Delaying school entry - does anyone have experience?

[dani747]

I am mum of twin girls who were born at 26 weeks gestation in August 2008. They will therefore turn 4 in Aug 2012 and expected to start reception in September 2012. The law states that children do not have to start school until the term after they turn 5 (i.e. Sept 2013) but I'm getting pressure from their school (nursery) that they must attend next year (2012). The local authority have been deflecting my queries ... does anyone have advice or experiencing in delaying their child's education until the child turns 5? (really only relevant to those who have summer born children or premature children's who early birth results in them expected to start school a year earlier than they should have).

They don't have to attend nursery at all if you don't want them to. AFAIK schools control their own nursery admissions as this is non-statutory schooling. The LA will control admission to reception so if you are in catchment their entry to reception will have nothing to do with whether or not they attended the school's nursery. You are right that they do not have to start til the term after they are 5, however, this is not carried over into a new academic year. So if they are offered a reception place, you cannot delay until year 1 - the LA has the right to give the places to someone else. If you want that school and you want to delay entry, the latest you can leave it is after Easter. I'm sure I've read somewhere about EDD being taken into account for prem children. Do they have any SEN associated with their prem birth?

The important thing to remember that is if you delay school until the term after they are 5 so the following September they wont go into reception, they will go right into Y1. You very way may have problems getting a school place as all the places will have been allocated in reception and the classes will be full.
What you could do is delay entry until the summer term of 2012 so they have the last term of the reception year before going into Y1 and you can apply for a school place in the normal admission rounds (which are currently open and close in January) and then hold onto that place until the following summer term (the maximum you can hold onto a place for. Given you have twins so are after 2 places it would be a big risk to delay entry for the full year, you could easily end up with them a different, possibly unsatisfactory schools in opposite directions miles away from home, it could be this that the nursery are warning you about and that missing the reception year could make going to school much more difficult having missed the play based start to school life and being dropped right into the much more work based Y1.

When it comes to premature babies starting school mine was only a month early, was born late May so always would have been in the same year however my dd's best friend was born at 24 weeks, she probably would have always been in the same year given she was born late in the year however she is doing very well at school, they are in Y2 now and she settled very quickly into school and is it seems making very good progress, she has other issues, mild CP and she is also registered blind. I am always impressed by her as she is has learnt to read and write text (she has a little vision left and uses a magnifier) and she is also learning how to read and write in braille, I would try not to worry about how their early birth may factor into life at school, you don't have the option of truly deferring for a year and having them in with the reception class of 2013 so it is probably best to let go of it and make the best of the options you really have.

No experience but I can offer advice on the practicalities.

If you apply now (i.e. for a place in September) you are entitled to defer entry until later in the year. This is your decision. The school/LA cannot tell you what to do. If you are deferring until later in the same academic year they must keep the place open for you.

If you defer for a full year as you suggest the school will not hold the place for you. Your children will almost certainly go straight into Y1, skipping Reception completely, so they will still be the youngest in their year. Also your choice of schools will be very limited as all the popular ones will already be full.

It is just possible you will be able to persuade your LA and school to put your children into Reception ni September 2013. That will give you a better chance of getting into a popular school and will mean they will be the oldest in their year rather than the youngest. However, you should check what will happen on transfer to secondary school. It is not unknown for secondary schools to put children who are in the "wrong" year group straight into Y8, missing Y7 completely.

You may already be aware of this but your children will follow exactly the same curriculum regardless of whether they are in Reception or Nursery. Reception is designed to be a gentle introduction to school and the emphasis is on learning through play.

I am not saying you shouldn't defer, just making sure you are aware of all the facts.

Thanks for advice. Am still confused as to why they would go into year 1 and why I couldn't,t just not apply for school reception class of 2013. I work in schools and actually very aware of the actual difference between nursery and reception even if apparently they r same foundation stage. I just don't know how the local authority could think it would b in my childs best interest for them to start at 4 when there is so much research proving otherwise re summer born children and prems. Am just not going to do forms but wanting a nursery place for them, they need social experience!

And we,d be in the same year group.... They,d b 5 in august but potentially a few more people would b 5 in September. It's completely bonkers!!

Foundation is still part of early years curriculum, just like preschool & dcs can do their early years part of the curriculum anywhere (or not at all if you so wish). But ks1 is compulsory & that's when they have to be in school (age - rising 5s).

I have thought about this & can sympathise, dd1 was due in august, but came in september & if she had come on time, I would have had serious issues with sending her to school the year before. If I were you I would have a look at schools in the area to find out about your options, (January or April in take, half days etc). But if it's not right, then go with your gut, but bear in mind if you want a popular school, you may have trouble getting them in 'late'.

