Youngest in the year - what would you do / have you done?

[Izzasaurus]

My DD is the only child in the family on both my DH's side and mine, and I don't have any close friends with children, so I feel a bit short on sources of advice and would be really grateful for anyone's thoughts!

DD will be 3 this August. She's an end-of-August kid so will be the youngest in her school year unless I hold her back.

I know I still have a bit of time to decide but I would love to hear other people's advice and experiences. For context, DD has been in nursery full time since my MAT leave ended and will be moving up to the pre-school there in September, but sadly won't be able to attend the primary school associated with the pre-school, so those friendships will likely be lost except for the ones I can actively help her keep up with through parent mates.

She seems on track with things for her age. My main point of comparison are the other kids in her nursery group, all of whom are older. She seems to hold her own with them. She's chatty, socially and physically confident, very articulate (can already out-debate me if I'm not careful... although I do set quite a low bar for her in that regard...), and decent at following instructions most of the time. Not great with drawing / precise mark-making but starting to be more interested. Can recognise and do the right phonic sounds for most letters. Out of nappies for a year now. My impression is that she'll be fine starting school a year in September.

But a couple of things have given me pause. I know that achievement-wise, kids born late in the year tend to do worse. I know from my own personal experience that being very young in the year can be a bit rubbish in other ways. A couple of people have told me they definitely plan to keep their summer-born kids back so that they can have more time with them and give them more space to grow in confidence. And given that I could possibly afford to drop some hours in future, I'm wondering whether having the chance to get lots of 1:1 extra time with DD before she starts primary school might be a lovely thing for us both. I feel I've missed out on so much with her by being full time.

Then again... as I can't give up work completely, perhaps she'll end up really bored on the days when she would be left still attending pre-school... I also don't want to do her a disservice if she's ready to progress.

All views would be very welcome!

I’m in Scotland so the cut-offs are different here. The earliest a kid will start school is 4.5 but it’s very common to defer those kids (Jan/Feb borns here) to 5.5 and they get another funded year of childcare. It’s just a tick box on the starting school form. I did this with DD1. DD2 just turned 4 and I can’t imagine her starting school, she’s still so little and I don’t want to lose the time at home we have yet. Thankfully she will be 5 when she starts.

But deferral doesn’t seem common in England yet and seems to have a weird stigma that gets people very fired up!

My best friend was the same. Born at 22:30 at night too.
She thrived at school, became Head Girl and is now a senior matron.

Just be mindful that if you do wish to delay her start it can be quite a long process so although it feels like a long way away, if you don’t want to start her next August you need to have it agreed with schools that she can start Reception the following year when she’s 5.

I always knew I was going to defer my August born so I started the process of getting everything in place when he was 3.5 years old so that I knew everything would go smoothly (as you will still be required to apply for a school place as if you’re sending them when they are just about to turn 4, even if you know you will then decline any places offered).

Yes, you're probably right. I see the same thing in the obsession with 'good schools' and the fetishising of private schools. I think some of the most illuminating and strange threads I've ever read on here have been the ones about how to 'replicate the effects of private school', and people replying in complete seriousness, as if a child magically touched by the fairydust of private education is some kind of recognisable type -- academically high-achieving, supremely confident, well-mannered, a dab hand at some sport and grade 8 viola, headed for Oxbridge. There's an absolutely neurotic urge to give their child some kind of competitive 'edge' and a concomitant terror about them 'falling behind'.

I think you can tie yourself in knots over this and frankly - you can't predict what will be the 'right' answer and once you have made your choice, you will never know the counterfactual.

As such, I would send her in her 'normal' year unless you have a reason to think she will not be ready.

Our LB is a June baby so less extreme but he has lots of summer born friends in his friendship group who all seem to have fit in to reception no problem at all.

My August born daughter went straight into y1 at just turned 5 (she was in a kindergarten 3 mornings a week up until then). It was absolutely right for her and whilst she had to learn to read etc, she caught up and actually ended up overtaking most of her classmates.
Interestingly my son is September born, so started Reception just before turning 5 and was so bored because he was so bright and wasn't getting the correct input!
If it feels right to you, don't send her to reception at just turned 4 - it's too young for the sort of formal teaching that goes on in early years.

My DS was one of the youngest and I didn’t hold him back. He absolutely thrived at school.

I have Jan,Aug and Sept children. Absolutely no difference as to how they thrived at school,all did well. There always has to be a youngest child in a class,Iam an August child and I can never remember feeling any different than the other children.

I have an end of August born. I sent her in her correct year and I regret now not delaying her. She is ahead academically but socially, emotionally she has slipped behind. She's in year 4 now and the gap between her and other girls in her year socially etc has widened rather than reducing. She was absolutely fine in reception - year 2 but slipped back a bit in year 3 and now in year 4 it's clear some of them are a year older. I wish I could keep her back but too late now and I fear she would be bored academically as she is ahead and performing well

I compare her to my younger daughter who is September born who is the oldest in the year and you can really see the difference.

However it depends on the child. My eldest best friend is end of August and thriving in everyway. Perhaps my August born is just "young" in maturity etc.

We deferred but we’re in Scotland and it’s becoming more common every year. For children who can defer they start school closer to 6 years old. We have nothing but good things to say about deferring and don’t know a single person who’s had a bad experience with it.

