To defer a bright child

[Clairebear231]

My son has always been bright, potty trained early, good speech from a young age etc I have never had any concerns. He is due to start school this September at 4 years and 2 months. All professionals say he is capable and ready....but I've recently found out I can defer him starting until next year when he will 5 years and 2 months giving him a big advantage throughout his school career.
My DH is very against this and feels he will be fine in school but I don't want him to be just fine I'd like him to excel, I'm also worried he will struggle being one of the youngest both academically and socially.
What are your thoughts on this? Has anyone not deferred a bright child and then regretted it or vice versa?

The evidence is very much in your favour. Statistically children do better if they start school later. Trust your instincts, which are backed up by the available science. He won't be bored if you do fun stuff with him, will he?

Gosh loads of pages so I apologise if this has been said already. But my ds is pretty bright, he is May born. He was reading before he started school. I tried to stop teaching him because I thought it was important he could learn phonics with the class. Reception year was very easy. He's 6 now just finishing yr1 and reads at about 8yrs and a bit ahead on things like times tables and spellings. He can't write well though! Anyway, school do nothing to push him. His books are still stage 5 phonics. If I'd held him back and he'd done reception a year late I imagine he'd be really really really bored.

Lots people quoted "statistical evidence". The thing is, "statistic" shows an average trend. But where that individual child sits on that curve actually matters more to make the decision. OP's child is probably not an "average" one as she described.

If your child was not quite so bright, then it would be better to defer, but as your child is bright now would be the best time! My twins are July born, so went at 4 years 2 months too, they are in year 3 and the one is doing year 4 maths and English having completed all of year 3 learning already. By your logic, if I had kept him behind a year he'd be doing year 2 maths and English at this point and would have been bored stiff! I vote dad's opinion x

My daughter is a very late August birthday and we could have deferred her starting until the following January/or September. She’d literally only just turned 4 a few days before she started in reception. I would say use your own judgement as to whether you feel your child is ready, both developmentally, emotionally etc.
Our daughter was more than ready, yes she was tired at the end of the school day but her teachers understood this and supported her. This was in fact the only way they could really tell the difference between her and her older classmates. You will find your child will adapt and go along with the flow. I’m so glad now that we didn’t hold my daughter back. They seem so young in reception but by the end of Year 6 and the move up to senior school it all events itself out. My daughter has just completed her A-levels and has now left school (still only 17) but is more mature than most of her year group who are already 18! Go with your gut instinct about how you feel your child will cope.

I deferred my 22nd August daughter and it was the best decision.

She had very severe obstructive sleep apnoea (waiting lists for tonsillectomy were suspended cos COVID) that was halting her speech and language development, and meant she was sleeping for up to two hours a day - and I had to let her.

Not deferring would have been a complete disaster. She started a year later, two weeks after her tonsillectomy.

However... Deferring isn't right for everyone. I have encountered problems, one being that the secondary schools in my area are very reluctant to accept deferred entry into Y7. This is a battle I'm going to have to fight all the way until she leaves primary, because I can't imagine her skipping a year, which is what we've been told will have to happen if we don't get the agreement in place by Y5.

Weigh up the pros and cons. There's a lot to consider.

My son turned 4 on the 7th August and started school a few weeks later in September. Like you, I worried how he would cope as academically he was brilliant but emotionally he would have a disadvantage, however, he has done nothing but thrive. Reception year is one of the best as it's such a light year when it comes to learning, it's not rigid like sitting down at specific tables doing specific lessons, it's still more of learning through play so it gives all the children a chance to adapt.
I'm so pleased I didn't defer him as I wouldn't want him to have stayed an extra year at school and he's already one of the brightest in his class, he would have been bored.
Just my take on things but you know your son :)

Can I add , the people saying reception is all play based and light , that’s fine but year 1 is quite intense (I’ve worked in a school ) it’s a lot more formal, lots of work - lots of sitting down at a table and long carpet input. Lots of phonics and reading.

