Summer born headache.

[Highfivemum]

So my youngest was a prem baby 28weeks and was born on the 30 march. He is due to start school next year. I always knew he would be slightly playing catch up with the September born children. Found out today that in his class he will have 15 !! children who all have deferred to start a year later. (This is their right being summer born.)But all is has done is shift the youngest in class to the march children! I can’t defer due to being March but he is socially nowhere near the level of his peers as it is.
anyone else feel that is sounds a good idea in principle but it doesn’t solve the problem of DC being to young for school. Surely it should be on the individual child.

The other children aren't your concern. The teacher will not accelerate the curriculum, what is taught will be the same regardless of who is in the class, particularly in Reception where it's a completely different framework to Y1+.

Kids are not actually only able to be friends with children born within the same year. Lots of kids have good friends who are older or younger than them.

If you don't feel like your child is going to be able to cope with Reception you don't have to send him until he's CSA which for a March born child will be after Easter.

My eldest daughter is an end of August summer born and is at grammar school, so academically she’s fine. Socially she was shy and a bit behind her peers. When she started reception she was 4 years and 2 weeks old. She did adapt well because she went to nursery three days a week.

We preferred her to strive to keep up with the oldest academically rather than be at the top of the class to start with, and she has that competitive drive so she got there in the end.

You are correct, but there are examples of summer born children doing fine.

I'm end of May born, skipped a year at school and ended up with a spread of As and A*s at GCSE. I would have been better in my own year for social and emotional reasons but academically, I was better off being stretched.

Had I been kept back a year because of my birthday, I think I'd have been extremely bored and ended up doing worse than I did.

Having worked in Primary Schools, provision for children working above their age expectation is generally poor. The curriculum is specifically designed to prevent these children "racing ahead". The system is meant to churn out students to secondaries all at roughly the same level- the less able are pushed, coached and taken away from anything creative or fun to focus on maths and English and the more able are just left to get bored.

I have a Feb born so she would have missed any cut off but being held back would have been disastrous for her. She was more than ready for school and was heartily bored of pre-school a good few months before she started.

Parents need to think carefully about what is best for their individual child, not the statistics.

I think it's ridiculous tbh. August babies I think there's an argument for deferring, on a case by case basis. Why tf would anyone think their April born baby needs to defer a year 🙄 I really don't think it's in the interests of most children

I would have deferred my August born ds had it been available at the time in order to delay the transition to year 1. Reception was fine for him but the expectations in year 1 like sitting for a lot of the day wasn’t where he was at and he would have been more developmentally ready a year later. My son wasn’t disruptive but might have been needing extra attention because of his age.

I’m surprised that April borns are allowed to defer. Are the 15 kids in the same class? Are the school splitting the classes based on age? I’d expect a more equal distribution of birthdays over the year.

Perhaps it's different for different parts of the country, but the county I'm in, in the midlands, what you say is absolutely NOT the case. I know this, and came onto the thread to comment, because I've seen this happen repeatedly.
They'd only get a full reception year, or not have to change year groups later on, if they had a significant learning or behavioural need, diagnosed by a doctor or psychologist.
"Mummy thinks they're not ready" doesn't count. You need solid medical/psychological evidence.

I don't think it's being 'the youngest' that causes the disadvantage, it's being under 4.5 and starting school

If this is true, and there are stats to back it up, then surely the solution is to change the age cut off for everyone. Make the birth dates March to March not Sep to Sep, so all children start school at 4.5+. It is unfair to introduce an option to defer which only the savvy will know about and only the comfortably off will be able to afford to use.

It's March-March in Scotland so all that's happened is that savvy/comfortably off people are deferring their winter born children and starting them at school at 5.5 instead of 4.5.

I actually think it should just be a firm date, very little wiggle room and only if a particular child is assessed at needing extra time. It's difficult to expect teachers to teach a group of children from aged 4-almost 6 and it is often benefitting those children who are already in privileged situations.

Yes March to March plus deferral definitely doesn’t fix the issue!

Agree it should be a firm cut off with exceptions for eg medical reasons.

I agree that 1 April to 31st March for all of them, with no option to defer, would be the best. Then all children would be between 4.5 and 5.5 when they start Reception. As the issue isn’t being the youngest. It’s being not ready for school because they are so young.

