DD with Aug birthday - has anyone delayed entry into reception?

[ladyandthechocolate]

So, DD was born 28th Aug 2008 and is due to start school Sept 2012. I was the youngest in my year and have reservations about this for her.
I phoned the school admissions department of our council and they said obviously we could defer her entry until later in the year but that would still make her the youngest in the year. If we wanted to delay her entry so that she starts reception at 5 then she would need to be assessed by an educational psychologist.
Does anyone have any experience of this?

My DS (31st August) is now in yr1 and he started full time school at 4yrs and 3wks.

I was very worried about how he would cope especially as most of his friends had later birthdays and stayed behind in the nursery for another year.

But actually he coped really well (better than me ) although he was very tired at the end of each day.

Also the parents of DS's friends who were still in the nursery for another year said their DC were bored at having to repeat stuff iyswim.

It did take him slightly longer to settle in and cope with school academically (as much as reception is academic iyswim) His first parents eve was not a huge success

But now a yr later he is in the top groups for everything and doing really well

I think this thread is a fair representation - 9 out of 10 August-borns are going to do just fine.

Mine would have been the 10th - but luckily I got to defer. The key is that you need to allow exceptions in the right cases.

My DS was born 25/08/08 and he has just started reception (we have delayed start from summer borns where I live).

I have and still do worry obsessively about this - but he is doing well.

He is tired and gets a bit frustrated that other kids can write and he can't yet, but he's only been there 10 days!

It is worrying and he is so little - but honestly he has surprised me with how well he is doing.

Keep an open mind, and as with any school issue - if you encounter problems work with the school to help you DC.

Has anyone experience of an August born and issues with going up to secondary? I have a child, born very prematurely (they would definitely have been in the year below if they'd been born around due date) who can cope academically but is struggling emotionally.

I'm terrified they'll get eaten alive at secondary.

They coped fine at primary/reception as at that age children born throughout the year can all have different issues and infant teachers cope well with this (so don't worry those of you with August-borns who are going to reception primary this year).

I have a July born boy who is very hypermobile and has mild dyspraxic traits. He is now in Year 1 and slightky struggling. Im would have loved to defer him given the choice althoughb I THINK he will catch up if we put in the appropriate amount odf work/help. But it would have been a hell of a lot easier for him and us.......

When you go to visit local primary schools I would ask what the school does to support children with birthdays in late August. I think that usually it is more of a problem for boys rather than girls.
Personally I would not defer entry as the style of learning in reception is very similar to pre-school or nursery. As you also have triplets your dd may qualify for a full-time nursery place and I would ask your Council about this.
However as a compromise, it may also be possible to start school in September 2012 but not go full time until later in the year.

she could just do mornings only and leave at 1 or 12.

Following this with interest-DS1 26th August birthday, verbal dyspraxia and still unable to do some stuff I would sort of expect (like dress himself unaided). But as I understand it we cannot defer in any meaningful way-simply hold him back until Yr1. May speak to CMH nurse about possibility of deferral as a result of some posting here.

Hypocritical as it sounds, though, working in Early Years does not really convince me of the blanket benefits of referral. Younger kids do do less well on the whole (and younger boys in particular), but this changes a lot by the end of Yr2, and more so after that. Having watched several summer babies bloom this year, I'm confident that they would have done so less quickly if this was their first year at school.

And most other evidence suggests that, whilst being the youngest does have some effect, that effect is magnified if entry is delayed. Above all, an averagely gifted 4 year old will not transform into a failure or even fall behind simply because they are younger-there are other much better indications of lack of achievement than age of entry.

lingle

"it's the kids with the double or triple whammies of an August birthday, language problems and /or general immaturity who realy need to defer"

Describes DS1 exactly, but have just spoken to LA and no chance of deferral even with professional backing.

Still, he can read a little, copes at nursery and loves his phonics work, so maybe I'm worrying about nothing. Thought of sending someone who can't be bothered to use the toilet to school scares me a lot, though...