They might just cope through reception but come to year 1 this is when the struggles will really happen if your child is not emotionally and socially ready , and this is what I’m concerned about with my child.

Ask your child. Especially if your child is bright, it would be unwise not to engage him in decisions that impact his life.

My DS is summer born, tested as highly gifted at age 7. I wanted to defer him when he first started school but at the time it was not an option. He ended up doing fine, mainly because of the following. I hope these could help you make your decision.
(1) we were proactive in making sure the school was the right school. The first school he went to was very tough, a lot of drills and rote memorization, and harsh in many ways. So we pulled him out and switched to another school. And he did very well there.
(2) DS is socio-emotionally more mature than his peers, which reduces the benefit of deferring.
(3) we are not big on sports, so having physical development advantage during sport team selection is not on top of our list. This further reduced the benefit of deferring.

Now that he is tested highly gifted, I've researched more into gifted education. We almost considered skipping ahead, but soon found out the potential negative impact on the child's socio-emotional wellbeing.

To summarize, I think as long as the school he is going into is a supportive, enriching and giving children much needed agency, he will probably do well without deferring. Without deferring, you will probably also be at more peace later when you find that he is academically advanced and be ok with not skipping a year or years.

I think by defer they do mean missing reception and going straight into year 1.

If your child is bright, he will be stimulated by being in a class where he is stretched. If you wait a year so that he is not stretched he risks being bored and being put off school.

My DD is just coming to the end of reception. She is still 4. She is bright as a button and I knew she was ready for school. She has done amazingly. Her latest parents evening was really positive and she is meeting or exceeding all of her targets, she is reading the same level of books as others in her class and most importantly she is "kind and never without a friend"

This is absolutely your decision but we have found it to be absolutely fine and she has loved school

@Clairebear231 i haven’t read the whole thread so apologies if this has already been raised.

Another thing to consider is that many sports such as football and netball are played by age so u8s, u9s, u10s etc.

By deferring, it means your child won’t be able to play alongside their school friends.

My son’s friend was held back but now has to play football at u9s, not u8s like the rest of the boys.

Not so much of a problem when they are little, but can be as teenagers.

A friends daughter was deferred. Played netball through school with her year group. Was entered into a county level tournament. Team got to semi finals and she couldn’t play. The organisers requested a team list with DOBs and school then realised their error. She shouldn’t have played in that tournament (and probably many others!) as she was too old, despite being only a few weeks older than other eligible players. Caused much heart ache and many tears, but ultimately she couldn’t play.

If he’s ready for school, send him. Deferring should only be for those that really need it. I say that as a mum of a fiercely independent late summer-born 2 year old girl who I already know will be absolutely fine starting Reception at just turned 4. Yes, she’ll be a bit behind, but she’ll catch up
in time and as a teacher by the end of primary you’d usually struggle to pick out the summer-borns in a class.

In your case, I wouldn't. If he was struggling developmentally, that would be different. Otherwise, can I get my y3 child to compete in the infants sports day so she can excel?

Those differences normally even put by year 3 anyway.

The reason this has been introduced is to give summer borm children who are NOT ready a fighting chance. Basically you want to play the system to give your son an advantage, which I believe is morally dubious.

Not in England. They start from reception still.

It's the problem of that particular choice of word. OP used "excel" but didn't mean to excel other younger children. She explained in later post.

My son was born late July, my stepson August. Several other kids in their years born in the summer. I see no correlation between their birthdays and success (my son is uni age, stepson in his 30s), though I'm sure there are studies saying Autumn born babies do have a slight advantage in the very earliest years, I've just googled it and April, July and October are touted as being months that most successful people are born.
While in some cases - immaturity etc - it might be a good idea to hold a child back, this definitely doesn't seem the case with yours. My son was very ready for school.
I was a whole year younger than my cohort (I moved countries and for some reason was put in that year) and thinking back it wasn't a disadvantage at all.

