Pros and cons of waiting another year before starting school

[albatros]

My dd2 will be 3 next month and will start school in Sept 07. She still seems very young in comparisson to dd1. She had a difficult start as a baby and had alot of catching up to do which I think she has now achieved. I know I can defer sending her to school until Sept 08 which would make her and older one in her class rather than one of the youngest. I had hoped to decide in about 6 months time after seeing how she got on at pre - school which she starts this Sept, however I have to apply for a place at the school this Sept if she is starting in 07.
I would appreciate your views particullary if you have a summer child who is one of the youngest at school how well they have done (not only accademicaly but emmotionally, she is not clingy but does not interact with other children all that well) or if it is worth waiting another year

ds2 was an August baby and I had this dilemma with him. I looked into keeping him back a year but was told that if I did that he would at some stage have to join the "right" class for his age ie. he would still end up being one of the youngest in his class. So there didn't really seem much to be gained from doing this.
I presume this is the situation in state schools throughout the UK?
ds3 has managed fine - he did struggle a bit at first but schools will take into account the fact that some children are only just 4 when they start.
I think girls are generally better able to deal with school than boys and although ds3 has been fine at school I still think he would have done better academically if he had been given that extra year.
So if you have the choice to keep your dd back and for her to be the eldest in the class I would probably go for it.

Thanks for your reply wordgirl
Someone did mention that the children join the 'right' class for their age I will have to discuss it with the school. I don't know if I am being over protective with her as she had a difficult start. I never felt this way with dd1 she was deffinatly ready for school when she went but she was a Dec baby and so alot older.

I think if you do hold a child back a year, in most education authorities they will have to go straight into Year 1 - which will mean they have missed out on not only a year's academic work, but also a year's socialising with that class. In many LEAs summer-born children start in the January term, and in some even in the Easter term, so your daughter might not have to start when she's just 4.

I have two August-born boys myself (DS is 31st August!). They both started the September after they turned 4 and both have been fine. They were (are still) both socially confident and chatty children.

My boys have both been OK academically as well, and I know in both their classes there are lots of summer-born girls and boys who are doing very well in all respects.

It does seem very early to be sending our children to school, but that is a whole 'nother story.

Good luck with your decision - I do suggest you contact your education authority to find out exactly what the situation would be if you held your DD back.

From my understanding ... please correct me if wrong...

If you intend your child going to state school then yes you can hold them back a year but they will then go straight into Year 1, totally miss reception .

The only exepetion to the above is on medical grounds and then I think it has to go through a strict panel e,g child born very prematrely and has not reach certain milestones.

If you send your child to private school then you can delay them a year and they can go into reception.

My DS2 is 4 in August and starts Sept by comparison to his brother he is no where near ready and cold do with another yaera at playgroup but unfortunately the line has to be drawn someowhere. It is said that they do all catch up . I was a July baby and I did OK at school .

yes, unfortunately I think you will find that the system is stacked against your DD like it seems to be against my DS. I have always thought that starting school at just 4 (his birthday is in August) is too young, and he is now due to start in September this year. I do think he is too young and would hugely benefit from one more year before school. However if I keep him back he will go straight into year one, and still be the youngest in the class...and will not get a reception year which of course he needs!

It's a crap system.

Sorry to not have more positive views!

and another thing all this is nothing to do with what the kids need - it started with schools taking the 'rising fives' a term before their fifth birthday in order to increase their funding due to falling rolls (declining birth rate) and govts have encouraged the 4 yr old start in order to get women out there working a contributing to the economy....

leaving little room for the child's needs to come into it.

Thanks for all your comments I will speak to the LEA tomorrow and find out the facts. If it is that she will start at year 1 if I hold her back then I will start her in reception 2007 as normal, as I think it is important both academically and socially to have the reception year.
Perhaps by next year she'll have come on in leaps and bounds, a year doesn't seem very long to us but it is to little ones ( I still rember the summer holidays felt like ages when I was young !! (a long time ago))

Sparklemagic Do you mean I will be earning money for working rather than being an unwaged skivy?

Albatros - also each school deals with the age groups differnetly, for example at DS! school it is a three class in take so for Reception all the children 5 before Xmas go into one class and the spring/summer ones make up the other two classes. They them mix them in Year 1.

However for the first time in a number of years they are having to mix all recpetion classes as there is not enough Autumn born children to make up one class, the majority of children satrting this Sept are spring/summer ones.

This makes me feel a bit better about him starting.

Will your DD2 be going to the same school as DD1 , if so they may be able to put your mind at rest how they deal with younger children .

You're right that a year's a very long time in a small child's life, and the difference between 3 and 4 is huge - speech, social confidence and playing experience, physical abilities etc.

Your daughter may well surprise you!

albatros, I wouldn't go quite THAT far

My dd is 4 at the end of August and will start school in September, she will be 4 and 2 weeks when she starts school which I think is far too early.

She goes to preschool which is attached to the school for a couple of mornings a week.

At christmas I was really concerned but I have seen such a change in the last 2 months, she has grown in confidence so much. Also the class size at school is very small - 12 children and its all the children that she knows from preschool, so I think I would be mad to defer her for a year. However, if it wasnt such a small class size and if she didnt know anybody and she didnt have this confidence spurt I would be tempted.

I have found out that if I hold dd2 back for a year she will miss reception and start school in year 1. So I will be sending her in Sept 2007 so she gets the reception year. It isn't fair as they have 2 reception classes at her school, which are mixed in the diffent ages. In year one they are seperated into older and younger classes.
It seems silly to me that they don't have the older ones start in Sept in one class and the younger ones Feb - Easter in another. But I guess it is all due to bums on seats for funds.
Thanks to everyone for your advice

As legally she doesn't have to start full-time education (at school or otherwise) until the term she is 5 why don't you ask if she can do part-time school until then? It's perfectly legal and just depends on the headtacher agreeing to it.
Whilst she's still home I'd give her a headstart on learning to read using the Jolly Phonics books.

The dates are different as I am in Scotland but I was able to keep my dd1 back until she was 5 and a half and will be doing the same with ds. In Scotland the school admissions year is done Jan-Dec, with children born Nov - End Feb able to go into school at either 4 or 5, and as it is the calender year no child starts school before 4 and a half. They then stay in the same year, (with the people they started with) right through school.
So my ds, born Feb 2002, (4 now) will start school in Aug 07, but he COULD start in August this year. But he's having another year in preschool instead, adn I am confident that I have made the right decision.
My dd1, born Feb 2000, could have started school age 4 1/2 in Aug 2004, but we kept her until 2005. It was so the right decision for us, and she was an outgoing, friendly, confident 4 and a half year old. In our area, most of the other families with 'winter babies' as it is in Scotland tend to keep them until they are older, which led to a very lively nursery class for her, with plenty people her own age around and she thrived on it. Scotland doesnt have 'reception', children go straight into Primary one, though there are still 7 years in Primary (but only 6 in Secondary), so the extra nursery year was a bit like reception for her. SHe has done amazing things in her first year of school and has loved it, and I think thrived as she is that little bit older and so able to cope with it better.
Also (puting my secondary school teacher hat on) I see abig difference in children coming into secondary at 11 and at 12. The 12 year olds are so much more mature adn able to cope with the change. This is especially obvious with boys, but holds true for girls as well (maybe one day I will do some research into it, as every teacher I have worked with comments on it but I have neer read anything about it).

I know most of this is irrelevant to you as you are obviously NOT in Scotland, but it does seem wrong that you shoudl be forced to put your child into school when they just do not seem ready,adn that there is so little flexibility about dates. I hope very much that you can work things out to suit your DD2