Parents of summer borns who deferred school entry! Any regrets?

[JL0]

My DC was born on 30 August 2020 and is due to start school in September 2024. My other half and I are on the fence about whether we should defer them to September 2025, but are leaning slightly towards deferral.

The impact of being summer born is well-documented through research (eg lower academic attainment, lower self-esteem). Based on these factors alone, the argument for deferral seems strong.

I'm less clear on the "cons" of deferral. I haven't found any research on this point. Anecdotally, I've heard stories about deferred children struggling emotionally and/or being socially isolated because they're older than their peer group.

Parents of deferred children - do you have any regrets? Have your children struggled emotionally or socially because they are older? Are there any other disadvantages to deferral?

For context, my DC is a pretty "normal" 3 year old. Meets their milestones. Is often shy in new settings. No SEN concerns. Attends preschool 4 days a week.

Both the FA and the RFU will allow a child to play in their adopted age group.

Our son was born on August 12th 2020.

We aren't going to defer.

A big consideration is nursery fees. We have an almost 2 year old and our 3rd will be born in December.

He's immature, but he loves nursery and learns a lot there.

We believe he will benefit from school, too.

Reception class is more playful anyway, I was told.

@WarningOfGails Not always (which is why I have detailed it above). I have known two cases of footballers who had their request revoked. They were both boys aged 13 who were out of year. Both were very tall and strong - physically dominant over their peers (think over a foot taller and shoulders twice as broad).

They were both permitted initially but a nasty tackle which resulted in a child breaking their ankle led to a complaint from the injured child’s parents and the two boys then had to play in their correct year group. It wasn’t just a knee jerk reaction to the injury, these boys had a real physical advantage and there had been complaints before.

One boy had been educated abroad and only started learning English when they arrived in the UK so was put in the year below even though he was almost a year older. The second had been deferred just because they could (mum was very over protective). This was in the private school sector where deferrals have been made for many years.

Yes, you will always have boys with a physical advantage who are in their normal age groups, but these deferrals gave them an advantage for no legitimate reason. The FA rightly took away that advantage. I would add that both boys also thrived in their correct sporting age group.

I’m late September born and was moved up a year from reception. I was academically bright so that was fine.
I would say that socially I lagged behind and should definitely have taken a gap year before university because turning up at 17 was just too young.

For sport size would make more sense or weight.
I know 2 dd very tall both 'obese' in primary. Much taller than adult women by end primary. It would have bwen good and fairer for them to play up in sport but then it would be with sixth formers..

Summer borns on average still behind at ks2 sats. By say 2 so getting say 103 rather than 105.
Going up to secondaries set for maths from day1 it can make a difference.
But partly summer borns are behind is that a few may get really behind so cant read or write well at all and affect averages. The determination from schools that being younger doesnt impact cant help as the call it ability when its age etc..
Regardless of age in year pigeonholing kids as bright or not at 4567 etc isnt great. Unfortunately using SATs etc pushes kids to maintain where they were at previous stage. Not to consider they were mislabelled previously

I deferred my summer born son - end of July birthday. I instinctively didn’t want to send a just turned 4 year old child into formal education where they might struggle purely because of their development stage not their potential. So I turned to the summer born research and found there were mainly advantages to deferral. I can fleet round admin challenges, I can’t get round loss of confidence.
My son is thriving and not much older than the oldest in the year.
You’ll get lots of anecdotal evidence on here advocating both choices but I recommend sticking with the quantitative studies.

@Fercullen (or anyone else!) Would you not say, though, like with any intervention, that studies can only give an indication at a population level? I remember that phrase a lot when I was pregnant and considering various options around pregnancy, birth and feeding... The midwives, doctors and so on would always stress that while there might be X effect "on a population level", each individual should be considered individually. I am not trying to start a bun-fight here or dispute anyone's deferral decisions, but I do think there's an important question (with no easy answer) about how we as parents apply population-level statistics to our own circumstances and individual children. I've definitely done it both ways with my own parenting decisions!

I didn’t use the data/studies or anecdotal evidence to make my decision. It was very much based on individual circumstances. I only came on here to tell the OP that I have zero regrets. Interestingly the anecdotal evidence that I gathered was extremely different to what I read on mumsnet. I guess that’s the point of anecdotes.

