To be able to choose when your child starts primary school

[kedge]

Like many other parents, I am waiting to find out which school DC3 will get a place at. Although DC1 & DC2 are already at our first choice of school for DC3, it is not guaranteed that a place will automatically follow so am understandably nervous. But was wondering how many parents feel that their child is actually ready to start school?

DC1 was nowhere near ready, having only turned 4 at the end of August and would definately have benefitted from an extra year at home. When we enquired about deferring a place for a year we were told that it was at the schools discretion if they would hold a place and that DC1 would join the class in Y1. We decided that there were no benefits to doing this as we felt reception class was too important to miss as it introduces the children to school life, is more 'play' based and enables them to form friendships. We were not allowed to defer the start such that DC1 would start the following year in reception and go through school with that year. Additionally, the school is one of the best in the area and heavily oversubscribed, so we didnt want to run the risk of losing a place there, so it was Catch 22.

When DC2 started, it was a whole different ball game as with a birthday that meant DC2 is one of the eldest in the year and was obviously 'ready' for school it has been plain sailing compared to DC1 who still hadn't settled in at the end of Y1!! DC3 is also going to be one of the older children in reception and is also ready to start school. The contrast between the two children already at school leaves me in no doubt that there is definately a 'right time' for them to go to school.

Would anyone else like to see a system whereby parents can decide if a child is ready to start school in the year they can apply for a place based on their own judgement? For example, if the childs birthday falls between June and end of August for a September start, they have a choice whether to defer a place for a year and start as a reception class child the following year, so that the child has effectively started school at just turned 5 rather than just turned 4?

We became an early years unit about 20 years ago (pre EYFS) so that immature/young children could still access an appropriate curriculum for their needs.

Lingle - I am really pleased you managed to stand up for your son and got him the environment that makes sense in every way . Sadly I know too many parents who hit brick walls with their concerns and schools and LEAs refused to the detriment of the child .

Mrz - please read my last post. I said it should be a balance between age and readiness, not a black and white situation of either/or.

My question was directed to blondiedollface not you SocietyClowns as she was the one who raised the issue of ability and age and I would be interested to know where she would draw a line.
Nothing in life is ever black and white wouldn't life be simpler if it were

sorry that didn't come out right in print I didn't mean to sound abrupt

Your school does sound pretty impressive if I may say so mrz Wish more were like that.

pretty bog standard really SocietyClowns

mrz not from your accounts of what you provide

...in your school (such as a double mattress and duvets for tired children )

I agree that maryz school seems to be impressive. No sign of mattresses at any primary school that i've ever known in the UK.
But sadly the attitude from maryz of instantly highlighting the extremes of changing the school system (16 yr olds in reception) is typical of the rigidity of the school system. No-one is suggesting such a change - only of allowing very young dc the possibility to start school a year later as is done in other countries including Scotland. But as long as people with attitudes like maryz are involved in the school system then I think it will be a long time if ever before anything will change.

Sorry I posted the poster's name wrong - on my ipod. Meant mrz. sorry.

Mrz My post was merely in context to the European style (France, Germany and Spain all have this system) where a child starts school in the same chronological year as their peers but if at the end of the academic year they are not performing to the same level as expected they stay in the year to consolidate the learning of that academic year's subject matter. At Lycée in France - the equivalent to our 6th Form in the UK - I was studying with pupils my age (15), bearing in mind I was a year younger than all my UK classmates, right up to the age of 19.

If a child has developmental issues with learning that prohibit them from simple mathematics, literacy and penmanship then surely there are grounds for which they should not be in a mainstream school?

However in answer to your question regarding a 'cut-off' age, in the UK primary school I attended you could attend the school up until the day before your 12th birthday. In France the system works differently and once a student has been in Lycée for more than 3 years or more than 9 months past their 19th birthday the school and state will work together to find them a place on a vocational training course, regardless of the level of, if any, qualifications they hold.

My original post was not meant to cause any ill feeling. I merely wanted to state that the school I attended did things differently and I feel it helped me vastly in my education as do many of my friends who started later, just weeks before their 5th birthdays. We are all happily graduated in our various fields and unlike many friends I met later on - really enjoyed our school days and never felt pressured or apprehensive about moving up to the next year or any exams we had to take...

Mrz Personally I wouldn't draw a line, in France the incentive of doing your work and getting a 'pass' score at the end of the year to move up with your classmates seems incentive enough for most of the students to do their homework and try their best, obviously there are higher and lower achievers but the tests reflect this and only hold a child back if they under-achieve by a significant amount.

The UK school I went to IMO had it right - a child could start a term at exactly 4yo or could start the term before their 5th birthday for example I started Reception in January, Spring Term 3 days after my 4th birthday, my best friend started in April, Summer Term and 2 weeks later turned 5. We both spent 3 terms in each class apart from in Yr6 when I spent 2 terms in the class and she moved up from Yr5 after 2 terms to spend 2 terms in Yr6 before we both went off to 'Big School' together.

We know from discussion that she wasn't ready for school until that age and probably would have coped badly had she HAD to start the September (7 months) before she actually did start. Whereas I was ready and raring to go, and had I been made to wait for the following September (9 months after) I would have been at a much different level to my peers.

The problem of choosing when to start instead of everyone starting in Sept is that the curriculum and lesson planning will have started already without one's child if one defers. I suppose they feel that is what Nursery (the pre Reception year) is for - you can start whenever if it is a private nursery, and those with September birthdays who start after 3 will have been doing it forever compared to those with August birthdays who also start after 3, who will have a whole year less pretty much. My main gripe though is that it all starts so early!! I know educators will say "but their brains are so active and ready for learning at age 3!" True, but it's all the other things of school that they are not ready for - lining up, queueing up for the toilet, eating neatly, having to be quiet at other times, dealing with the morning walk to school or rush hour traffic (if your school is far away), permission slips, homework, the register, etc etc.

Its pretty standard in my area SocietyClowns

Mrz - if only we could all live in your area...

kipperandtiger,

the problems you outline just don't occur if you allow simple year-deferral for summer-borns/premies and those who have perhaps had some other setback.

My son started reception at age 5 with the rest of his (adjusted) cohort. All that was required was the extra year's nursery funding - no adjustments to the curriculum or lesson planning were required.

Is Ploom mixing up Maryz with mrz?
When I went to kindergarten in American system, when everyone was 5 or nearly 5yo, we had mattresses on the floor. I recall being so bored because I never slept in the day.

I'm awfully worried about my premature summer born starting reception this year. :(

DumSpiroSpero thanks, I have opened negotiations with LEA and school and been advised to apply 'on time' and then review. Luckily I have DS's consultants on side (he is delayed overall and has input from various professionals, no specific problems and is expected to catch up eventually). I am prepared to push hard and have been in touch with Bliss about their advice.

kickingKcurlyC sorry you are worried. Did you try to defer? There is some useful information at bliss.org.uk if you are interested.

Only one mattress in the quiet area ragged and they don't need to go there if they don't want

We had to lie on the mattresses for a spell in kindergarten, it was compulsory. I used to look longingly at the first graders who could go off & do something else.

Lingle - I agree with you. Our local authority simply doesn't allow it.