They would go into Y1 because that is the way the system works, I'm afraid. A child who is five on 31st August would go into Y1. Rightly or wrongly the system is largely driven by age and is designed to ensure that the pupil enters Y13 (Upper Sixth) in the September following their seventeenth birthday. In other words, once the leaving age goes up to 18, the system is designed to ensure that pupils get their A-levels before they reach the end of their compulsory education.

Don't blame your local authority. They have very little choice in this. The Admissions Code (which has the force of law) says they must offer places to every child in the September following their fourth birthday assuming the parents apply. It gives parents the right to defer entry but says that the school must not hold the place open if parents choose to defer for a full year. This is broadly in line with the recommendations made by the review led by Sir Jim Rose under the last government. Having said that, some LAs will allow some pupils to enter Reception a year late if there is good evidence that this is in the child's best interests.

You have the absolute right to defer entry until later in the school year so you could, if you wish, apply for places now but not have your children start school until, say, Easter 2013. The right to defer entry is intended to help with the problems that affect some summer born children. I'm not saying it is the right solution and I am aware that some experts think this actually makes the situation worse but that is the only solution offered by the current system.

If your children were to go into Reception in 2013 they would be the oldest in the class and would be a year older than the youngest. However you design the system it is always going to be the case that the oldest in the class is about a year older than the youngest.

I don't know whether or not the current system is right and I am certainly not here to justify it, but I know and can explain how the system works and, in most cases, the thinking behind it. I understand where you are coming from and I sympathise. However, the best advice I can give is that you should apply now for places for your children to start in September 2012 then, when you have accepted the offer, inform the school that you intend to defer entry until Easter 2013. In parallel you can see if your LA may be willing to allow your children to enter Reception a year late but don't let that delay you applying for places - you need to get your application in by January 15th.

Can I just ask what concerns you have about your daughters starting next September ? I only ask because I have b/g twins born 28/8/04 who were 6 weeks early and went to school in Sept 08 when they were 4, They were immature and it was sometimes a bit rocky but they loved and still love school. I think being with 'older ' children has brought them on. Academically they are middle or top groups and they are both way ahead of their chronological age for reading. They are still a bit immature and less 'streetwise' than their peers but we can all live with that.

Both my children were born in August and if I had my time again with the first one I would have actually wanted to hold them back a year ( I suppose a slightly more extreme example than just delaying entry). Some children are more mature than others and cope better, with August children once you take both age and immaturity into account you can have a child who seems almost two years different from some of their classmates. The problem also persists , it's not just early years. I have a friend who delayed their sons entry into an independent school ( can't do this is the state system) for a year. He was august, small even for his age and immature. He's beneifted enormously from it. If you can delay entry and feel its the right thing to do then I would follow your instincts. They won't be missing out on much real learning at that age and the socialisation side of things you can fix yourself.

You could move to Scotland where it is more complicated but basically the younger children can start later and each class spreads over 18months rather than a year.

Scotland offer the deferal when they start in the following year in P1. DD has thrived from being deferred socially and emotionally. She's 12 in January (our birthdates are March to Feb) and she's ready for high school and the change which will come with that. I find it sad that it's not an option for England and Wales.

My daughter was born in August. She is now in Y1. She learnt so much of the basic skills in R and formed good friendships. She is quite 'needy' and sensitive and I think she may have found it difficult (but not impossible) to drop into Y1 with friendships established. She is below avg for Y1 in almost all key subjects (apart from singing lol) but would be above avg if born a week later and now in R. The main points are that R is crucial and my DD is very happy, even if she is not top of the class.

obviously, this doesn't work (or isn't attractive) for everyone, but we home educate. That way it's much easier for the children to develop at their own rate rather than being "behind" or "ahead" of the rest of the class. If there comes a point where any of my children want to be in school, and its in their best interests, then they'll have had a confident and not-comparing-with-other-children foundation so that any catching up that needed to happen will have had the best possible chance of occurring.

(NB I don't have august born premmies, but I'd think it would be an even more beneficial path to consider in that circumstance)

I'd look at deferring entry until later in YrR - January might be best so your DCs would have 2 full terms in school. I did this with DD1, not because of age (she's January born) but because the LEA here forces children to do half days until the term they turn 5, which was at the time disastrous for us - 2 f/t working parents and no childcare with midday pickup provision.

We deferred, she started in January and she settled in very quickly, caught up in no time (due to very good nursery with EYFS programme) and was well ahead by the end of YrR.

You are still entitled to the 15 hours free nursery funding until the term after they turn 5 i.e until they reach legal school age.

My DD who turned 5 in january and received it until Easter. (We used it to part pay fees for private school reception)

There is one older child - August birthday in DD's class but it is private and I think they can be more flexible.

Definitely don't defer and miss out reception. It is a very important year.

