Going full time at 4 yrs and 3 weeks. Not ready!

[Clare123]

My ds will start school September after having his August birthday. Our borough is requesting all
children start in September. I spoke to the local
school which he will going to, about possible part
time, but the head made it very clear it is not an option she would like to consider.

The problem is my ds is not ready, he is bright, but struggles holding a pencil and had NO interest in letters or numbers. He counts to about 13. His concentration is still very limited, but most worryingly he says things like "I'm not good at drawing/counting etc". I worry his self confidence is just going to drop even more when he is with 5 years old who cab do all those things!

We do have the private option and can afford it. What would you do? Any advice/opinions?

My August-born DS2 has been in Reception since September, and as far as I am aware, doesn't get asked to do much 'sitting still and concentrating'. They play out on bikes, climb trees in the "wild woods" (school garden area), sing songs, listen to stories, draw on each others' faces (without teacher's consent or awareness!).

DS2 doesn't yet know all his sounds, but I am not worried about that - it'll come when he's ready.

Have you been into a reception class? Sitting down and having to listen accounts for a very small part of the day! It's mainly play punctuated with eating times. Loads of 4 year-olds have the attention span of a gnat - teachers are aware of this, that's why 'academic' skills are taught in short bursts. (IME)

in scotland is very common for parenst to defer their younger children ( here its those born 1Jan to 28Feb). At our school there are 3-4 children in each class of 26 ish whose parents have done this

we have a Christmas baby and we are not sending him to school until he is 5 years 8 months old. he will start in the youngest class (called Prinary 1, same as reception in England)

we don't have to have him in education until the term in which he turns 6

DD2 started full-time school when she was 4 years and 10 days old and has never had any problems.

I know reception is mainly play, but Year 1 is all about sitting and learning and he will be just 5. I very much doubt he will be ready for that. And he will have to sit and concentrate in many situations at schools - assemblies etc. I know of many children's whose self confidence is so knocked by starting school too young - and lets face it globally the UK doesn't come on top becuase it starts education at 4 yrs old.

have not read all the posts, but did read thisisyesterdays post, and I agree. Register to start so you get your place, and do part time, either short days or short week until you and he are happy and confortable with school. You may find that he settles in and flourishes very quickly, you may be surprised, but if not, it is your call, not the schools, but that is easier to arrange once you are in there so to speak.

At the school DD is at, where she was 4 and 8 weeks when she started they were/are very very aware that there are children who are only just 4 there, and they structure the reception year accordingly, it is an extension of pre-school in terms of how they work and the curriculum they follow, and the head said at the beginning that while she expected/encouraged children to at least try full time, or aim towards it quickly, she would be guided by the needs of the individual child and wishes of the parents, and would work with them and the teachers to get the right balance, if full time was too much, also that this can change at any time, so once full time, did not need to stay like this if not working out/vice versa.

You have three issues here.

1. is he too young to go to school at all?
2. Will he be permanently disadvantaged/damaged by being the youngest in the year?

3.If you can afford it, should you go private?

On 1. as people say it's very much learning through play in reception, it's more like nursery and they don't sit for more than a few minutes at a time.

On 2. My experience is (and I have children at either end of the spectrum) is that summer children are at a disadvantage. It's not just hearsay - there are plenty of studies that back this up. If you can possibly avoid your child having such a disadvantage, why wouldn't you?

On 3. Well....

oh just reading on a bit -

DD does not sit and learn all day, she plays outside, whenever she wants to, it is segregated from the main playground during normal hours (ie not breaks) and a teacher supervising and 6 children are allowed out at a time ALL DAY if they wanted to be. She plays dress up, does craft, listens to stories, sings, dances, makes a mess, plays with water/sand, and alongside this does a bit of reading, does spelling and numbers games and songs, uses the computer. She has a lot of FUN. And has gone from being completely uninterested in letters when she started to being able to write her own name without prompting, and read 3-4 letter words, and desperate to learn more wherever we go.

KATTT you cant have your child set back a year.

Really you cant.

NIckschick

Really I did.

Its definitely not the norm.

Was it recently?

Certainly in the last 14 years its not been done in several authorities that I am familiar with and when I did my training it wasnt something accepted and that was even longer ago.

Its a subject close to my heart as I have an august ds.

Have you actually spoken to the prospective teacher about how they will be handling the summer born children in the class? My DS is in Y1 now, he has a late August birthday and it was September start only last year. It was the first thing I buttonholed them about. The school were very gentle with him and the other young ones, allowed lots of play time (Sandpit and cars, mainly) and didn't push him with writing or things he couldn't manage. He loved the social side of school and the friends he's made, and in one or two aspects is actually well above average. It's not ideal but I can't change his birthday!

He won't be the only summer born child in the class, and it's the teacher's job to cater for all of them. Unless it is a tiny school there will be 50% of the class who have birthdays April or later and a very wide spread of maturity.

The learning journey for that year is just a continuation of the nursery EYFS system and there are no targets AFAIK.

Unless your DC is well below average maturity for his age (not his school year) I don't see why he shouldn't be taught with other children of his age group. But that's just my view - good luck with your choice.

