions” and the possibility of autism has been thrown around because he is so much quieter and reserved, with less social skills compared to the rest of the class (lower in confidence).

Yet my son, with the same abilities and character is said to be thriving (even though he’s only 3 days older than my friend’s son), because he’s meeting the expectation of the Year 2 curriculum as opposed to being expected to meet the school’s criteria of what a a Year 3 child should be doing.

If my friend’s son was in a Year 2 cohort instead of the Year 3 cohort I imagine the labels he currently has (struggling, behind, possible SEN) wouldn’t even be considered as he’d be on par with everyone else.

My friend regrets so much that she didn’t defer her child.

This is just one example and I know other children will have completely different experiences, but it does show how starting school so young can disadvantage the summer born and at the age of 8 he’s already been written off (for want of a better word) when actually he’d probably be classed as perfectly normal if he was in the cohort below.

It’s for reasons like this that the knock on effects of starting school so early can impact a child through the entirety of their education (academic and socially).

Honestly, as a Scottish person this thread is just fucking weird and depressing. I have a summer born and will definitely consider deferring if need be - but we are in England, and I had no idea the judgement would be so harsh here

I was a teacher for long enough.

At Primary School, no-one is winning a prize for being top of the class. They win prizes for good behaviour, consistent effort and a good attitude.

At Secondary School, there may be awards at some schools for the top child in each subject, but again, most are for attitude, effort and behaviour. There's no prizes for top achieving student at my SD's school, only for students who demonstrate the school values.

Streaming is applied to a top GROUP not one child, and the purpose is so children are moving at the pace they need to move at, not a punishment or reward.

Parents pay for private education and tutoring because they want their child to do well, and doing well is doing well regardless of what their peers are doing.

Once you get to GCSE level then you are "competing" against the whole country. If you get 10 8s then it doesn't matter if the rest of your class got 10 9s. You've still got a great set of results.

You sound like the type of parent who gets competitive over Reception book bands.

Im also a Scot in England - I deferred one summer born and not my other and honestly nobody gives a shit.

People sometimes ask me questions if they know I deferred one and not the other, but generally the only time it comes up is if someone wants info on how it works.

Where are you getting your anecdotes from? You sound ridiculous.

You notice that the older kids in the class exacerbate social issues?; please explain how you feel that children a few days or weeks older cause your child problems?

Do you only let your child play with the summer born then in case they get corrupted by the villainous autumn borns in class? and do you tell them to keep way from the terrifying tall children so only be friends with children who are smaller than them?

I feel pretty concerned about the reasoning and critical thinking of a few posters in this thread and wonder if they were summer borns and could have been benefited from an extra year at school too…

I’m English and also find it weird and depressing.
But not because I care what people think about the decision I made for my own child, it more just makes me worry about how many adults rely on ‘gut instinct’ and anecdotal evidence to inform their decisions and opinions rather than reading around the topic and consulting the evidence that is available.

It says a lot though that this is a total non issue for those whose countries have a more common sense optional approach to school start age, and suggests this is more jealousy or anxiety from those parents who didn’t know it was an option or didn’t read about the impact at the time so now needing to tear down those that did delay start because they need to justify their own approach.

Had exactly the same situation; child’s best friend a few days apart started at just 4 when he was still wetting himself etc. He is a lovely bright child, but has experienced bullying and social issues and consistently being flagged as under performing. The school referred him for assessment as they said he was taking up too much of the staff’s time trying to help him; but he doesn’t have SEN he’s just ‘behind’. It’s really affected his self esteem and it’s heart breaking to see as if he were in the year below he would be meeting expectations.

My son started at 5 and is definitely not top of the class; I’d say he’s meeting expectations in some areas and behind in others. It makes me so relieved imagining how horrific he’d have found it if he’d been in the year above trying to cope with the areas he finds challenging and I feel so sorry for my child’s friend that he’s being unfairly labelled as behind when he is absolutely on track for his age.

My friend says she regrets hugely not delaying his start and admits she didn’t bother reading around it at the time as her husband was dead against it.