Is it right that you can now defer entry till the summer term in reception?

[Consuela39]

I thought I read on here a year or two ago that it was now possibe to apply for a reception place for your child, and not send them until the term after their 5th birthday - or the summer term, in cases of summer born children.

I mentioned it vaguely to our HT when we looked round and she had no knowledge of this. I also just looked on our County Council website and it was very vague, I wasn't sure what it was saying.

Can anyone please point me at the legislation or some kind of document about this, as I was really hoping ds2 could start in the summer of reception - so as not to miss the entire year but not to have to go when he is so tiny - he has a June birthday.

Many thanks.

Depends on your area I think. Ds1 is a July baby so he did not legally have to start school until the Sept after his bday (1 year after he actually started school) but the school would have put him straight into year 1 which would have been even more of a shock to him. I know some schools will also not hold a place for you that long either.

This is it, Bert - I heard that the legislation changed in Feb last year so this would no longer happen. ie you could accept the place and they'd have to hold it for you till the summer, so they get a little bit of reception iyswim.

in the area I teach (so poss nationally), schools have to do a headcount in january and their funding for the year is calculated using those numbers. This is why most schools do a sept intake only with some doing a january intake aswell, to get the children in school by the time the headcount takes place.

Easter intake no longer really exists because the school then wouldnt recieve funding for that child (this is what I have been told by our head/governors)

you may be lucky, but if I was a headteacher I wouldnt be willing to take a child in the summer term because of this, especially if I had a list of people waiting for places.

However, it may be perfectly possible for your child to go part time from september or even from january, worth asking anyway.

For what it's worth, I have a little boy who started with me in sept (mine have the choice of sept/jan start) his parents chose sept because it was easier for childcare, he has a july birthday and is really not ready to be at school compared to the other children. All the other summer borns are starting this week, by parental choice.

If you have the chance of strating him a little later or maybe having him go part time for any extended period I would definatly try to arrange it, also, by starting him with all the other children in sept you would have the choice to send him full time if it became clear he was coping, and he would also not be at a disadvantage friend wise.

At the moment at our school, children start in reception in the term in which they turn five, so in your case, in the summer term, just after Easter
Our school have three reception classes, one per term.
All this is changing though, and from September a child can start in the September after they turn four, or the place can be deferred up until the child turns five.
Ionce they are five, they will go strAight into year 1.

Thankyou very much for such a balanced view. My thought was that the schools were now obliged to accept children later in the year, not that it was discretional - and I doubt our HT would be flexible about it, sadly.

I would be happy with January, if it was that or September. I really don't foresee her being alright with PT either.

I appreciate your answers, thankyou.

I found it on the DFE website however the page has a disclaimer regarding the change in government - therefore it is not clear whether the legislation still applies, nor what any updated legislation may dictate.

Here is the relevant paragraph:

'Deferred entry to primary schools
2.69 Admission authorities must allow parents of children who are offered a place at the school before they are of compulsory school age to defer their child?s entry until later in the school year. Where entry is deferred, admission authorities must hold the place for that child and not offer it to another child. The parent would not however be able to defer entry beyond the beginning of the term after the child?s fifth birthday, nor beyond the academic year for which the original application was accepted. This must be made clear in the admission arrangements for the school.'

Has anyone got any idea whether this still holds? I'd be very grateful.

consuela you are right.

you can accept a place at a school, in reception and then not send your child until they actually turn 5

but bear in mind that they break up for the 6 weeks summer holiday in July. so to get a "bit of reception" you would still want to send them perhaps after the easter break at the latest

you can "defer" but as a previous poster says, that would mean them going into year 1 rather than reception- in the september

Thankyou, TIY - I was hoping the new government hadn't changed it, but it's really hard to tell what is happening because of the disclaimer.

I hope you're right, I would be open to sending him in January if he is ready or indeed at Easter, but I do feel September is often too soon for the littlest ones and from our experience it certainly was with Ds1.

I've just emailed the HT to ask for her position on part time or deferring, quoting that paragraph because she seemed not to know about it when I mentioned it. She will probably get defensive about it but I have to know what to expect before we get into the same mess we did in ds1's case...they were very odd about him doing PT so we lost our place.

