Is possible for summer babies to start school in reception/foundation after turning 5, please?

[Italiangreyhound]

Hi all

I do not yet know if my new son has any special needs but he is newly adopted (aged almost 4, been with us just over a month) and was a summer baby so turns 4 in the summer.

Is possible for summer babies to start school in reception/foundation after they turn 5? So he would not go to school this September, but in 2015 after he turns 5. I know it is possible to start school when they turn 5 but was told if he does that he would go into year 1 and miss out on reception.

As he is newly adopted I need to focus on his needs and also work out if there are any additional needs. He will be busy attaching to me and grieving for the losses he has had so I don't want to add into the mix the fact he would be very young in his year if he has to stick to his chronological year.

Any advice would be gratefully received, please.

What do you think of this case at our local village school. Child A was late summer born, no sn, in fact a bit above average in some areas. He attended Nursery at the school. His mum assumed he would automatically get a place in YrR but it was over subscribed and he did not despite being at the top of the waiting list.
The mother opted to keep him in Nursery for another year. As it is a small school nursery and reception are Class1 so he was with his peers and his mum was hoping for a Yr1 place.
I was talking to her yesterday and she said he had been given a Reception place next year so he would be the oldest in that cohort.
It means that he will now be in a different class from his peer group who will move into Class2 next year. What happens in year 6 in such cases?

greylady - I think if she hasn't asked for a reception place the school has almost certainly made a mistake. Or they will officially have him in year 1 but intend to keep him in the mixed year class 1 for a while then move him up to the year 1 class. She needs to check - otherwise the school could find itself unable to fund his place when he gets to year 6.

Tiggy but they would keep them as they would still receive funding.

Thats what I suspected titchy. I only know her from picking up dgs but I'll mention it when I next talk to her.

OP - I know that there are many reasons why schools don't like to have children outside their normal cohort and other posters gave made these clear. However, there are children all over the place in the "wrong" year groups, although it is less common than it used to be. I think if you discuss this with the right people and ensure that children's services stay involved, then you have a good chance to get what you think is best.

Hi, sorry for late reply.
Ds's default year would have been Sept 2009. He had very serious receptive language delay (suspected autism, though he is fine now).

In 2008/2009, my LEA's official policy was parental choice for entry year for summer borns so the only thing I had to deal with was opposition from other parents and the LEA themselves (their concern was that they thought I might change my mind - lots of people do - and end up sending DS2 in the default year having left it too late to get a statement. They calmed down once I reassured them in November that I had not applied for any school place and thus had "burnt my boats").

My paediatrician supported my decision (though she thought I was in denial about autism), same with speech therapist. The best support was from school who were 100% behind me. This is a huge advantage of going to school nursery.

Anyway, the intensive extra year at nursery and home did the trick. When DS2 entered reception he no longer needed any one to one support.

I used to believe strongly in parental choice as it seems to do no harm in Scotland. I still do really though I would accept a system where you needed support from professionals.

Fear/uncertainty and doubt about year 6 stop many parents deciding to defer. And that's a terrible basis on which to have to make a decision.

I have never understood the GCSE thing. My son will take them at 16, as will all the children born in September, October, November, etc. it seems again just to be a fear/doubt thing.

Sorry, one more thing. If we moved from our LEA to another LEA then our "deal" wouldn't apply.

The LEA next to us is an 11+ area. So if we moved there now and wanted DS to go to Grammar he would have to go ahead into his default year.

But what I always say is that if your child has serious enough issues to warrant deferral in the first place then you are in a "one year at a time " situation and the secondary school issue is just not your biggest problem (and you have seven years to campaign.....).

Riversidemum thanks for your encouragement, it is helpful to have people thinking I will be successful (for my son's sake). Can I ask, you said OP - I know that there are many reasons why schools don't like to have children outside their normal cohort and other posters gave made these clear.

I have read back through the thread and I cannot see any reasons why schools don't like to have children outside their normal cohort, aside from the issues about keeping them in year when they move up to high school. I can see that taking children two or three years outside of their cohort would be problematic but a few weeks or months, I cannot see why that would be an issue.

goonIcantakeit thanks for your wise words. I think parents know their own children best and even though I have only been ds's mum for a short while, I know him better than anyone now! I am not a fan of academies (at all) but if the primary and secondary schools are in an academy together then they should be able to make decisions together about school entry. Yes agree totally, you need to take the step next to you not the one 7 years down the line.

