Summer-borns - Would anyone be willing to send this to their MP?

[bananasontoast]

As per the title:

Dear [MP],

I am concerned about the inflexibility of the school admissions process for summer-born children in England.

Section 8 of the Education Act 1996 states:

"A person begins to be of compulsory school age when they attain the age of five"

The important words here are;

1. "a person"

Each child is a person in their own right and deserves to be treated as such and the child's best interests are what should be driving any admissions discussion. Not what the admissions authority administrative system wants to happen for its convenience. And;

2. "compulsory school age"

Summer-born children don't reach this until the September term after they have turned five.

Reception class is defined by Section 142 of the School Standards and Framework Act 1998 as:

"A class in which education is provided which is suitable to the requirements of pupils aged five and any pupils under or over that age whom it is expedient to educate with pupils of that age".

Reception Class is therefore aimed at children aged five, yet parents are being forced to enrol their child a whole year earlier than compulsory school age or have their child's education entitlement reduced by one year with obligatory entrance into Year 1, completely missing Reception Class.

When forced to enrol at just four years old, these children NEVER reach compulsory school age during their attendance during that academic year.

There is a wealth of empirical evidence that clearly demonstrates the harm that can be done to summer-born children should they start school too early.

The current system of inflexible cut off dates for school entry does not allow for the normal range of children's development, every child is different after all and needs to be considered in that light if their best interests are to be ensured.

Administrative constraints take precedence over the well-being and future life chances of a substantial number of our youngest children.

I would like to see admissions authorities adopt a more flexible approach so that parents are given more choice, to enable them, if they so wish, to enrol their child in school after they reach the age of five and in Reception Class.

I would be grateful if you could raise these concerns with Rt Hon David Laws MP, Minister of State for Schools.

Yours sincerely

[Name]

[Adress]

[Contact Number]

[Constituency] Constituent

Yes that's exactly what i'm suggesting.

Why not? It's what they do in Scotland IIRC.

The Lea should already hold a place so a child can start after Xmas or after easter depending on when they turn five, bit they dotn tell parents this and are very against it but legally you can insist on this.

Home school then?

The Scottish system works well. My dd1 and ds are both feb born, they both started school at 5y6m. My dd2 is November and started at 4y9m, which seemed so young!!

I think the flexibility is the thing. I had the choice with dd1 and ds. Also the cut off date is later here - no child starts school before 4 and a half.

As a secondary teacher myself, I noticed a huge difference, mainly in boys, between those who came up to high school at 11.6 and 12.6. Mainly in ability to remember stuff!!

zzzzz why is it odd? I think there's something you're not getting about this.

Every child is (supposedly) awarded a school place. If they can then choose when to take up that school place, that's a fair system, no one has an advantage, no one has to make a crap choice.

If on the other hand parents could either choose to send their DCs in September, or forego a place, that's unfair on those who aren't ready. Their choice is go too early or go to a rubbish school, compounding the disadvantage of being born at the end of the school year.

(I appreciate this is a simplification of what actually happens on RL, just trying to explain the point to zzzzz!)

Given the already nightmarish situation with school places in some areas, this would just make things even worse.

Someone has to be the youngest and holding children back a year will just make it an even bigger disadvantage for those summer-born children who go to school in the correct year.

Ooh I think perhaps I've misunderstood the Scottish system.

Weegiemum if they start a year late do they join the next cohort or stay with the same one they would have if starting at 4?

Clearly on average summer borns are disadvantaged. That's just obvious. It does irritate me when people say "well my DS is a summer born and he's fine". Clearly across a large sample, summer borns, in theory, will do worse and indeed that's exactly what happens.

What's difficult is to know what to do about it. The only real answer I think is to adjust for it in testing. Across a whole population it ought to be possible to screen out the effect of birth date. It's as simple as the children being up to a year younger than their classmates when they take a test so of course there's an impact on their attainment.

Quangle and also Pyrrah, would tend to disagree a little. Of course there will be a small cognitive difference between an average 15 and 16 year old taking their gcses but the large age related gap in attainment suggests that something else is at play especially because it doesn't really occur in countries with a late school age start date.

I think the problem is that summer born children that aren't ready for school are disadvantaged because they can be labelled or self label as being naughty or stupid or even suffering from attention deficit disorder when all they really need is a little more time to play and mature.

I am not sure that a ready for school summer born dc suffers at all from their birth date. In fact if they are quite advanced for their age they may even enjoy the challenge of slightly more stretching academic work.

Thats why I think it is important to give parents the choice based on their child as an individual. If we really don't trust parents to make the right choices for their children (as it would appear many don't) then perhaps nursery workers or teachers could help with this assessment.

auf Scottish kids who start later go into p1 along with all the other kids starting then. That's another difference with England - there's no reception. If Scottish kids start later they're not going in to an established class - they're new starters like the rest of the class.

I love the way that people causally shrug and suggest home schooling, because obviously that suits everyone...

Most DC are not summer born, so most of those parents aren't bothered, or are actively against having "out of age group" DC, and some parents of summer born DC are of the mind that it's not a problem for their DC, and don't want others who feel differently to have the option to defer entry to reception, perhaps because of cost or pressure on school places, perhaps because having no choice means they don't have to make a decision that could turn out to be good or bad for their DC.