Hi Adela,

Bradford would tell you the same thing - it's only once you get into the paediatrician, SALT system that you find out there are more options. Perhaps worth having a word with paed if he has one?

don't suppose you fancy moving to Scotland where they are more civilised about these things do you?

I can see what you mean about starting in Year 1. But then you read very positive reports about it on here and you wonder.

Assuming he does go in September, I guess it will be a challenge for you and him and I guess you will make it your business to rise to that challenge. Maybe he will surprise you, as you say.

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/education/823663-Following-Ed-Balls-webchat-thread-for-parents-of-summer-born

Adela, a thread you may wish to follow (see post from 1st Feb)

Adela,
"....most other evidence suggests that, whilst being the youngest does have some effect, that effect is magnified if entry is delayed..."

I am sorry but actually there is a massive body of UK and international evidence which clearly shows over decades that ON AVERAGE summer born children (and particularly boys) perform less well later in exams, life etc. Even Sir Jim Rose (who quite frankly produced a disgraceful report) stated that there was enormous benefit for children attending good quality nurseries/other pre-school education. In his report the recommendation was fudged to become school only. Vested interest, political pressure, who knows.

All I am asking as a parent is the choice. Many parents will choose not to delay. The impact to education will be minimal but to MY child it could be lifechanging.

In my dd's class, 70% of them have birthdays between now and August, so they have quite a 'young' class. Several of the youngest ones are in the top reading group.

It doesn't pay to anticipate the worst. Talk to lots of people first. Some children find it very exciting. My daughter was in tears during summer, but absolutely loved it once she started.

My DD will be 4 at the very end of August. I have found an independent school that is letting her defer and so she will do nursery in September then start Reception in Sept 2012.

A very happy outcome for me as she seems a long way off being ready for Reception. It means she will be the oldest in the class but I see this as a positive.

samels001

Sorry if I've misunderstood and for speed of this (am on mini-lunch break). If you read what I wrote I didn't deny what you said. I think the evidence (not Rose's usual polemic disguised as evidence, but the rela evidence) is fairly clear that:

a. there is disadvantage in going to school young, all other things being equal BUT
b. that many other factors-notably parental education levels and economic status-are far better predictors of acheivement
c. that the gap declines as children grow older, is less at GCSE than KS1, and is very slight indeed for non-compulsory education (although this is hard because entry to that depends on past performance)
d. critically, that summer-born children entering a high-quality educational environment a yeat younger than their peers (not necessarily Reception-I agree-but this and nurseries are not too different) do better than summer-born children who do not and thus receive less 'schooling'.

These seemed relevant things for the OP to think on to assess risk and action, especially since she had not given any information on what alternatives she had, and none ore free (in either sense of the words) choices.

I said absolutely nothing about whether parents should have the right to choose to delay entry by a year, because I honestly don't know-compelling enrolment but not attendance is stupid, but someone has to be the youngest. It should however have been obvious given my concerns that if the consequence of allowing parents who wished to defer because they feel there children not as ready as they will be later or as their classmates is that parents such as lingle and myself who worry that our children will simply objectively not be ready ( in that they are not speaking clearly enough to communicate what they'd wish to say, able to go to the toilet and dress themselves) is that we faced less of a struggle, then I'd love the system changed.

Hi, I too was worried about my boy Charlie his birthday is Aug 27th and I was an August baby and remembered being too scared to ask questions at school so was put into'B' class aged just seven. So I tried to get him held back but was informed like you were that if he doesn't do reception he will join year one, so miss out on reception.So I only held him back until January and he likes school, but doesn't mix with a lot of the other boys, probably because he started late. I read with other children in his class today and most were much better than him, two were able to read, which surprised me but they were ten and eight months older than him. I am trying to help him catch up and trying not to worry about it. Good luck. Hilary

Adel,

Do you have links to the evidence that less schooling for the younger in year children leads to worse outcomes? I have seen it mentioned elsewhere - but haven't found the research. My instinct would be that 'high quality' is the key.

