Oldest or youngest in year?

[LazyLondoner]

If you could choose whether your child was the oldest in their year or the youngest which would you prefer? My summer born DD is due to start school this September but I have the choice to delay a year so that she is the oldest rather than the youngest if I wish. My instinct is to do this as there is lots of evidence about summer borns being disadvantaged but now several people have commented that it can be just as difficult for children who are oldest in the year and get frustrated as they are much more able than their peers. Argh! Any advice from parents of autumn born kids who are the most able in their class - is it a problem?

@OvO @notjustamummythankyou would your reflections change ten years on?

(I came across this thread as someone had reanimated it- didn't look at the original date! DD is early Sept so will be 5 on the day she starts reception...)

No, I had no worries when DS was in reception and he's had no problems at all being summer-born.

Putting him side by side with his autumn/winter born friends (many of which are the same friends he had in Reception), you really would not know that he is 9-10 months younger - socially or academically.

Deferring my DS's was one of the best decisions I’ve ever made as a parent. Being that little bit older really makes a difference once in secondary!

My older daughter was born in the middle of the academic year and is very intelligent but not in a rush to grow up. Academically she doesn't fit in her year group and would fit better one or two years up. Socially and emotionally this wouldn't be right for her though. She definitely wouldn't be ok in the year below. My younger daughter is Summer born and doesn't seem to be as academically able as her sister. I don't want to defer her as I feel this could hold her back and she will benefit from school even if it's harder for her so I'm choosing youngest. I do know kids with particular challenges like a speech delay who I think would have benefitted from deferring.

It depends on the child. A summer born child who is academically able child will be fine being one of the youngest. In fact, it will be beneficial. That same child held back would be very frustrated as the learning would be far too slow relative to their capability.

A child that's not academic who is then also the youngest could really struggle though and I'd definitely hold back if you had any indication of this already.

An average child will probably benefit from being the oldest though primarily via confidence at finding things a bit easier etc.

There isn't going to be one size fits all. Do what will work for your specific child.

Its never too late to post a new comment on an older thread 😊👌

My youngest misses out on starting school this September by less than 24 hours.... she would have been absolutely fine being the youngest in the year.
More than ready.... as it is, she will have to do another year of nursery whilst all her friends move up to reception.

I have a Feb born and an Oct. They have summer born mates.
Academically they level by year 3-4
I'd keep in year. Im a mid August and never did reception . I went to Yr1 when it was the norm to start actually at 5 or the term after you were 5.
(1970s)
If I had to choose I'd go older in year.
This helps get results.
BUT a lot of sports and clubs are done in school years. I know kids who are eg in Yr6 but play sports with Yr7 as at school they stayed down.
The Yr7 kids socially are on a totally different page
The Yr6 who stayed down a year is then a big of s social misfit

We have had that this year- by less than 72 hours. The one piece of advice I have is to work with preschool to keep them engaged, work on social and emotional development, and do a lot of extra curricular stuff.

We have been lucky to have a great preschool who has helped in this, and knows that the school we have been placed at is going to be very helpful on keeping her engaged.
.