Nickschick

I should ask.

Do you mean can't as is 'that's mean to her'
or can't as in 'that's impossible?'

It wasn't mean to her. Her best friend is 3 days younger than her and would have been in the year below. It would have been mean not to do it. See early post at 21.05

And it can't be impossible because I've done it, other people have done it. More people should know about it.

Nickschick.

This was 5 years ago and someone asked about three months ago for more details so I rang the LA and got an updated copy of the same document - saying the same thing.

It should be more widely publicised. Some children who are near the cutoff would benefit from going up or down, not all, but some.

Sorry if yours could have benefitted from this, I do tell everyone I can.

KATT I had a conversation about this the other day with a friend as her child is going to be in school year with another friend's child who is almost 1 whole year older, while in a different year to my son who is only 3 months younger than her, seems mad! We talked about how useful it would be (who knows how practical to manage) to have parents of children born in July and August be able to choose what year their child goes into, with guidance of some kind perhaps, based on the need of the child/development etc. Some children are very very ready at 4.2 years to go to full time school, some children are not, would be useful if summer babies got a choice.

Grizzly

I know. It's just an arbitrary point on the calendar but it can make such a difference to children. I thought education was meant to be child centred! Not a factory where they have to be huddled together by their batch numbers and date of manufacture.

If you can spare a few minutes have a look at this. It's a brilliant take on the outdated thinking behind our current education system.

ww.youtube.com/watch?v=zDZFcDGpL4U

Just one last though Grizzly. I was talking the other day to a woman who is trying to get the NHS to run more efficiently. She pointed out that institutions, unless they are stopped from doing so, will be run in the best interests of the institution, not ever in the best interests of those using it.

It seems to apply here. That cutoff, batching children up, may make it easy to run the school, but that really is not the point, or rather it should not be the point of schools.

Just to clear up a couple of things...

From this September parents in England have the right to delay the start of full time schooling until later in the school year, although they must start no later than the start of term following their 5th birthday. The school and LA have no choice in the matter. Indeed, parents probably had that right from September 2010 but the information put out by the last government was confusing and contradictory. However you cannot delay entry by a full year and retain your place at the school. And you must still apply for admission as if your child is going to start school in September.

Parents also have the right to request that your child attends school part time for as long as they want, although the child must start full time education when he or she reaches compulsory school age. However, schools and LAs do not have to comply with those requests. The information put out by the last government suggests that they intended to give parents the right to choose when their child started full time but that isn't what they actually put in place.

There is no absolute right to hold your child down a year. Whilst some schools and LAs will allow it, most will not. Indeed, even if you do manage to hold your child down a year in primary school, some secondary schools will then make the child go straight into Y8, skipping Y7 completely.

There is a child in ds1's class who is a nine year old year three. It can and does happen. I am in Leicestershire.

OP - pleaae be aware that KATTT is very, very unusual and is not speaking for all parents of summer-born kids. She may have chosen to put her summer-born kid in the year below - most of us do not make that choice, have no interest in making that choice, and are entirely happy with the results!

OP - Reception really isn't about sitting still and concentrating on academic stuff for hours - it's about learning through play - it's called the Foundation Stage for a reason; it lays the foundations for later schooling in a fun way, it isn't just the same as later schooling.

To start your child in year 1 effectively misses out on all that gentle foundation building.

Now that would be really hard for a child - any child. To go straight into year 1 without having that gentle intro first.

And make no mistake - once they are 5 they will have to join year 1, even if they've skipped reception.

Plus they'll have to cope with being a year behind other kids socially, academically, and out of the loop socially.

If you're planning on homeedding forever, or moving to another country with a different education system, fine.

Otherwise, it just sems really cruel.

My DS (4.5) loooves school. He's grown so much in confidence being there - he's a different child.

My experience of the private sector is that they bend over backwards to accommodate funny/delayed starting times (they did with all my summer-born children). The head's line was that the parents were the best judges of when their children were ready for full time school. I did get some raised eyebrows from other parents who wished they'd asked too!

coldtits - yes, it can and does happen BUT it is at the discretion of the school and LA. Parents do not have any right to insist it happens. And I do know of cases where a the parents have managed to persuade the primary school to hold their child down a year (or admit their child to Reception a year late) only to find that the secondary school insists on putting them straight into Y8. When this happens the child finds that all their primary school friends are now a year below them and they are struggling to catch up with others in their own class, having missed Y7 completely. The school's point of view is that the child needs to complete his or her GCSEs before ending compulsory education at age 16. The child in your son's class will, under the current rules, be able to leave school at the end of Y10, a year before most children sit their GCSEs.

I am not saying the current system of grouping children by age is correct but it is the way schools generally work in the UK.

When Ds1 was about 3 and admittedly he was a very immature 3 we realised he would have to start reception class as an August born child almost 12 months younger than some in his class.

We were selling our home and did ring many LEAs to ask for information on deferring for a year none were receptive,the only place we discovered was Scotland and we very seriously considered going there purely for that.

Now we also have 2 other ds an September born and an October born- both were entirely different and really would have been ready for reception a year if not sooner before they began.

In fact because of this we chose HE.