DID I hear right? That parents of 4 rising 5s can now DEFER school entry in England??

[Tansie]

HAS England joined the 21st century?

I am delighted if this is the case but also rather angry that my May born DSs have struggled throughout school, and will forever struggle whilst in academia to be measured against DC who are nearly 10 months older than themselves?

At 17 you may say: What does that matter now? to which I'd say 'because my DSs were, at 7, 'only just 'good enough' (2s at KS1 SATS); at 10-11, just 'OK (level 4s with the odd 5 at KS2 SATS) then streamed and 'set' ever onwards.

I believe there is a statistic that shows that 70%-odd of Oxbridge entrants are Autumn born, thus I rest my case.

I look now at DS2; 13 years and 2 weeks, school prize for application, contribustion, effort, 'joining in' etc etc- but academically just 'OK' and think : IF he were at the end of Y7, not 8, he'd be in the top sets for most things. He'd be feeling bloody good about himself, his achievements etc etc. He'd be 'aiming high' as his results would demonstrate that he 'was capable'... however, he knows he's 'struggling' academically as he just doesn't have the maturity to absorb some of what's being taught.

Which wouldn't of course be useful for the boys in their 'correct' school year with non-tiger parents barely keeping up with a much higher 'best' to aim at, I guess..

And in my experience- there is absolutely a physical and emotional difference between those who have deferred and the youngest third. They are bigger, more confident and a lot of the time they do dominate.

Well in my experience it's not. You can't tell the difference in my DS's class. But the plural of anecdote is not data.

If you feel your child isn't mature enough at 4, you should be able to keep them at home till they are 5.

Guess what? You've always been able to do that.

If what you really want is for your child to have an academic and physical advantage over his/her classmates by effectively making them the eldest in their year...well, that's another matter.

The line has to be drawn somewhere. It's the 31st August. 'Twas ever thus. I don't know why people who conceive in Oct/Nov are surprised by this.

But maybe you can't tell the difference as it is your child and you want to believe that, but I bet the other parents can. Only for the fact that it wouldn't be fair on the children, I would put a video up of a recent assembly and I can guarantee that anyone could identify the deferred 6.5 year olds!

Toffee- that's exactly my point.

" it is not about the child being ready but about the parents own insecurities and wanting their child to be top of the class."

Nasty thing to say scarlett.

And I could post my DS's school photo and I guarantee you wouldn't be able to pick out the deferred children.

Toffee, guess what- after 6 years of secondary infertility, I wasn't going tosend my August 27th baby back. Nor was I, as some people helpfully suggested, going to wait for a few days as I would have been burying her rather than visiting her in NICU. So thank you for that word of wisdom. Some people don't get the choice.

And I should add that my Aug 27th baby is very bright but she is still only 4 and has the emotional maturity of a 4 yo. A few days younger and she'd still have been in nursery. As it is she is in reception. Luckily she's in a school where they don't aggressively enforce reading and writing, in fact they don't do them at all until 6.

I don't mean to be nasty, I just find it infuriating that the youngest in the class are penalised by being in with children who are fifteen months only when there is no clear academic need. It is worth remembering that in Scotland, this is not children who have just turned four starting school, but children who are at least four and half- very different to children in England.

But scarletsmummy, to defer outside the jan/feb window and still get funding you do have to present additional evidence of a need to defer so in reality very few people do. So the differences normally just aren't as massive as you are saying.

toffee "The line has to be drawn somewhere."

Well maybe if you like a fixed attitude towards such things. Some of us prefer to trust our children. Children are not somehow magically ready for school just because a line is drwan in the sand.

All some of are arguing for is having some flexibility, it's not about wanting our kids to be top dog or best in class.

Some children are just not ready for a variety of reasons: they may not be mature enough emotionally, socially, academically I am surprised that some of you are so anti-choice.

I know my one would have struggled going to school a year earlier than he did, he wasn't ready.

When he did start a year later he wasn't the biggest in the class. He was in the bottom reading group, no good at sports, but he was by then ready emotionally. It wasn't about my ambition for him to be top of the pile- it was about having him mature enough to cope with school comfortably.

Why is having that choice such a problem?

That still leaves a fourteen month gap between the youngest and oldest. Surely you can see that this is a huge difference at age five?

scarlett "when there is no clear academic need. "

It is not always about academic maturity though.

The problem is that in Scotland there are no clear guidelines- anyone can choose to defer, so in my daughters school there are children who probably would have benefitted from an extra year in nursery, but could equally have coped in P1, doing what is expected of a child of their age, deferring. The result of this is that when they do start P1 they are much much further on than the children fourteen months younger than them.

Toffee, that's why I think the Scottish system works so well (despite Scarlettsmummys chip on her shoulder). There is a fixed cut off of the 1st of March, children with Jan/Feb birthdays who have just missed the cut off can defer automatically, then others can also defer if they present further evidence of a need to defer.

It seems bonkers just to have a fixed date no matter what the child is like. My friend's DD was premature and missed the cut off by literally a couple of hours in England, but no choice but to send her to school.

I am baffled by those who are anti choice, it seems very selfish to me.

This would be fair enough if we're talking about children who have just turned four- but we are talking about children who are in some cases four and ten months deferring. Children who would actually be one of the older children if they lived in England!

That does seem like too wide an age gap to be in the same class Maryz.

scarlett but these decisions about deferement are not done in isolation. There are meetings with headteachers and nursery staff, and parents come to a decision with teaching staff.

No there are no "clear guidelines" but to me that is a good thing, that gives parents power and choice- is that so bad?

Deep, because if it is entirely parent choice ie no third party assessment then many parents will defer for "performance" reasons and this then shifts the problem further back into the year. I would have deferred summer born DS for performance if that was an option

Saying that only in exceptional circumstances there will be more than 1 year between eldest and youngest in the year feels as fair to all as it can be.

It also makes school planning harder if you don't know the academic year of a rising 5.

In Australia, if everyone "starts when they are ready", do they also "sit exams when they are ready"?