I understand that the system can be frustrating (I have 2 summer born dc) however a line has to be drawn somewhere.
I think that to go straight into year 1 would be very hard, and would perhaps consider a deferral till January as others have said. The reception teachers at my dc school are fabulous and try to take into account the fact that my son is a year younger than some of his peers.
That said I have heard of children born prematurely being able to be held back but this may have implications for their secondary and further education.
Another alternative suggestion would be for your girls to do part time, so they get to know their peers and get used to school before year 1. It is hard when they are so young, even more so when they were born early I'm sure.

Thank you so much everyone for your advice and support.
My husband and I have been very stressed about the situation and the lack of flexibility that seems to be within the system. A few of you ask what are my concerns about them starting, and, in a nutshell, I just want the best for my children and for them to do the best they can and they simply won't be able to do that if they are the youngest in a class and were born 14weeks early (they weren't even due to mid November 2008). I think only those parents who have children born extremely prematurely could ever really understand where I am coming from, the first 5 months of their life they spent fighting for and every aspect of parenting is taken from you as you have doctors and nurses keeping your children alive. Back then I had very little parental choice and obviously medical professionals know how to keep babies alive, but now I am in a position to fight for what I believe my children are entitled to. What I believe that is is another year to mature emotionally, for their lungs to grow stronger (last year they took 2 months of private nursery in the winter months due to illness and year before that it was 3 months), for their attention and willingness to follow adult led activities to improve and primarily a chance for them to have the best start in their education. I will not be completing an application for school next year and I will be asking from support from their school nursery to provide them with another year of nursery education. I will enter legal proceedings with the local authority for them to enter reception next september (which is when they would have entered if they were not born 14weeks early). If the authority does not agree then I will home school my children after they are 5 and we will relocate to NSW, Australia where they would not start school until 5 1/2 anyway. A big decision, but one that has allowed me to get some sleep at night after tossing and turning for months.
Thanks again

Wow dani - that's a big step to take. Have you actually spoken to the LA regarding the possibility of them starting according to their due date rather than birth date? Some authorities are more accommodating than others it seems.
I completely understand your concerns. DD2 is an August baby and has just started reception. Academically she's holding her own - somewhere in the middle of the class according to her teacher, but socially and emotionally she struggles a bit. I did think seriously about deferring her until Easter but then thought that she might struggle further socially being the only late starter it might actually make it harder for her.
Good luck with whatever you decide, but I would encourage you to put an application in for this year anyway to keep all the options open to you. You can always turn places down at a later date....

Your children might cope fine and all this could be for nothing.

DD is the youngest in her year but the top of the year. It is down to more than just when they were born.

Dani I can totally understand where you are coming from. As I understand it there is very little flexibility to keep your twins down a year - this sort of discussion is more usually had about moving gifted children up a year, and it's very very rare.

However, one point that I can add is this: see if you can get in touch with other parents of summer-born children and find out what they are doing. Last year 10 children from my child's school were kept back at pre-school until Christmas. As they were all together they had the advantage of being a nice group to join the rest of their class. This year only 2 children stayed back and at least one other parent of a summer-born child did regret not doing that. It definitely helps to be in a group. HTH

If you are intent on relocating, if they went to school in Scotland they would start Aug 2013, and be in the middle of the class in terms of age.

StrongestMummyInTheWorld from experience I would say they are more disadvantaged by having a term less in year than by being the youngest in the class (speaking as a mum of 2 summer borns)

Hi Dani,
I am totally in exactly the same situation as you but without twins. I had a prem girl born 11 weeks early in early Aug should have been in mid Oct. I am from NZ and so dont yet understand the whole english system.

Everyone keeps telling me the option of delaying until the January but I am totally not interested in this option, it is completely non-sensical altogether, I think.
I just want to know what I can do to let my daughter start a year later, as she should have if born when she should have been. Why should she be pushed into education a year earlier just because I physically couldnt carry her longer! I find it very hard to swallow that the system in this country does not allow for prem babies to start school based on there "due date".
I too am considering the option of returning back to NZ purely because the system over here just seems so riduculous and in-flexible. No-one seems to "get" that I just want my daughter to start school a year later when she should have! Its not that complicated or asking terribly much I think, quite simple really!
I will take the advice of prh47bridge I think before the drastic option of having to leave friends and family here, and enrol her, but try to convince school or local authority that she start a year later, although based on my dealings with "officals" so far, this seems like a very un-likely option, I will be amazed if anyone says I can do it. Why cant we as parents have any say in our childrens education, in these special but very common circumstances, its crazy, all I want is choice, but it seems it is very much a dictation by those that are unwilling to acknowledge the facts of life, forcing people to leave the country to obtain choice seems very unreasonable to me!

I would love to hear from anyone who has managed to delay their prem childs education for a year and how you did it???!!!

you dont have to go as far as NZ, just come to Scotland instead as our cut off date is the end of February so your lo wouldnt start school until she was 5 (our term starts around the middle of August)