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..

Also, if deferring became the norm, how long before the parents of June babies started complaining about ther child being the youngest in the class, educated alongside July-borns who are almost a year older? You just shift the problem.

"You just shift the problem." but in practice that doesn't happen. In Scotland 53% of parents with children in the two youngest months DO send their children to school early. They have that choice. Some of these younger children are ready. Deferement has been going on for decades here and your warnings have not materialised.

I think ReallyTired has summed up the issue - as parents it's difficult to be objective and so we aren't always best placed to decide alone. We may make choices with the best of intentions which aren't always the right ones for our children.

Yy to that, tiggytape. And half of those parents deferring is significant - I think it works out at 2-3 per class which is 7-10% of each class.

deepinthewoods I've seen that between a poorer area and a wealthier one there was a big difference in deferral rates. Within individual schools it has been the more privileged children who have been deferred - their parents have heard about the research on attainment.

Agree with posters regarding parental choice - deferral should primarily be on the basis of professional's opinions ie nursery manager, healthcare professionals, educational psychologist.

Where I live, the competitive parents defer so that their child will be near the top of the class when they do go to school. Interestingly, in my DS's nursery, many of the deferred children have outgrown nursery & are playing up/being disruptive.

Perhaps 2 intakes a year is the ultimate solution? Although I imagine that's not realistic for a number of reasons.

traditionally schools in England had 3 intakes lotsofcheese but this hugely disadvantaged the youngest children as they had 2 terms less education than their older peers and as someone pointed out earlier is a contributory factor in the research on attainment.

tatty "deepinthewoods I've seen that between a poorer area and a wealthier one there was a big difference in deferral rates. Within individual schools it has been the more privileged children who have been deferred - their parents have heard about the research on attainment."

But that is simply not true, if you look at the demographics published by the scottish government it's the pooere families to have the highest deferement rates. rich families are half as likely to defer than poor ones.

www.scotland.gov.uk/Publications/2012/05/7940/4

You can only just do this in England? we have been doing it in Scotland for years

lanabell- I think that is clear.

lanabelle- sorry, hope that didn't come across as rude. X

Dunno toffee but DD3 and her friend are the only remaining 4 year olds in their class. Also, the week DD was born the maternity unit was like the Marie Celeste so I imagine that people deliberately avoid late summer birthdays.

duchesse the week DD2 was born the unit (in the old place, not the lovely new one on the main site) was heaving! She's not the only late August born one at her school either - I think the August born ones (not all born here of course) number about 6 or 7. Perhaps our year was just odd. It was VERY hot (the August lots of people died from the heat) so maybe many of them were prem (like Dd2 in fact).

Like you we didn't 'aim' for a particular month, having had a MC earlier in the year we were delighted when we knew she was on the way and was sticking around.

Thanks deep that's info I've not seen previously.

Straight away I would say more poorer kids should probably "qualify" to defer anyway. Then there is a more even split among the poorer families between "automatic" deferrals (Jan and Feb birthdays) and the earlier birthdays. Does this not mean poorer kids with Jan and Feb birthdays are less likely to defer than their wealthier counterparts?

It may be clear but it's untrue Lanabelle, as someone pointed out at the beginning of the thread nothing has changed ... this isn't new!

It does even out in the end. I'm summer born and felt I struggled at school until I was around 10/11 I did eventually become an Oxbridge summer born statistic. I did puposely avoid having a summer baby due to experiences. I have quite a few friends who deliberately had summer babies to have a summer maternity leave but did regret it later after they realised the difference it made at school.

I too was a summer born Oxbridge statistic. Dd2's ambitions don't lie in that direction (at the moment) but I really don't feel being August born has held her back at all.

tatty I disagree- I think that children from a "poor" background (by which I mean poor in life experiences rather than poor in money) should be in good quality educational settings much much sooner than legal school age.

As an aside, I think the sure start centres were a fantastic thing set up by the previous government, sadly being eroded all over the place by this government. As an example, before 2010 there was a brilliant range of activities organised all along the long thin (10 miles long, about 2 miles wide) corridor-shaped catchment area of my nearest sure start centre. The centre was having a purpose-built building added onto a primary school site at one end of the corridor, but had been operating from village halls all along the corridor. Since 2010, the permanent building has been completed but virtually all the provision in outlying villages has been pulled, leaving rural parents with limited resources and often no car with no means of accessing the services when they are the ones who most need it. The buses are unaffordable here and offer at best and at peak times a 3 x hour service for about £5 return per adult. There aren't too many rural poor who can afford that.

I have a May-born DS (just 13) and academically he's near the top, but physically (very small and underdeveloped) he would benefit from being in the year below. So its hard to generalise I think, although having boys in his year who are 10 months older, six inches taller and with breaking voices and huge feet is hard for my DS, who still looks like a young boy.

Though it is written in the admission code that parents can delay the start of reception, LEAs have not allowed it. It has become very difficult in the last 10 years if not impossible. This has been across the board. To say to someone that they do not have to send their child to school until they are 5 end of story shows a lack of understanding with the admission process. It is not easy hence my fight for 10 months with our LEA to allow a delay even with medical and educational support as well as legal support and the DfE stepping in on my behalf. If it were so easy, this forum would not be having this conversation.

jwpetal, but that's not true deferement though. As I understand in England parents can send their children to school when they like but they will be assigned a class according to their age.
A true deferement system allosw the freedom to drop back a year and send a child to school with a class below in age terms.

Another one here with a 2003 premature August baby... excess heat obviously pushes them out!

I have lost so much sleep over dd being the youngest in the year. She really was not ready for school but the local school was oversubscribed and leaving starting till she was 5 could well have meant not getting a place not just at the favoured school but at any nearby one.

Anyway, dd is, in true MN fashion, top of the class, but I don't think her year is a particularly high achieving one and also there are a lot of summer-born children. She has just sat Level 6 SATS, and she doesn't feel she did terribly well. I know they don't really matter, but if dd fails then I think her self-esteem will take a hit, whereas if she were a year older she would have been - presumably - a year better.

Ds is also an August child. He is sitting his GCSEs. He is complaining that every other person is brandishing an "extra time" card (some are in his opinion highly dubious) and he thinks that he should be able to play the youngest in the year card and get a few extra marks/minutes thrown his way.

I'm in Scotland and have two November born boys. I deferred them both.

My eldest was at nursery but they refused to fill in the form as he checked all their little boxes so that made him ready for nursery and youngest wasn't at nursery until he was 5. So the deferral forms just had space for 2 lines for parental comments and the rest of the forms were blank.

Somehow we got the deferrals and funded places at nursery for an extra year.

You couldn't pick them out of a line up as the oldest. Which is an odd idea. They are 3-4 months older than the next oldest. How can people claim they can spot a 3-4 month difference.

I deferred due to them being emotionally not ready, nothing to do with wanting them to be the biggest and best.