My dc do have sen so perhaps im bias. The bottom 10 children academically of each of my dc class in primary were all summer born. Im a huge fan of deferring option. My younger two summer born spent most of their first year of infants school sleeping from lunchtime as it was too much. Luckily school was fab and made them bean bag beds in secretaries office. Differing would have been much better for my kids

Hi OP,

I deferred my summer born as he was late August born so instead of going to school just after his fourth birthday he started a few days after his fifth birthday.

Academically he’s been fine, and for the last few years he’s gone to the year above (where he “should” have been) for his maths lessons, but from a social and emotional point of view, he’s far more in keeping with his main class.

He’s about to start Year 3 (so “should” be starting year 4) but we’ve never regretted deferring his start.

His last two teachers tried to get us to make our son skip a year so he could go back into the year group he “should” have been in, but we never even considered it. Academically I’m sure he would cope but that’s just one aspect of the schooling experience and I think being moved up a school year would be detrimental to him in other ways.

He’s obviously the oldest in his year, (unless there are any other deferred summer borns in his year group which is of course a possibility) but only by about a week, and then within the following 6 weeks there are many other children turning the same age as him, so it isn’t like there’s a particularly big age gap between him and some of the other children.

The only way that it’s most obvious (to me) that he’s a deferred summer born is when he is with the summer borns in his class who started just after turning 4 years old (so a whole year younger than my son), as my son is obviously physically bigger than them in size, and he’s probably taller than about 75% of the class. He’s not one of the tallest or one of the “biggest built” children though despite being the oldest.

Based on his size alone I imagine a lot of the parents think my son is one of the oldest in the class but assume he’s a September/October born as opposed to August born.

Just to add it’s not necessarily an added expense to delay a child’s school start for a year. They can stay at school nursery for the ‘bonus’ year. Obviously I appreciate that not everyone will get the 30 hours funding or have a school nursery close by.

I am not an advocate of deferring. For starters why would anyone keep paying nursery fees for another year? Imho it causes problems later along the line. I know plenty of summer born children who are doing just fine with their peer group.

Well the child will still receive the funded hours for the extra year so it’s doesn’t necessarily incur any extra costs to defer.

I imagine finances are an issue that may affect some families decisions, but it’s not a given that delaying for a year will cause huge financial implications.

Yes, some LAs are definitely working outside the guidance and misunderstand their authority, and some are notoriously difficult. But the guidance is very clear at a national level.

Thankfully, LAs who take the unlawful stance of refuse delay applications and demand medical evidence are becoming fewer and fewer.

Apr borns are incl as summer borns because they only got the term after 3 till 4 at nursery funded.

Other reasons people may want to defer
Spend the year 4-5 with their dc.
To do activities like swimming or rugbytots etc. Learning to cycle
To travel
Or just that their other kids are young and home anyway.
Obviously when at school you are tied to term times (though summer borns in cohort cant be fined their whole reception)

One of dc class mates is 12m younger but theyve moved private. That is much more likely to have a big impact on grades

Uk education is a huge mess in many ways and unfair.
other countries wouldnt believe
We have state, state religious requiring attending church, state grammar, and private.
The rich are at the top of all those lists.
They can buy houses close to good schools and then still choose private. They can afford the transport, moving costs etc. They obviously tutor for grammar.

Some people are already timing the birth of their kids for sept/oct anyway...

Theres also a lot higher sen in state schools now.
So its best for the class overall to have fewer summer borns ue to behaviour and concentration.

If we bear in mind - state has higher
sen
Behaviour issues
Summer borns (as more winter borns accepted at private)

Deferring summer borns could arguably be something that shifts balance even slightly for state schools.
Especially as private schools have always moved students up or down

Our never holding kids back is literally seeing kids pushed forwards who cant read

Your LA is not following the admissions code or the associated guidance correctly then. Being grossly misinformed is hardly something to crow about. 🤦🏻‍♂️

Blimey, you best inform the government that you aren't an advocate of this option ASAP.
I am sure they will be in a rush to update the admissions code based on your detailed and insightful commentary. It must be wonderful knowing what is best for literally every child and family in the country. How wise!

Would hardly have said I was "crowing"... Seems like a nasty comment to make considering I was just sharing my experience.
Oh well, bowing out of this unfriendly thread now.

Bit harsh?