Delay school start this year

[Junebuggirl]

Hi,

I have a lovely almost 4 year old due to start school this September, place has been confirmed etc. I was talking to another parent whose child is the same age and they are delaying school start. Their child has no development issues she just said they'll do better being the oldest not youngest.
I've literally never heard of a child not starting school unless there was a real need is this something a lot of people do now?
Starting to feel worried now as potentially my child could be with children who delayed from the previous year and could be nearly 16 months older. It just doesn't feel right and I feel I could be letting my child down or setting them up for a tough journey. Is this the norm or exception? Should I seriously consider delaying my DC starting school for another year so they aren't at a disadvantage?

It's very common in Scotland where the youngest DC can start school is 4.5 (28th February cut off, not August). Children born in January or February are often deferred and receive a further year's funding for pre school.

The thought of DC starting school at barely 4 years old seems odd from a Scottish perspective, but I guess reception year is very much play based with little formal learning?

I worried about this too, ds started reception a month after turning 4. He was due in the September but unfortunately had to be born prem which pushed him into the wrong school year. He only stopped crying at drop off at preschool in the last few weeks of the summer term before he left, so I was really worried about him starting school, he’s emotionally behind and still is. He’s about to go into year 1, and I’m still worried about his development, he has very little confidence, can’t say what’s wrong when he’s upset, and I feel like we spent the whole of reception year trying to encourage him to use the toilet at school, eat his lunch, play with other children etc, things they’ve usually achieved at nursery.
Thinking about your decision, I think this would have come up earlier rather than because you heard of someone else deferring. It is not the norm to defer school places,l unless there are very compelling reasons to do so. There is absolutely no need to defer a place unless it would help them.
Deferring our place was at the forefront of my mind the whole time he was at preschool, as I knew he was developmentally behind and would struggle, which he has- it’s been quite a battle with his health being poor due to issues after being prem so his attendance has been lower than I would like, not that they take this into account- they manage to make me feel bad for having a child with poorly lungs. With hindsight I’d have deferred his place, but nursery kept telling me ‘he will be fine’ which he isn’t but I felt they knew better than me, I got the impression they just didn’t want the hassle.

OP you'll get SO much misinformation about this on Mumsnet. Many people still don't seem to understand the system for deferral for summerborn children to start reception at 5, even though it's been in place for 10 years now! There are so many threads about this and the same silly comments get made every time unfortunately.

The data shows it is beneficial for children socially, emotionally and academically not to start school at 4. Most other countries start af 6 and Scotland has had a deferral system in place for decades that works well.

Look at the "flexible admissions for summerborns" facebook group for lots of actual data instead of anecdotes, and details of the process. The people there are knowledgeable and can answer any questions you have so that you can make an informed choice.

I’ve deferred my daughter’s reception place. She’s a July baby. We know other children who have been deferred. Around 4000 kids across England were deferred in 2021. This is a growing trend. My local authority gives an automatic yes to deferral and most schools in my town allow deferred children to start in reception. I couldn’t read data around summer borns and potentially allow my DD to struggle.

This totally depends on the child.
My oldest is 5 in December so he starts this year, he isn't ready at all.
My youngest turns 3 next week and he's ready, I'd be much happier sending my youngest than my oldest after summer!

Schools can put deferred children straight into year 1 but they need to argue that would be in the child’s best interest and therefore would have to say that their reception year is pointless and children don’t learn anything in it.

This is complete poppycock.
The default position is that all children (in England) are educated with peers born in the same academic year as themselves.
It is the family that would have to "argue" (to use your language) as to why they should be out of year group.

Look at the "flexible admissions for summerborns" facebook group for lots of actual data instead of anecdotes, and details of the process. The people there are knowledgeable and can answer any questions you have so that you can make an informed choice.

Except that the group is specifically set up for people in favour of deferring, so hardly an objective, unbiased group willing to put both sides of the discussion.

Hi OP.
My eldest is august born. He turned 4 and started school a week later.
But he was ready. He’d been going to nursery since he was 1 year old and as school got closer we were able increase his days at preschool so he got used to the “feel” of a school day. I think all of this helped.

We were also nervous, but when we spoke to pre-school (attached to his now school), they didn’t think there was any need to hold him back. We voiced our concerns to school and they reassured us that because he’d been at nursery and preschool it’s likely that he’d be ready, but that they would communicate any concerns to if necessary.

He’s just finished reception. He had a brilliant report. He loves going to school. He’s reading at the same level as his peers. And can’t wait to start year 1 (where I’m sure the real work begins!).

There’s not right or wrong in this instance. You can only do what’s right for your child, for you and your circumstances at that given time.

Yes agree.

So many people think you defer and automatically start a year later in reception which is simply not true. Often you can but not always

Nope. Your post directly contradicts the Government guidance that schools and admissions authorities have to follow. I think I'd probably listen to that more than you.