Yes and applying both population level - no negatives of being oldest
And individual - no negatives except paying for another year of nursery - which is still funded 15/30 hours and you would pay if child had been born in sept.
Being so bright that they are ahead is unlikely to mean they are ahead of all children including those 11m older especially when looking at secondary numbers of 200-300.

So the real question is how disadvantaged are children by each birth month apr-aug.

For gcses etc and sats children are directly competing against the others taki g the test - with no age adjustments. The 11+ adjusts by age. But afaik still fewer summer borns get in

Imagine with sibli g if you have 3 the youngest might often be left out as the baby. Older children can lower behaviour and interests to the youngest, young ones can raise it but it can be tiring

I moved between England and Scotland with my early August summer born so effectively ended up deferring after half of reception (covid happened too) as she had to start in P1 the following September.

Although she's about the middle of her cohort in age she's a better fit with the year above academically and her closest friend is in the year above.

We've got away with it because it's a small school and she's been in the younger half of a mixed year class so been able to be in 'both'.

When she started reception she was physically tiny (but confident and physically capable) but is now tall and slender rather than short and slender.

Deferring in England would have been the wrong choice for her, in Scotland we are in one of the few bits of the year with no option to defer and the effective deferral is probably not ideal without a very helpful school and a system that allows kids to work ahead if that's what is needed rather than the mastery syllabus in England. I'm still a bit worried about the final year of primary when there isn't a year above to work with and her bestie is at high school but that's a future problem.

If you have a confident, assertive child I'd lean away from deferring (which is why we didn't defer in England before moving) and would also consider how tall they are. My younger one's best buddie was premature and should have been the year below but didn't defer at least partially because he's already one of the tallest in his year despite being about the youngest!

I think with anecdotes, it's only really helpful with sufficient context. If someone says "my son has the same birthday as your daughter and I did/didn't defer him and I have absolutely no regrets" that's not useful. Whereas with more detail about their child and circumstances, you can work out how much their anecdotal evidence applies to you, and whether it resonates.

Also not trying to start a bunfight but I'm fascinated by the number of people who have summerborns who are "top of the class", anecdotes which entirely contradict all of the data/research etc.

I'll be honest and say that statistics did play a significant part in my decision (supported by what my child's nursery said about deferral).

I wonder what the disparity is - mumsnet is clearly skewed upwards along socioeconomic lines. I wonder if the disparity comes from these summerborns having greater support at home? More intervention from parents?

Maybe it is a Mumsnet socioeconomic effect, yeah. My daughter has two professional parents who both did well at school, and with us both working, she went to nursery full-time where they follow a preschool curriculum. So she had the benefit of nature and expensive nurture (by way of nursery - we've never pressed that side of things at home, unless you count reading stories and chatting; I'm more keen that she has fun and good relationships with people). I'm sure out of all the children in the UK with her birthday, she has more advantages than most.

I didn't mean to imply that parents should disregard the stats altogether, and of course if the child's nursery is saying the same thing, then it seems like a no-brainer.

(I also don't think being "top of the class" is everything. I was top of the class as a nearly-summerborn child, but really struggled in other ways. It may be that weaknesses will become apparent and that's OK and we'll cross those bridges if and when we come to them. I just don't think another year at nursery, which was realistically our best alternative, would have been better. I like that she spends her day with a qualified teacher now, in a more orderly and expansive setting than her nursery was; that's reassuring for me regardless of how she's faring with phonics. Ah, look at me, "justifying myself" like those other posters accused me of doing 😂).

A kid years ahead would still be ahead. Its the 10-15% etc who wouod seem average.
A placid attentive child can do extra work.

Its about confidence and soft skills.
So my CSA start child vs summer born in cohort.
Has had more party invites so better social skills
Higher activity group brownies/guides nore interesting activities and skills
Higher swimming group
More energy for clubs
Less time doing homework
Positive parents evening
Faster at maths - gets to the challenge q
If dc were slower to learn to read will be in ks1 till 8, so less need to read themself
Better at sporfs day (if only in the sense dont mind tsking part. A SB boy cried in y2 about losing)

I think the rigidity around birthdates has been losing England out in terms of sports and academics.
But especially pushing kids into next year group when they cant read or write is obviously ridiculous if they could catch up with a repeated year

How much they learn at nursery varies so much
dd1 did phonics and writing
dd2 did neither at same nursery.

if a kid wont sit still in reception it is an issue and they will get in 'trouble '
Dd1 spent a lot of time in the parallel class as punishment or outside class.

probably a syste m of moving kids into school when displaying the learning behaviour would make more sense.
our relatives abroad their kids were so much further behind uk in terms of reading/writing and maths. But by about 10 have largely caught up.