I am not a huge fan of schools, I need to be re-convinced that they are good places to be. How bloody sad is that. And all this stuff just adds to it. I really hope dd's school will come through for ds. I have been mega supportive of the school even though they have not always been supportive of dd. Now ds needs them to be supportive - let's see what they do!

Thanks for all your support.

"That is the exact system we have. Any parent can request it but, in practice, only those with strong professional support are likely to get their case agreed."

Hi Tiggy,
On paper we do have that system but functionally we don't! This is why your posts on this topic are very valuable!

To make the current system work we would need:
1 access to better quality health professionals for two year olds (lots of four year olds are seeing their first SALT ... and that is usually a non- specialist...)
2 access to an educational professional (School SENCO or senior teacher level) for those children in private nursery, school nursery or no nursery at all), and all this no later than the child's third birthday.
3 clarity that decisions made in one area of the country should be binding in all parts of the country throughout the child's school career.
4 an advocate. I'm a lawyer and I had to really be on my toes to work the system, as did my friend who is a doctor. If you aren't confident at dealing with "systems" it is likely you won't be able to make the right case by admissions time.

All of that would cost lots of money which is why I feel the Scottish system is better: a slightly later start for all and no hoops to jump through.

Hi

There's another thread about delaying reception entry where I wrote about flexi-schooling. I know you are planning a delay now and thinking about the knock on effects. I know an adopted children that has stayed in the year group below if that makes sense?

One of my DC did 3 1/2 days a week for reception. It was meant to end at Easter after they turned 5 but we just carried until end of the year.

We started with picking up at lunch on Wednesdays and having every Thursday at home with me. I just found the kids get very tired at the end of the week in reception but they like Friday because it's chip day!

I think some of the other parents thought it was a it strange and were worried their children would ask but it worked for us!

One of the worries is possibly that a situation will occur like that seen in the USA. Parents of summer-born boys seeking to hold them back so they will be bigger in their year and do better in sports. Girls don't seem to be as big an issue as the parents are more interested in pushing them ahead in the academics.

Someone is always going to have to be the youngest in the year and if a large number of August/July born children were held back then you could end up with classes with a 14 month age gap between children and increased anxiety amongst parents of June-born children.

Schools don't have 28 September born kids and 2 August born, it's normally a broad spread and schools with 2, 3 or more forms of entry do try to ensure a good mix in each class.

Sometimes it's hard on the September borns who are expected (even if sub-consciously) to be more mature and capable than they might be as an individual.

I totally see the case for deferring when children have significant SEN or are prem babies who would have been in another year had they been born at term, but there does need to be some kind of regulation.

Many parents also under-estimate their child and over-estimate the way Reception works. IME, Reception is very gentle and teachers are very aware of the needs of young children at all levels of readiness. DD's school have piles of cushions in a corner should a child need a nap and there are no problems with children who start in nappies or who have a lot of accidents, and there are lots of hugs and tlc doled out.b

I'm August born myself, have a brother who was a November baby but who had significant speech and hearing issues and was deferred a year, and a sister who was a year ahead of her peer group. So I have a lot of sympathy with those who seek to defer for legitimate reasons (ie not for red-shirting reasons) and wish them luck.

Human nature won't change, so parents will always seek advantage for their children and parents will never be experts in assessing their child's abilities relative to others in the default year.

Tiggy, yes I take your points. Interesting what you say about the conflict with medical practices. I'll add another point - it's normal, natural and possibly necessary for the parents of a 3 year old with SN to be hoping for the best: we need to be in that frame of mind in order to do the best job we can, and for some of us that results in an unwillingness to get a diagnosis, with that stance either being borne out or abandoned as the child gets older.

So I would ask this question: which system causes the most suffering? The English or the Scottish? I think it is the English. So if we aren't going to stump up funding for assessing two-year-olds, I think we ar better moving to a system of parental choice and accepting that the sharp - elbowed will be amongst those who benefit (though to be honest I was made by other parents to feel deferment was a stigma rather than something aspirational...it's no fun having to develop the skill of explaining your reasons to other parents)

goonIcantakeit I am not sure what you mean by Human nature won't change, so parents will always seek advantage for their children and parents will never be experts in assessing their child's abilities relative to others in the default year.

I am not sure seeking advantage for their kids would lead parents to look for places in the year below. I am sure lots of parents do not seek advantage and many are happy for the school to take the lead. My parents were. They are great parents but they never questioned anything at school and I had a crap time and left with the equivalent of one O-level pass and lower results! I also found it hard to make friends and had (I am sure) dyslexia, which was never diagnosed. Later I did an English degree and studied Mandarin, have masses of friends and had a very different life from the one my school 'prepared' me for!