And no, that group is full of information, research, legal resources and useful information. Some people in it decided to defer, some did not. It is very balanced and - importantly - factual. Unlike your comments.

It depends on the LA. Ours they will have to rejoin their correct year group before secondary unless proven additional needs. So they miss either reception or year 6

It doesn’t always hold them back. My late summer baby is exceeding in both maths and reading she’s going in to y3. She’s the youngest in her year group. I wouldn’t defer unless there is a real reason to. Being the youngest isn’t necessarily a barrier

My friends little boy is 28th August and she decided not to defer him and he is absolutely fine, a little slow at learning to read, but everything else was ok and he made friends. If your child struggles you can extend the settling in period, children don't have to be full time until they turn 5 anyway. They do lots of learning through play in reception, so I expect your child will be fine.

Schools can put deferred children into Y1 however, they have to explain why this would be in the child’s best interest. It isn’t, so it’s kind of difficult for schools to ‘argue’ this point. Schools often follow the LEA decision, academies/religious schools are an exception as they act as their own admissions authorities (generally).

The Facebook group is great for anyone who wants to explore their options. Some members haven’t deferred their children, it’s good to discuss and share experiences. I’ve met parents who had no idea they could defer their summer born and have been upset because they would have wanted to. I think that’s really that parents are informed and discussions around the topic are encouraged.

What really needs to happen is legislation, meaning some consistency around the country rather than every LEA having their own process.

Yes our LA is if you defer reception, then they go straight into year 1. Which personally would be even worse.

Yes our LA is if you defer reception, then they go straight into year 1. Which personally would be even worse.

Such a policy would be unlawful.

It depends on the LA. Ours they will have to rejoin their correct year group before secondary unless proven additional needs. So they miss either reception or year 6

No. They all have to follow the rules for England. And the policy you describe would be unlawful.

its not common, where I am I don’t know anyone that has though I hear it occasional happens

i did think about it for my now 10 yo but am pleased I didn’t. He was socially very “young” (and small) when he started but it’s all fine now and academically it was definitely the right call NOT to defer him-
he would have been frustrated to be held back. If you do defer it can cause issues with sport as your child won’t be the Same age as peers teams etc.
also don’t underestimate how much a child can “grow up” and develop between the ages of 4 and 5.

It’s not uncommon these days and achievable. Our DC came from US to UK system, was late Aug birth and a premie. He started school aged 5 wearing age 2 clothes - eldest in year smallest in school. Imagine a year earlier it would have been terrifying. NB now 6ft at 17, but still smallest boy at 11.

It is becoming more common now every year as a higher proportion of parents are realising that it is an option.

I think the rates in Scotland (where a similar policy has been in place for decades) are somewhere around the 45-50% mark so presume England (and now NI, who have just recently introduced the policy also. Not sure how it works in Wales) will gradually move towards a similar proportion of deferrals.

Mine is the youngest by a few months, and as you say, some are 15 months older. We couldn’t defer him as he started out in a different school system and it’d have meant repeating a curriculum year. But he’s secondary age now and it’s really hard for him. Others are much taller and more developed and are allowed more - and I always feel I have to let him do things that he’s not quite ready for (tech/gadgets/bedtimes/staying out etc). Academically totally fine, it’s the maturity and being smaller/behind developmentally that is difficult. Had I had the choice I’d have deferred

It's interesting you say it's better to delay but didn't delay your own, what was your reasoning if you don't mind me asking? How is your DC doing now?

My mum is a teacher and thinks it's mad to delay without a learning/development reason as she said the class pace is set by the slower learns not the fastest even in groups etc so being ahead can be a disadvantage sometimes

In our local schools, if you deferred your child would just start at the point where they should have been, ie Year 1. So they’d still be the youngest and will have missed all the fun playing in reception. I wouldn’t have done that, I don’t think it’s really in their best interest.

Apologies my tone came across wrong before. I get frustrated with the ‘they’ll just make them go into y1’ scaremongering that always comes up on these threads without acknowledging that there is an official process for requesting a delay to school entry. I should have factually stated this however. All the information about it is here. https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/summer-born-children-school-admission

I have an August baby and unless she turns out to have a developmental delay (no signs yet but she's not even one), she'll be starting reception the Sept after she turns four.

The way I see it someone has to be the youngest, and if everyone starts holding back their August babies then it'll just be the July babies in that camp. I was summer-born as we're many otters I know, and being one of the younger ones in the class has never held us back.

It isn't about not being the youngest. That is a total misconception. It's that 4 is too young to start school. While reception is fine, YR1 is not developmentally appropriate for a child just turned 5, etc. You do not see the damage to mental health, emotional development or academic results for the youngest children in the year in systems that start aged 6+. Whereas if they start at 4 it causes long-term negative effects that persists all the way into adulthood. There is very robust research on this.