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?

I understand why people say he'll be bored but surely if he was born in September only a few months people won't worry he was bored and say he should move up a year.

Except those September children have always been with groups expected to go to school at the same time. They weren't put in the older group at nursery who started learning phonics etc.

Your kid expects to start school. He will feel demotivated if he doesn't. What message does that send 'Mummy doesn't think I'm as clever as all my friends so I have to stay with the babies in nursery'? Way to knock his confidence.

Thinking of this as giving him an advantage compared to his peers is kind of a waste of time, a moot point. You’ll never know the answer there, there will always be brighter and poorer children than your own. If you think a year would benefit your child - a year more play, a year to grow more mature, a year to gain more confidence in the world - then go for it.

I’m in Scotland, I sent my Nov born DC1 to school at 4y9m and then Feb born DC2 at 5y6m. DC1 was more confident and social when she started, but she just wasn’t ready for the restrictions of P1. She didn’t try at her work and really didn’t care if the teacher thought she’d done a good job or not. She just wanted to play (because she was 4!). DC2 is generally more nervous and shy but when he started P1 he flew. It was such a relief, he was ready to learn and grasped things quickly and loved it.

The rules have just changed in Scotland and now I can defer my Oct born DC3. Academically and socially she is totally ready for P1, but she is so similar to her big sister. She doesn’t want to sit for long and do jobs, she wants to play, which is completely appropriate, because she is 4. Another year in nursery will be enjoyable for her I think, but if she gets bored, that’s fine, children need to learn to deal with boredom.

There is also something to be said for this age group of children and the effects of Covid. They missed so much. They don’t remember it now and don’t know any different, but I think they deserve more time before the demands of school kick in because they lost out on many normal baby and toddler experiences. Not to mention the fact that speech and language difficulties among these children have sky rocketed - this has an impact on teaching time for all the children in the class. If your child is super ready then the impact of lack of support will be lessened.

Just send him to school in September. Cannot think of any benefits to delay a year and you potentially have a very angry teenager who will resent being held back a year ! Friend’s daughter was held back and she was bloody furious when old enough to understand.
Academically my son born in July has done exceptionally well and was at grammar school and Lancaster Uni . Two of his friends at school were both born 31August ,one went to Edinburgh and the other to Durham …it really doesn’t make any difference long term .
My daughter was a September baby and was more than ready to start school for the whole year she waited before reception. She was bored with nursery and wanted to start big school!

Don’t underestimate the misery of not being able to go to the pub when one by one all your friends go.

I'm not underestimating it. I remember it - I wasn't that young in the school year but all my close friends had pre-Christmas birthdays.

But I wouldn't factor it in to a decision to hold back a child who was bright and already knew they were going to school in a few months. My DD is about the same age as OP's son, she knows she's going to school (as OP said her son does) and if we said (obviously worded more sensitively) "actually no, all your friends are, but you're not", that would also cause distress and upset.

But deferring won’t make your child excel, it will only appear that he’s doing better because you’re comparing him to a younger group of children? He’s still going to be a year behind the curriculum for his current/true cohort.

I’m an advocate of delaying formal learning longer than we do in UK, and that for some younger children, deferring really is a great option when they are emotionally and developmentally not as ready for school as their cohort. But to hold back a child who is able and ready? I can’t see how this will benefit your child in the long run.

I think what you need to work out or whether you can provide him with something for a year that will promote his development better than school would? Otherwise you’re holding him back in every sense of the phrase, just so you can say he’s top of his class next year.

I’m really surprised how many people think it’s a terrible idea to give your child another year before starting school. The message about the importance of play and the benefits of delaying formal learning aren’t being heard yet!

@Clairebear231 if he can handle school don't defer him. He's bright enough. By delaying him you can cause all sorts of issues.

1. The school you're putting him into now may accept him a year older, but some schools would insist he skipped reception and went to year 1 with his age group. If you ever moved schools etc and going to secondary that could be a problem.
2. Sports and extra curriculars are based on ages not school year. He may find himself too old to compete in sports at his school because he isn't in the right school year. Delaying him might actually take away opportunities.
3. He is bright enough. He can already excel. By delaying him you could just end up with him bored and not putting effort in. He could end up disruptive because he's bored.

The deferral is there for when its required, it really isn't in this case. You're doing it for yourself because you want to have the biggest brightest kid in the year. He probably won't be thanking you if kids pick on him saying he must have been dumb to be held back a year, or he only did well because of it.

@MumblesParty so deferring because when they are 17 and their friends are 18 they can't go to the pub. Suggesting that in 13 years time they want to go to the pub... ok.....

Thing is if he's already counting and knowing his letters, the next year is going to just be a lot of repeating. He might be a little further ahead of his peers in reception but it's not like nursery will put him in advanced classes.

Is it a private nursery or school nursery? Would you be looking to him transferring back to that school for Reception?

I think you risk knocking his confidence and enjoyment of learning. And I absolutely know September parents who'd kill to put their kid a year up cos they're so bored by the Ed of nirsery

I agree more time for play is important, but so much of the reception learning is done through play. I'm all for deferring when it benefits the child, but nothing the OP has said indicates this is to benefit her DS. The decision to defer is because she wants him to excel, and she thinks the easiest way for him to get ahead is to be the oldest in his year.

I'd say it would definitely hinder him.

Friends I know with very bright children couldn't wait to get them started at school... they were already quite far ahead with reading, numbers etc and they got a bit bored in reception at times even being one of the youngest.