Nowadays (my school days are a long way ago) I bet plenty of parents are still not seeking the advantage for their kids and let the school take the lead. Why would parents seeking advantage be a problem if it did not disadvantage other children? I think many would actually choose for their kids to go into nursery and school as soon as they can. Lots of people need to get to work etc. My dd went to nursery part-time as a baby and I never worried. I think wanting to hold a child back in education is a very specific request and made for specific reasons not a general desire for them to do well (IMHO).

Spoke to Senco, looks like school wants to go down the party line and shit all over my plans! If you have any wisdom fling it now, please. Private messages/advice etc very welcome. Thanks so much.

Trust me OP, I am the last person in the world who would block wider parental choice on this issue. I'm one of the good guys here. There is a lot of misinformation out there and that's why I appreciate Tiggytape's contributions even though we may not share the same views.

Back to you. Right now you need to decide if this is the right battle to fight. If it is, you need to get over to the specialist forums where you will get lots of support. They are swapping stories of how they won all the time on there.
I'm sorry that school are making this hard for you. I doubt they have any good reasons to do with your own son.:(. It's probably a "don't let her do it or others will want to as well" argument.

goonIcantakeit I am sorry if I came accross very heavy last night. I am very stressed about this and I hated school and feel (secretly or maybe less secretly) that school can be a very crap place to me! But I am not a fan of home ed either! I want schools to be nurturing places as well educational places! So I may well have reacted badly to your comment and I do apologise.

tiggytape thanks and apologies, I was not meaning to be all heavy!

gooncake it is totally ..."don't let her do it or others will want to as well" argument. They have made their pronouncements without accessing my son or even meeting him!

I did start a thread in special needs. Does anyone know any links to the area I should go to, please?

We're good OP xxx. I have experienced a lot of anger about this issue too. In the past I actually described my feelings as grief.

This is clearly a case where it would do no harm and it might just do loads of good to defer. A good system would recognise that. You are being forced to do something that you feel may be against his interests and that's not what you want at this stage of his life with you. I feel that it is critical that you do whatever you need to do to nurture your relationship with eachother since it is ultimately from that relationship that he will develop. I apologise for speaking without knowledge of adoption but I learnt enough about special needs to understand that children develop and flourish out of relationships with those they are bonded with.

For know how and facts, get yourself to these forums:
www.facebook.com/groups/121613774658942/
groups.google.com/forum/?fromgroups#!forum/schoolstart
If you want to fight, they will pop up and help you draft letters/know what to say, etc.

Re school and medical people, you have to either build alliances or be such a hard person to beat that the matter gets escalated to someone more confident and capable.

Is building alliances an option? Realistically, at this stage? Is there a nursery attached to school? Can the adoption community advocate on your behalf? I feel the adoption issue is key here.

If the doors really are being slammed, remember that you have options. You can take another year out to be with him and decide in November whether to apply for a year one place or keep fighting. Have you applied for a place for this year yet? You also have a right to start him next spring instead of now (assuming you applied for a place). I would definitely have him in a school nursery from September if he isn't starting school, and definitely one attached to a school.

You can also think about moving to a school where they have mixed year groups - that is common in very small schools and in 45 kids per year schools and can work well for young August-borns. You can think about moving to another LEA or even Scotland. I know that sounds dramatic!

Your comment about needing time to bond with him is resonating with me. I kind of have a gut feeling that you must do what in your heart you feel would be best for this key relationship to flourish.

Back when things were hard, I used to have this regular sense that, by taking a different path (no school but no diagnosis either), DS2and I were alone up a mountain together. Other people kept telling me to come back down the mountain. They insisted that would be better for us. But actually it was just that it would be more convenient for them.

So I would consult with adoption experts and work out what is in his best interests for the next nine months, then simply do that thing. That will change the game (no one took me seriously until after I let the default year application deadline pass ).

tiggytape thank you, you are bringing tears to my eyes.

goon thanks so much.

You said I used to have this regular sense that, by taking a different path (no school but no diagnosis either), DS2and I were alone up a mountain together. Other people kept telling me to come back down the mountain. They insisted that would be better for us. But actually it was just that it would be more convenient for them. I really do think it is actually it was just that it would be more convenient for them. When they have not even met ds let alone assessed him at all.

thank you.