I agree that some of the 'research' that supported Rose's decision was weak. However, he made several recommendations, yet the government choose to focus on the 'easy to do' recommendation - all dc's to start school in September. I fear that this will be seen as a big mistake in several years time.

I also agree with you (and lingle) that relative age is just one factor in determining educational outcome. But when combined with other factors (poorly educated parents, immaturity, SEN or even being male) it can make a significant difference.

To me - the most frustrating thing is that the relative age 'factor' is actually created by the education system, and is one thing we should be able to do something about.

"I also agree with you (and lingle) that relative age is just one factor in determining educational outcome. But when combined with other factors (poorly educated parents, immaturity, SEN or even being male) it can make a significant difference. "

yes indeed.

My son was 8 weeks prem (and 1lb 15oz at birth), and therefore born in late July instead of mid-September (what terrible timing!). When the time came to start school he was absolutely not ready for reception (he wasn't even reliably dry in the day!), so we kept him at nursery, and then at home as I was on maternity leave with #2.

He skipped reception altogether. I taught him to read, count etc at home, and he started school in year 1. He was (and still is) very immature for his age, but with each year change he gets used to the behavious levels required within a term or so. He was tiny (at aged 5 he was the size of an average 2 year old), and this caused him some problems initially as the other children thought he was a baby! (He is now average height for his age, so still smaller than most of his classmates, but no longer at all bothered by it).

He had fewer problems adjusting to year 1 than most of the other children who had been in reception; they had been seeing school as this great fun place with sand and water play etc and year 1 was a rude awakening. He, however, associated playing with his time at nursery, and was happy with the new environment and took it in his stride.

Academically he was way ahead of his peers in reading, and quickly caught up with maths.

It was definitely the best decision for him (and incidentally, though I didn't realise it at the time, meant he got a place at our best local primary; has he applied in reception he would not have got in as they were oversubscribed then and we are out of catchment).

Just as point of information - in scotland parents have the right to defer entry if their child is born between 1 Jan and 28 feb. Many parents also defer December born children as well, if they feel they are not ready. Technically if the child is born between 1oct and 31 dec you are meant to ask to have them assessed but most paretsn just go ahead and do it

It's very common, in my children school there are about 3 children in each class of 26 ish who were deferred entry. They don't miss a year of school. AFAIK Teachers are perfectly happy with the system. They would rather not have to deal with kids who are not ready.

Children , parents and teachers happy, no adverse affect on attainment and no extra bureaucracy. What's not to like?

Wish I could find the link, but 70% of Oxbridge students are autumn born.

I am December- great! But my 'advantage' got squandered by being effectively kicked out of an overcrowded primary a year early to a grammar- where I became the second youngest in the year!

I would say that although I was OK academically, I was really quite disadvantaged in terms of maturity.

DSs school is very much play based. DS1 is a November birthday and he is very grown up so he is fine, but DS2 has a severe speech delay and is an April baby. I did think about having him start later in the year (I think that you can differ the start of school to the term that the child is turning 4). But I can see that DS1 is really playing all day with some learning activities in between, and the learning activities are really good fun and not hard work. You could check with the school first.

I can also say that in DS1 class, there are a few August children and they had a bit of a slow start but now they all look like they are having a good time.

I meant, turning 5... sorry

Getting them put back a year is incredibly difficult.

I have an Aug baby and she is doing fine.

I wouldn't delay entry as your child will miss the play based first year and go straight into year1 which is more academic.

My son is born on 20th August. He found the first term difficult but is doing well in his second term. I have noticed that summer burns seem to play together and the autumn borns do the same. Therefore in a playground there isn't a disadvantage as he's racing around with children who are physically and mentally at the same age.

Academically he's in the top half of the class but this doesn't worry me as my sister is August born and went to Oxbridge and his late spring born brother became academically confident in y2 so I'm happy to hang in until then.