The new government has not changed it. Under paragraph 2.69 of the Admissions Code you can defer entry until later in the year. The school and the LA don't have any choice. However, you only have the right to request that your child goes part time. The school/LA can reject such requests.

Thankyou very much. HT has already replied, saying she thought it was basically the old system (they have a waiting list so don't want to hold places, understandably) but she has forwarded my email to the LEA for advice.

I hope that ds2 will be more physically able to withstand a full day than ds1 was, but in case he isn't I would really like the option to be there to either defer or to do PT.

She actually said the PT isn't on, as they are only allowed funding for three weeks of part time in our county.

That might explain why ds1's first school agreed to it reluctantly then marked him as unwell for the entire period without my knowledge... If only they had just said!

many thanks for the info. Looks like deferring till January might be the best option all round, if it's necessary to do anything that is.

The head does not understand the system.

If you apply and are offered a place to start in September 11, then you can defer entry as per paragraph 2.69 of the admission code. The place is kept open for your child providing that you have come an agreement with the school / LA over the deferment. It does not matter how many are on the waiting list they are not relevant as they can only have your place if you reject the place- hence the need to accept the place and then agree with the school the deferment.

It is always a balancing act as to whether it is best to start in September even if they are not quite ready, but build up a friendship group or that you defer and run the risk that your child feels left out if all the other children have tended to form friendship groups.

Not sure what the head means by part-time funding for three weeks, they are actually getting no funding based on the pupils that come in september, full or part time, as the funding is actually around the numbers in the school the previous January. That can obviously have quite profound effects if there are big differences in numbers between the reception class coming in and the previous year 6 class that have just left the school.

It is definitely possible to defer til Easter in my county.

Have you read through all the paperwork that comes with the applying for schools booklet? It might be buried in there somewhere.

Here is one of the entries from our county website:
If I delay my child's entry to school, will the place be held open?
If your child has not reached statutory school age, you can have their place held open. The place must be taken up once your child reaches statutory school age and it will not be held open after the start of the summer term 2012.
If you are considering delaying your child's entry you should apply by the closing date, so that your application is considered at the same time as all the other applicants. If you apply late and the school is over subscribed, you may miss out on a place.

agree with admission (am HT myself). children only HAVE TO go to school when they are 5. Once offered a place you can defer entry should you wish until they are 5 (which obviously would be before August 31st).
Feel I should also add (just because I always say what I think!!! that ... school is great for kids and the right school will be right for your child - and make age allowances.

thankyou so much. Yes I think that our school is so highly regarded that they at times slip into the parochial, slightly complacent bracket of thinking which means that the usual rules and procedures pass them by, they think they are kind of different or outside the rules - basically because they are hugely oversubbed and everyone wants their places.

I havent got an admissions booklet this time round (at least I don't think so - unless I have lost it!)
I really don't know what she meant about the three week funding thing, then, if that's all wrong. Perhaps trying to fob me off.

But I will be interested to know what the LEA say. There are only a few schools round here that are really nice, and this is one of them, but they do tend to want to have it all their own way because, basically, they can.

I do want him to go into reception as he alreayd knows quite a few of the kids, and I think the pay off from starting late might not be too bad in terms of friendship groups as he already has friends among them. I think it will be worth it in terms of his physical and mental stamina, which Ds1 really suffered with. HT was quite good in saying she didn't hold with the theory that kids starting younger do better long term, but she did think if their peers were starting younger, they are better off to as well iyswim.

Thanks, Cat - food for thought. I do realise they are used to it - I'm not concerned about how gentle they will be with the kids, not at all.

What I am worried about is just his ability to cope with such a long day, every day.

With ds1 he was a fast burner, so he would race about, get completely knackered and then flake out. He still had afternoon naps when he started.

So he would forget to eat his lunch, nobody reminded him or checked, he often didn't drink anything all day, didn't go to the loo etc. He would be extremely cross and upset after school, often fall asleep at approx 4pm on the sofa as soon as we got home, then sleep through supper and wake at around 10pm crying.

It was a nightmare for him and half days gave him the chance to sleep it off and recharge every afternoon, which worked quite well. Then school decided to change to every other day, full days, and that was difficult for him as it broke the routine and he didn't want to go on the days he was meant to.
It was all such a mess by the end as they kept changing their minds about what was acceptable.

