Please sign this petition regarding when summer-born children start school [headline edited by MNHQ]

[Sootball]

Yes I'm posting for traffic. But this is important. It really is. Because very few people know that the UK government are currently consulting on whether to change the guidance for allowing summer born children to defer a year.

And yes I know many start school at 4 and are ready, they have no problems, that they are the top set. But the research evidence does now show that socially and emotionally the summer born effect lasts for some into adulthood. This is simply about allowing those children who are NOT ready for school, whose self esteem and confidence will be impacted to wait a year.

If you care or have faced this issue then please can I ask you to take a moment and respond using this link >www.gov.uk/government/consultations/changes-to-the-school-admissions-code

Even if you are not sure what to write I have been advised in a box 5 the following will suffice Parents who wish their summer born (April 1st – August 31st inclusive) child to enter Reception class at compulsory school age must submit an application for the relevant academic year. The application must be treated equitably with children starting school prior to compulsory school age, and the child can remain with that year group cohort for the remainder of their education.

AND THANK YOU

P.s. The cost of an extra year of nursery has caused us a massive massive financial headache.

I have a summer born DS and I deferred his start for a term. He's in year 5 now and academically very able, but there's no doubt his emotional immaturity compared to his peers has been a disadvantage. Equally, there is a boy in his year who is a September child, so just one week short of a year older than my DS. He has had problems in that he is bright and advanced, and feels bored in his year group.

Personally I think there should be some flexibility, maybe offered to parents of children 2 months either side of the cut-off. Parents could send their kids into their "correct" school year, or the one above, or the one below, depending on their intellectual and emotional maturity.

I think this is a good and workable idea.

I teach in a non selective private school and we have fluid year boundaries between July and October. So more confident, academically and socially able children born in Sept/Oct are sometimes put in the year above where they should be and less confident, less mature children born in July/August are sometimes put in the year below. It's a combination of parental choice and school advice and seems to work well. It's not just for reception either.

Too much multi-tasking means I've cross-posted with Primafacie!

If you went up against one of the worst leas and own, then surely you are proof that the system of deferring entry only when there is a clear need is working.

I'm sorry you had to go through that as I'm sure it was a difficult and stressful, but surely you can see how some people would use it to their children's advantage with a direct disadvantage to other children?

I'd support a campaign that allowed summer born children to start school in January or even Easter without losing their place in their usual year group, but parents being allowed the choice of whether to start their children at school a whole year late for any reason they choose is not something that I think is worthy of support.

I'm amazed you managed to get a delay OP. I tried hard, wrote to every authority I could think of, including my MP, but the answer was the same - DS could join his correct year group in September of reception, or January of reception, or September when they started year 1 (thereby missing reception completely). I opted for the January start, which worked out OK. But of course he'll always be the youngest, and he hates that. He was a month prem too, so should have been born at the end of September!

Oh no. What I did wasn't a system working. No. What I did was threaten European Court of human rights. I had letters from every specialist that dd sees, childcare, specialist therapists. And yet having all that information I still had to fight.

That's not a system working. That's a system deeply flawed.

jollyphonics that a damn good point and one I've seen where a sept child is desperately ready for school but has to wait a year.

Bit hang on. You'd allow a child to lose one or two terms but then expect to start school year 1 with their peers and be equal? No. That propogates disadvantage

Shall I admit that I consciously chose to have a summer born child purely for financial reasons?

Well according to this petition both my dc are 'summer born' but they are not they are 'spring born', just over halfway through the school year and ds1 was v ready to go to school at 4.5 and I expect ds2 to be the same. That's quite different to a child born at the end of August.

I don't see what this petition is trying to achieve, I can see the benefit of a further entry into reception in Jan for July/Aug babies (and don't understand why that was got rid of) but surely children delayed a year and going into reception (which is mainly play based anyway) at 5 will just be bored?

Maybe my view is biased by my experience as a v bored 5yo (when school age was 5) and ds1 who wanted to go to school since he was 3.5 and some of his nursery friends went.

It's a useful discussion point but I don't see what this petition would actually achieve

Maybe I'm being really stupid here but surely if somebody defers for a year then their child will take a place away from a child who is in the correct age group?

But of course he'll always be the youngest, and he hates that.

Somebody has to be!!!