I would send him now and you can always defer next year or in the future years. Best to try it and see.

Well it depends on the set up doesn't it. No one in my DD's nursery is deferring, so if we did defer her (June birthday) she would be repeating a year of pre school that she's already done, with children younger than her, while her friends all leave and go to school.

That's different to a set up where lots of people defer, or where school just starts later.

Reception is still quite play-based as well, from what we've been told by DD's primary school.

It would be fine if a child is struggling/has always known they aren't going to school that year. But a child who is ready, and is expecting to go with all their friends?

Nowhere could be more set up for learning through play than a reception classroom. Well, it could I suppose but it would take a lot of effort to replicate that on a daily basis.

@MoserRothOrangeandAlmond It’s not just about going to the pub ..which actually is called socialising but all the other potential drawbacks for being the youngest that @MumblesParty has explained. Having said that my July baby was actually ok .

The going to the pub logic always confuses me in these threads as no one thinks of the reverse of the argument - I'm early September born so was pretty much the oldest in my year, but when I turned 18 as all of my friends were younger I still couldn't go to the pub and drink as if we got ID'ed they weren't 18 and I didn't want to go on my own!

I don't understand why you think it would be beneficial. If he's bright and socially ready as you say then he'll thrive. Holding him back will hinder him

Its completely illogical as someone will always be the oldest and someone else the youngest... in truth the birthdays are spread throughout the year.

Deferring means he’ll go straight to year 1 alongside his peers who would have already been attending for a year. It won’t mean he’ll be the oldest and the cleverest. Also early speech and potty training doesn’t mean he’s any more academic or intelligent. Many of the boys in my family didn’t speak until they started school and I come from a family of very intelligent men who all work in engineering, computer science based jobs.

It always irritates me as it's such a basic way of looking at it. Why worry about something that isn't going to affect them for another 13/4 years?! There are pros and cons to being the oldest/youngest. I'm still best friends with a girl I went to school with. I'm September born and she is July born so 10 months younger than me and it's a total non issue. In fact I'm always jealous of her when our birthdays come round each year!

I didn’t start school until the term after I was 5 (local policy back then). I was bright, already reading etc. I remember being SO bored being “stuck with the babies” in preschool when all my friends had moved up to school. I apparently stropped home and told DM I didn’t want to do playing any more, I wanted to go to big school and “do sums and proper things”.

I did fine at school, but so did DBro who has a July birthday and started the September after he turned 4 (so essentially a year younger than I was when I started (different LEA, we had moved house by then). He was a little socially immature, but it had no impact on his friendships, just a bit fidgety and chatty in class. He is very bright (went to Cambridge) and honestly would have been bored if he had been working a year below.

DS has a May birthday and was a very “young” four year old when he started school (toilet trained and well-behaved, but very shy and clingy). He absolutely flew on starting school - loves all the rules and structure (preschoolers do seem to love rules), loves learning, and has made friends well. He couldn’t read when he started, but now in year 1 he is on gold book band and is in the top set for all subjects.

If your child is bright, and it is a reasonable school, they will do well whatever age they start.

I absolutely would not do this.

My DC is bright too and young in her year and school has been painfully boring for her at times. Imagine sitting through learning every single phonics sound one by one for two years when you arrived at school already reading books. I can't imagine compounding this by deferring for a year unless the child wouldn't cope socially in their given year (my DC is academically advanced but behind a bit socially which really showed in Reception but has evened out a lot by the end of year 1).

I'd only defer a year if you really think your DC won't cope with going to school yet.

I think deferring a summer-born child who is struggling makes good sense. For a bright child it makes no sense.

I have a bright daughter whose birthday is in July. It wouldn't have occurred to me to defer her entry to school for a year. Admittedly that was partly for selfish reasons (no free nursery hours in those days) but also because I didn't see any advantage to her in keeping her back, either socially or academically.

When she started reception, she was probably the best reader and writer in her class, despite being one of the youngest. Many of the children weren't reading at all.

If she had been kept back a year and started reception a year late, she'd have been even more ahead and would surely have become bored while everyone else was still learning the basics.

If she'd gone straight into year 1, she'd have missed out on a year of making friends and might have found it harder to break into established groups.

She went on to a selective secondary school (which took no account of age when looking at the entrance exam) and from there to Oxford.

He won’t be excelling. He’ll be held back and compared to younger children.

Even if he starts off doing ‘better’ than his classmates, eventually overtime they’ll catch up and some may even do better than him; whether it’s primary, secondary, University or in the professional world.

You would be better off encouraging him and giving him the confidence to be challenged and being the best he can be, and also learn resilience.

"All professionals say he is capable and ready." - There's your answer!

I'm a late August baby, daughter is born literally right at the end of August and started school pretty much the day she turned 4. It's literally fine, there are differences at the start but they even out. It makes them more resilient if anything, it sounds like you just want to wrap your child up in cotton wool so they never feel any disappointment etc, which is natural but it's actually a good lesson imo.
Don't really believe in the need for children to "excel" from reception age anyway

I was born on the very last day of August, which is the cut off (or at least it was then, I presume still is.) My mother was very reluctant to let me go and wanted to defer, but my Dad was a teacher and as I was bright thought it much better for me to go and not wait around another year and get bored. I thrived at school from day 1, I was quick to read and continued to be very bright and was always in the top 2 or 3 in my class until I left school. If your child is bright, he will be better suited going now I think.

(The only thing I struggled with being so young was physical things like tying shoe laces or hand-eye co-ordination, according to my parents!)