I know school will be very kind with him but it doesn't mean he won't be massively overstimulated and worn out physically, iyswim...Ds1 was MUCH better by yr1, he could look after himself better.

Saying that, ds1 has always been fairly chaotic in himself - processing instructions was hard for him - so maybe ds2 will be far more sedate and able to cope.

Coupled with this school having a single intake and the one ds1 was originally at having three classes, I think the odds are in our favour that it will be a more sustainable experience.

My youngest is a july baby, and she started school in September.

Her school said that as parents we know best, so if we thought they needed to do part time until christmas or even easter then we should do it. Whether it was leaving at lunch time, after lunch or even at 2pm - the children's well being was the most important thing and each child would be different.

My daughter started full time on 16th September and has never looked back, but then she did go to nursery before hand and was really ready for school.

My 3 oldest children all went part-time until the term after their 5th birthday (youngest one didn't as he was clearly ready to go full time at the start). It worked fantastically well, I would really recommend it.

Consuela39 I'm reading your thread with interest as we have an August born DD who is due to start school in September.

Have found it quite enlightening, especially as I was unaware that we could simply defer her place.

It does sound though that your DS1 had a particularly hard time in starting school so hopefully, as you said, DS2 will find it much easier.

My dd is a summer baby - born in July. She started school in September. They did part time for 3 weeks and then full time since. My dd, prior to starting school, still had a nap every day for 2 hours at least and still slept all night from 7 till 7. She just needs that much sleep. She also has a couple of medical conditions which make her more tired. I was terrified about her going full time so soon and yes, she has been knackered. But, to be honest, they all have...even the ones who are almost a year older than her. It is a huge shock to the system going full time to school, everyday. But she has coped.

However, she has been very poorly all Christmas and partly I put this down to having got so run down and tired towards the end of term. She has had a nap every single day of the Christmas holidays and having gone through this first term and having the benefit of hindsight now, I will be taking her out for the odd day or afternoon if I feel she is getting too tired this term.

Like you have rightly said, they are not legally required to be in school until the term after they are 5.

That said, like a pp has said, I wouldn't want my child to be the odd one out and miss out on that social side of getting to know her other class mates...so in that respect I wouldn't be happy about her missing the first two terms of the reception year. But you have to weigh up what you think will work best for your child. Good luck.

Thankyou for all the replies and I am glad if this thread helps others decide the best course for them also.

there is immense pressure not to make our children the 'odd one out' in every aspect of their lives, and as such it's really hard to do something that goes against the flow. I wish more people did the part time thing - it might not seem such a bad thing to do for our own children, if it was more commonplace.

For me the idea of ds2 struggling as much as ds1 did is unthinkable so I will have no problem deciding to take him out or do part time should it be right for him. I feel so sad seeing some of my friends' little tinies crying and exhausted, and their parents under such pressure to send them so they don't miss out. I feel that our system is thoughtless in demanding so much of children who are often only just past three years old.

I think usually they make a successful transition, ie adjust to it, during the first year, but having seen the enormous difference in stamina and sheer coping ability in my first child between the ages of just four and just five, I don't see the point in forcing this huge adjustment before they are physically, emotionally and mentally ready - it isn't a question of physical activity being forced on them, but the processing of all the changes and rules and instructions and new faces, which at that age is often really hard work.

They come home with their little brains full of new things and have to take ages to wind down and sift through it all - a bit like we do after a big day out or a big party, we can't just switch off, we are buzzing, yet at the same time very very tired.

SI think it is really important that they are allowed this short year which carries so great a development, such a change in them, if they need it, in order to develop at their own pace just as they have done all their lives from when they were babies. Forcing a change they are not ready for is not usually a good idea at any stage.

Consuela, have discussed this with DH over breakfast as, until I read your thread yesterday, we were both unaware that we could defer her place without loosing her place.

Didn't get the stock answer of "I'll think about it" which means never mention this again but he did say that we'll she how she is in the summer. So that's a good start.

Oh that is great

I don't think many people do seem to know about it, perhaps schools are keeping it quiet but I'm not sure why? Maybe it does affect their funding?

I hope not, that wouldn't be fair.

We're in Islington, I also have a summer child. I've been told you can defer till January without losing the place. Can you in fact defer even later than this?