When I deferred DS till January, I had no idea quite what they did in reception, beyond playing. It wasn't until DS2 started a few years later that I realised how much DS1 missed in that first term. The teachers must have been cursing me, knowing they had to do all that phonics with him separately. But he's bright, so he caught up quickly, and my (much disapproved of by everyone) decision was thoroughly vindicated.

But I still think he'd be happier in the year below. He has more friends in that year, and he hates being the baby of the class. This year he went back to school the day after his birthday, that's how close to the cut-off he is!

Anyone would think that the rest of the world would have realised the error of their ways by now, looked at how fantastically the system works in the UK and stopped allowing their krazzzyyy flexibility about school start dates relative to age. Oh, wait.

Yes but there's youngest and there's youngest. Being the youngest and born is April is not ether same as being the youngest and having most of the class several months older than you.

I agree somewhat but April 1st is not summer born that's way too early. I'd consider a child born July 15th onwards to be at a disadvantage. My dd is June 1st and took all her gcses, a levels, anything end of year test wise, age 15 when her peers were 16, she took the entrance exams aged 10 not 11, etc she was also very anxious starting reception but we worked through it and she changed school to my preferred one I originally wanted after two weeks and was absolutely fine, loved it. I don't think this was to do with her birth date though. She's always been a very high achiever. Whilst I can see a child that's just turned 4 in August struggling, I think April-onward is a bit silly. Also there will always have to be a youngest, no matter what the structure. I believe in the US school years are much more flexible with those born August or September starting earlier or later depending on maturity. But skipping years also occurs more over there.

"not the same" not "not ether same"!

But if you move the cut off point to April, or allow flexibility beyond April, then the April child will be the youngest.

being the youngest and having most of the class several months older than you.
Whenever the cut off is, for the youngest child, most of the class will be several months older.

Sorry, that was to Jolly.

Can I also ask what is the plan for dealing with precocious 3 year olds? Why can't they skip nursery and go straight in reception?

correct age group is subjective paddy.

After the first year it will make no difference anyway, it will just be a different intake of kids.

In NZ you start school on your 5th birthday, no matter when it is. It's great for the teachers as they don't have a whole class of new entrants and it's good for the children as they look forward to Big School on their Birthday as a rite of passage and they go into a class where the children are all happy and used to school. They are moved up to the next level as they are ready and even though it sounds wishy washy it's child centric not birthdate based (other than your first day!) and it all works out really well :)

I think parents should have the option of when their children start reception with a minimum of 2 intakes per year.

I don't agree.

You can't try to change something like this on the assumption that 'not everyone will choose to take advantage anyway'.

Potentially, it could be the new 'norm' and more people would do it than not. Meaning there would be age differences of up to 18 months in a class. March borns would be the 'new' August borns.

Generally, I think it would do more harm than good. All children generally catch up within a year or two, even those that aren't quite ready for school. But the points made below, about the people taking advantage of this possibly being those who are well off enough for an extra year of childcare are valid. It could create a culture where the oldest kids in classes were all from better-off familes, with the youngest from disadvantaged families - that in itself can cause enough disparity in a class, without adding age into it.

Oh and just to cause a flap - children can skip a year or be held back a year if it's in the child's best interest - Oh Shock Horror.

Skipping years does occur more here in the US, particularly for late born boys. It's called red-shirting, and it's actually disallowed in certain States. It's a huge point of contention over here.

My DS is August born, but the local public schools have a December 31st cut off. Well, at least in theory. I bet he does end up being one of the youngest, as Fall and Winter kids are so routinely held back, meaning that they start Kindergarten at 6 and not 5 (schools starts here a year later).

Oh, and the three boys held back in my husband's year at school are three of the most emotionally immature 40-year-olds one could wish to meet.

So telling a child they need to retake a year won't cause any damage to self esteem? I think it will.

And I think the 1st April is too early as well but that is what the research suggests is the point at which a disadvantage is emerging.

And that is ultimately what is supporting this argument, that research studies have indeed collected and shown statistically significant results that some summer born children are disadvantaged for life the highest number of SEN applications and support are for those born in the months of July and August. My child does have additional needs (cerebral palsy) however how many children labelled with special needs tags aren't in fact special needs but are just too young to be at school and learn and have an equal chance at learning?