Just to correct some of the misinformation on this thread. It is absolutely not the case that a deferred child will miss reception and go into year 1. The summer born group on Facebook has all the information about how to prevent this from happening. We follow their advice for our DC and it has so far been a great decision.
The only downside we have found is having to explain ourselves to other parents, some of whom can get quite defensive because they either chose not to defer or didn't even realise it was an option. Our DC is absolutely at an advantage and so much more confident than if they had gone at just turned 4.

My take on it is that people get very defensive when summer born deferrals are discussed and they chose not to defer their child (as we’ve seen in this thread). Hence the need to emphasise that their particular summer born is excelling.

My experience is people get very defensive, and try to immediately discredit the objective, quantitative, evidence, as well as the practice for more flexible admissions in other English speaking nations, as well as trying to discredit those who have deferred. It appears very important for some mothers of summer born children to tell everyone how FINE their child is.

Typically, those who deferred only disclose when specifically asked, feel comfortable with their decision, and if it's not working for their child, have the option of moving their child into their age cohort if they wish. As a group, we have a lot less to prove, I feel. It's a fully reversible decision if it's not benefiting the child.

Teacher here giving my opinion that in most cases, it’s best not to defer your child. Somebody has to be the youngest in the year, and if the July/August babies are held back then it’ll become the June babies that parents are wanting to hold back and so on…
Primary schools are very well equipped to deal with a range of ability and maturity in Reception starters, and by the end of infants/start of juniors the noticeable academic differences are pretty much evened out. Of my own DC, the one who was a summer birthday actually ended up being the most academic and attaining the highest GCSE/A Level grades compared to her siblings who were autumn/winter birthdays.
Unless your DC has SEN I would never recommend deferring simply because of a summer birthday - send them to school with the other kids their age.

Also would like to add that, at secondary/sixth form being in the correct year group gives your DC the option of repeating a year if it becomes necessary without significant administrative problems. For example, it’s possible to repeat Y12 with government funding if a DC is struggling (funding available up to age 19). OTOH, if they’ve already been held back a year, it’s very difficult for them to be allowed to repeat again, and in this way a deferred child really doesn’t have much leeway to struggle.

Teacher here giving my opinion that in most cases, it’s best not to defer your child. Somebody has to be the youngest in the year, and if the July/August babies are held back then it’ll become the June babies that parents are wanting to hold back and so on…

But surely a scenario such as that would involve ALL parents of July and August babies deferring their school start, leaving the June babies the youngest…

That will never happen. One thing I’ve learned since deferring my child is that people, generally, are really quite invested in upholding the status quo. Many families also choose to send their summer born to school for financial reasons, to avoid paying another year’s childcare fees.

I’m also pretty sure that families don’t defer simply to prevent their child from being the youngest in the year - it’s to save them from starting school when they are barely four years old and not ready (and there can be all manner of definitions of “not ready”). So this cascade effect you describe of each birth month not wanting to be “youngest” really wouldn’t happen IMO.

I think it would be worthwhile looking at how realistic it is to defer in your area. In some counties it's much easier than others.

I disagree. I'm now in Scotland where the school starting age is 4.5 at the earliest, you still get parents, especially in leafy areas, deferring so their child isn't the youngest. Deferring is especially common in private schools, although I guess there is the complication that it's possible to go to university after S5 which would be age 16 for the youngest in the year...

Deferring is very much accepted, my November born (so more than 3 months before the cut off date for that year) is the youngest in his class. I could have got an extra year of nursery funding for him - and this would have applied to any child who wasn't 5 by school start date (around 15 August).

Hi. I'm going to defer my child for reception. Does anyone know if it's the schools decision or the county council? I read to check with the schools I visit, which I am , but then have been told it's the councils decision. Thanks

Just go to the website of your local council and look at what it says there about deferrals policy and the process for it...probably varies between areas anyway.

If you need more info you'd be better starting your own thread.