I would love to have the Scottish system, and believe there is disadvantage in starting school aged only just four. But don't think there's much point campaigning

I really can't understand the strong opinions people have against allowing parents to support their children. It's not fair to have an attitude that if I'm alright and my children are alright then no-one else should have help. Without really knowing a child no-one can really judge what is best for them. we should let parents who care more than anyone else for their children use their judgement. If some children start school later no-one else will be disadvantaged. Everyone will be at least as well off as they already were and a few might have a little boost. Other countries all over the world allow flexibility in school starting age (and many of them come out much better in pisa tests than we do). In fact, it is England that is out of sync. Its also common knowledge that teachers choose to have their children in the autumn term and they must know a little about what is best. I am also a parent governor and I care greatly not only about my own children but about all the children in my school. Flexibility of thinking and considering the individual needs of every child is the key to a great education system for all!

In every class there will be an oldest and a youngest.
If the cutoff was not 1st September it would be different children.
But it is.
They cope with it.
And by year 10 its very, very hard to tell who is old and who is young - in fact it can be hard to tell the year 11s apart from the year 9s

NB : there are 6 million people in Scotland and over 50 million in England : what works in the Highlands will not work in London.

NB : the vast bulk of the research about outcomes of children and year groups is based on current University leavers - IE those who went through Year R before the current developments in child centred learning - so are statistically invalid for kids today

NB : if you are going to allow random child entry, do not complain when your chosen school is already full as LEAS cannot afford to hold empty places. And academies and Free schools certainly will not.

Apparantly the research is showing quite strongly that it isn't WHEN they start school that makes any difference, for the simple reason that wherever they put the cut off date, some group of children will suffer

Also, children who have fewer terms (i.e start later) do even worse in term of catching up with classmates / adjusting to school.

The best solution is to adjust exam results for relative age (which is no different to adjusting results for kids with dyslexia etc).

As the effect is lost over time (up to 40% of summer borns do worse than expected at KS1, whereas only 5.5% do worse at Key Stage 4 and is practically non existent by A-level...the problem is those summer born children that struggled at KS1 are far far less likely (25%) less likely to go to college and university) So by GCSE/ A-Level this effect would practically eliminated, and therefore no longer needs adjusting for.

This is not at all difficult for the government to do.

As for giving the 'brighter' summer borns an unfair advantage as one mother argued with me, this is nonsense. If a child born in august is keeping up with the best of its september classmates just fine, that child is more advanced and intelligent than the september born child when adjusting for cognitive age!! Even the bright ones are being unfairly labelled average due to age effects.

I still don't see why we can't have the deferral system used in Scotland. It works perfectly well up there - if you feel your DC is ready to start, they can, and if you don't, you can defer to the next academic year without missing P1.

I'm an August baby myself and DH and I chose to actively avoid TTC a baby that would be born between July/October in order to avoid the youngest/oldest issue. May sound extreme, but as an August born I wanted to avoid that for my own child.

So I definitely understand where people with late summer children are coming from.

I just can't see a solution that would work across the country - especially places like London where it's hard enough getting a school place as it is.

The exam adjustments are a good suggestion though.

CouthyMow
I still don't see why we can't have the deferral system used in Scotland. It works perfectly well up there

There are more children in Central London than in the WHOLE of Scotland.

There are not the resources to have all these empty school places.
School budgets are set by the numbers of pupils coming through the door.
No kids in term one, no teacher all year.

Alec Salmond has kicked the debt can on down the road (to be paid by the self same children)
England has decided not to.

They go into the year below, in Scotland, if you defer entry. I have a June Birthday. When I moved up to Scotland, at the start of Y11, they decided that due to coursework issues, to put me in the year below. I wasn't the oldest child in the year.

Teachers seem to manage perfectly well in Scotland, having a larger spread of ages within the school year. My guess is that that is because every child in that year is READY to be in that year - academically, socially AND emotionally.

Or are English teachers not capable of coping in the same way as Scottish teachers?

There ARE no 'empty school places' when you defer - you just go into the year below.

So the Council know who has deferred for a year, so they know that they have X amount of DC's born between 1st March and 28/29th Feb. They also know how many people born between November the previous year and 28/29th Feb that year have deferred. Therefore they know how many school places needed...

Only difference is that they will gain SOME pupils that were deferred from the previous academic year, and lose SOME pupils that will be deferred to the following academic year.

As to what the issue is!

It works in cities like Glasgow, why can't it work in London. Genuine question btw.

Couthy
Were you in the centre of Glasgow?
as that is the only part of Scotland with a density of schools and churn ANYWHERE comparable to much of London, Birmingham, Leeds / Bradford, Manchester, Liverpool.
There are no empty places to slot the kids into
and I'd be interested to see how long it lasts in Scotland once the cuts start to bite.
Flexibility is for the resource rich.

Couthy
DH was in a school recently where half the pupils had arrived in the UK within the last three years : try planning for that in advance

My daughter is a late August baby & she really suffered at going to school at just 4 & if I'd had choice shed of gone a year later, children at just 4 are not ready emotionally to start full time education. I think the problem lies with more children going to nurseries than being home with mum & becoming grown up too quickly, it's a shorter day for a child usually in nursery but not for one who stays at home. Parents of Summer born children should have more of a say when they start school, I was defiantly bullied into starting my child at school by local authority.