Four years and two months wouldn't even make him the youngest in the class. My DD is very late August born, and she's a bright capable girl. Keeping her back would have been a mistake as she would have got bored and disruptive.

I hate this thing where everyone thinks their kid is the special one who should be kept back. If you have a child who would really struggle you would know, but you don't keep them back just because they are summer born.

My DD’s birthday is the last week of August so she started school the week after her 4th birthday and I had the same dilemma you are having about whether to defer her for a year. I also spent most of her reception year wondering if I had done the right thing in letting her start so young.
However she’s now finishing year one and is doing so well, she’s one of the best readers in the class and her report said she is exceeding all her targets for this age, she’s also got a really good group of friends. I think she’d have been bored doing another year at preschool and when I look at the reception class this year they all seem so much younger than her.

Sounds just like my DD, she's doing amazingly well with her reading.

I haven't read the entire thread, but to share my experience, I deferred my bright son. He's June born.

When I say he's bright, I just assumed he would be fairly intelligent in the future because both his parents are relatively academic. However, age 4, my concern was that his speech was very poor (he was having speech therapy) and that he was socially and emotionally immature. This was my reason for deferring his entry into Reception. He was able to remain at his nursery (his keyworker had also deferred her own child so was very supportive) and he started YR aged 5 and 10 weeks.

I have never regretted that decision. He started school much more emotionally mature, was able to listen and focus, and was really ready for slightly more formal learning. It's caused us no problems at all, and his reception teacher went from slight bafflement at our decision to suggesting it as an option to all the parents of the summer borns the following year! 😆

He's now year 5 and we are looking at secondary schools. We approached all 3 of our local ones last year and none had any problem with him remaining in his adopted cohort (it would never be in a child's best interests to skip a school year, so ignore that scaremongering!!). He'll even be able to take the 11+ with the rest of his cohort as it's age-adjusted anyway. He's not bored at school , he's in the top groups but not far and away the brightest. I think he's confident and thriving. He's not overly large or tall, he's not the fastest or strongest in his year group, it's never been an issue. Some children question how he's just turned 11 and is in Y5, but he just says 'I didn't start school until I was 5' and they all accept it.

It won't be the right course of action for every summer born child, but it was for us.

Just to feed in from my experience as I seem to be from a different perspective from most of the responses - we are Scotland so the cut off is a different time of the year and not sure if the process is different - but last year we deferred our DD, who has now just come to the end of the deferral year and it's been an amazing experience for her which I'd recommend to anyone struggling to decide.

I think you mentioned in a later post social readiness and I'm so surprised more people didn't focus on this as well as the academic. Ours is really engaged in the academic side and always has been, so academically could have been ready - but we felt needed longer socially.

This year has been brilliant for her. She's grown a lot in confidence and it's been brilliant keeping flexibility and a balance of home and nursery for a bit longer - it's been so good for her and we've never looked back.

There's a few differences with your situation - we did decide early enough that she didn't start any transition stuff for last year, so didn't have a concept that she was being deferred, she was in a mixed group of two years at nursery so kept half her friends either way, and she was able to stay in her own setting.

For us it was just a case of weighing it up and we were lucky there were so many pros of staying. This year she has come on lots with reading etc but her nursery have been brilliant at helping her with that and it's certainly not held her back being in that environment - and now that she's heading to school it's lovely to see her confident and ready to go.

I don't think the decision should be based on the academic profile of the child. I think deferral works best if the child needs it for other more social interaction reasons. Does your child regulate their emotions well /in line with their peer group? Are they confident socially? If they are young but also lagging communication and interaction or social, emotional mental health skills then I'd defer. If they are fine in those areas then let them start school.

I was so surprised by most of the comments too, and Scotland as well.

It's quite interesting- I wonder if there's different attitudes in Scotland and England, maybe just with the starting age always being typically slightly higher here and the deferral conversation maybe going on a few years longer - as well as a lot of current chat in parliament here about raising to follow closer to Scandinavian countries' age 6-7 ish start?