In other countries children start school at 6-7 years old, not at 4-5.
No, they don't have these issues there because they just start learning to read/write 2 years later than here.
I have a summer-born and yes, he has been struggling at school, not because there is something wrong with him, but because he is just immature and too emotional for compliant based, rigid English early years schooling with its harsh demands. In other countries he would be still in nursery, playing with Lego and teachers would give him a hug if he cried and there would be zero discussions about being 'school-ready', cause nobody would be expecting it at this age.
Also, in other countries, nobody 'fails' a child when they are 5 because of poor 'self-regulation' (too emotional, etc.) (see EYFS goals). Hence the 'hysteria' here.

I’m an end of August baby and was kept in my normal year. I adored school and was always top of the class, went on to get a masters degree. I’d have hated to be held back. She sounds like she’s ready.

I would only do this if your child can stay in that cohort - it would not be helpful for them to suddenly be shoved up a year and I think it would compound issues.

The differences between the experience of my oldest in the year versus youngest in the year are massive - as are their educational outcomes. The youngest's outcomes were definitely impacted by health issues but also being the youngest left them unable to catch up.

In Scotland you can defer. Middle class kids are universally deferred but kids from lower socioeconomic groups whose parents are less aware of the statistics on being the youngest in the year, and who are more affected by having to fund another year of childcare are much less likely to defer. So you end up with the oldest kids being up to 15 months older than the youngest kids and having more cultural capital so the attainment gap becomes even wider. So I don't agree with deferring kids.

My second DD is a June baby. She had been at nursery since she was a baby and seemed very ready. However she didn't really settle at primary school until year 2. All through primary there was an undertone of 'not as bright as her older sister'. But her GCSEs were excellent and she seems to be enjoying doing 4 A levels at college.

My DD(14) was the youngest in her year, her birthday is 30 August and we deliberated for ages about whether to delay her starting school or let her go.

in the end we decided to delay her a year after someone asked if she was born in September 1 would we have asked if she could start early - which you can also do. Obviously no one wants to be the youngest so no one ever requests for an earlier school start. A retired head teacher friend also recommended a delayed start not because DD was behind but because she would just be that much older and more mature to start learning etc.

Anyway roll forward 9 years and we have never once regretted our decision. DD thrived when she started school and ever since.

Dont be put off by what others say, 3 is incredibly young to start school and summer borns generally have a harder time especially the youngest August children.

In addition she’s never been prevented from playing sports with her adopted year group, and DD says she would have hated being the youngest in the school.

I hope this helps.

Exactly. When did this become a thing. Ds2 and his twin friends all the youngest. All started at just 4. All did well and went on to university. No different to any of the other kids just a bit smaller

Thankfully now all deferred kids are fully funded in Scotland as well, so hopefully that will change. But I agree up until recently that’s been the trend.

Same - 31st August boy. It worked v well throughout primary, he was in a lovely year group (small village school). The time where he felt it was 6th form when loads of his year passed their driving tests in Y11 and he couldn't even start lessons until Y12 and also being the only one under 18 for the whole of that year also.

I would say it’s only become more prevalent in the last decade based on more research being carried out and published with regards to the possible detrimental effects of starting education at just turned 4.

Adding my August baby to the mix (who was due 1st September!)
Ummed and aahhed a bit but went didn’t defer, we might not have got our preferred primary if we did due to boundary changes. Learning wise was very ready and coped well but did struggle with tiredness until end of yr1 even though had done full time nursery. Has always been one of the tallest in the year! Smashed first round of SATs and has had brilliant SAS scores this time round, now heading for Senior school in September, just turned 11 and 5ft 5!

DD1 was born at 9.20pm on 31 August. In nursery class, her emotional immaturity was sometimes noticeable. Academically, she quickly began to outstrip older peers. Now in her 20s, she has a first class maths degree.

As a primary school leader/teacher, I've taught loads of summer born kids, including prem babies who should be in the year below. You cannot make any assumptions about what a child will or will not be able to do.

She sounds great and absolutely ready to go with her cohort.
If you defer you have to take into consideration out of age sports teams, and the fact that children could choose to leave school without actually taking any exams because technically they will be old enough.
Hard to imagine your 4 year old as a teenager but they will become one and they will have minds of their own.
August borns have managed for many years and good teachers are fully aware of the age difference. If this trend continues all we are doing is changing our school age groups from August to July children. Someone has to be the eldest and someone the youngest.

Same. It’s soo young isn’t it?

OP I would definitely hold mine back if I could but it sounds like she would be in nursery full time anyway so I’m not sure it would particularly benefit her? I say just go with your gut, you know her best.

I did defer my son and it was the very best decision for him BUT he was behind in all areas and would have just floundered in school. This does not sound like the case at all for your little girl so I wouldn’t defer on this basis

Many years ago now so possibly not relevant, but I was over a year younger than the oldest children in my year all through primary and secondary school.

When I started in year 1 the alphabet was new to me. Reading has never been an issue. I was slightly behind in maths to start with but caught up by the end of year 2. My subsequent career choices have been maths heavy.

Being the youngest was never rubbish. It was irrelevant as far as I was concerned. Somebody else already mentioned this, but the only downer was being the last amongst my friends to get a driving licence. Although not the last to pass my test.

It isn’t always a bad thing.