Great news for summer borns...

[satinpillowcase]

www.theguardian.com/education/2015/sep/08/parents-of-summer-born-children-get-right-to-delay-start-of-school

Dds friend is a week younger than her just started a combined degree at 17 they really are all different blanket deferral isnt needed imo although we dont have reception here so i can see why somebody would defer a just turned 4 year old .

I think it only makes sense to let those born in, say, last 6 weeks of year defer - ie those born in summer holidays (that would have been my two!). Ok, that's tough on someone born on July 15th, but I really don't think an April 1st birthday counts as young in the year. An April 1st person is five months older than an August 31st person. It would also make the potential age gap in a class 17 months, whereas if it were six weeks that wouldn't be so dramatic.

Yeah that makes sense make the cut off age a tighter margin for deferral

It's not great news for high performing ones though. My DD2 is a late August child and it was bad enough for her being top table for everything through primary school and being the target of older bullies in her year because she was on 'their table' but looked physically like she belonged 2 years below (she is very wee). Imagine if a school year/class at primary level contains kids who are 17 months older than the youngest person in the year - it will make life really difficult for the youngest ones. Who will therefore be pressured to stay down a year just so they aren't so ridiculously physically outmatched - but if they are bright it's just going to be punishing them because other children can't cope academically. I think it's a terrible idea and I'm very glad that my 3 summer borns won't have their lives made more difficult by it.

My DD has always been a minimum of 17 months younger than the oldest in her class. It's a non-issue. She is on the small side of average, but there have always been smaller (but older) kids in her class. No one makes a fuss about age and most of the time other kids, parents and even teachers don't seem to be aware that she is a little younger.

I think there are issues with this policy as announced but as a PP pointed out the details are still to be firmed up - and hopefully sensible compromises and safeguards can be put in place.

Misti - well it's not the same situation then. My DD2 looks at least 2 years younger than her chronological age. She is now in Y8 and remains the smallest child in the school despite the arrival of the new Y7s. But my point was specifically in relation to high performers (people whose August born children struggle always assume that it's the same for all August born children. It isn't). It was difficult being the youngest child in her year but the highest performer when the age gap was almost exactly 12 months between oldest child and her. I can't see extending that by 5 months as a positive. There is an agenda to pretend that all August born kids struggle. This is not true, but the adherents of the agenda shout very loudly. The effect is that many people including teachers now assume that the smaller younger kids will struggle and the the bigger older ones are also the brighter ones. In primary schools, the effect of this is that when expectations are not confirmed to, it's difficult for the smaller younger kids and probably also for the larger older ones impacted. The month in which you were born does not affect your academic ability (although being subjected to low expectations as a result of what is becoming a self fulfilling prophecy might). This new development will just further entrench the completely false idea that older = better in school terms.

Dd has always been younger its 11 months between her and the eldest although there was a friend who was deffered so he was 18 before any of them no child is equal they are all going to have their personal struggles whatever age they go to primary a summer born English child may be miles ahead of a winter born I think it is a great option to defer but they are never going to be equal or at an advantage enmass because of deferral.

Another problem with deferral and teacher attitudes to the younger children ...my DD1 (Feb born) just diagnosed with ADHD at 13 -nearly 14. Mainly struggles with concentration. (She is bright but never got any work done in class - we had school work home etc)
I suspected it for years - but actually didn't want her labelled and she was coping and doing ok academically. However I did mention it once as being a possibility when she was 8-9 at parent's evening (teacher asked me how did I managed to get her to do the work at home - took hours with mixture of rewards and arguments). The teacher said well but then she is the youngest - very young - concentration comes with maturity. Same story at secondary at 12 - when she was coping less well with things like coursework - got told 'well but she is the youngest'...
(I went to GP - she was diagnosed within 3 months...now getting the help I should have got her years ago...)

Not sure if I am missing the point? Surely this is just moving the potential 'problem' to children born in February and March? Added to the fact that there could now be 18 months between the youngest and eldest in the class as opposed to the current 11 months? My dc4 was born on 9th April, I would not want to defer her, I am fairly confident at this point that she will be ready for school. However, there is considerable talk locally of children deferring to give them an advantage (grammar school area). I would not want her being the youngest in the class so would be forced to defer. Surely there will have to be some strict guidelines around children deferring. What if the vast majority of children born between April-August defer? During the first couple of years of this won't there will be some large class sizes?

Properly young in year children (August borns) will be forced to defer whether they would struggle or not so that their proper year group can accomodate April borns who would struggle whatever year group they are put with. It's a lunatic proposal but it proves that if you shout loud enough for long enough common sense and fairness will go out of the window.

I should have said at secondary that was in a meeting with her guidance teacher...when I mentioned it at parent's evening to her teachers (less aware of her DOB) a lot said yes that would fit, then one who was surprised (but pleased) said they aren't really looking for things like that at that age - normally picked up at primary - thought she would have been assessed before - how did she get so far without it being noticed?

That's what I was thinking uhtred I hope that the parents of children born in July and August can afford the extra year of childcare regardless of whether their children are ready for school or not. My first 3 children are born in September and October. My dds1 and 2 were absolutely bored at nursery until they were almost 5 added to the fact that the majority of their friends went to school the year before.

I also wonder how deferrals will impact children in schools where children are routinely taught in mixed classes. For example, my DC's school have mixed classes of Y1&2, Y3&4 and Y5&6.

So at the moment the Y1&2 class contains children born Sept 2008 - August 2010.

But under the new scheme the class could contain children born May 2008 (deferred) to August 2010.

A 28 month age range feels huge to me. Especially for the Y5&6 classes where there is already a huge physical and emotional difference between the most mature (adult size girls well into puberty) and the least mature who are still small children.

I have a March birthday and I started school in the April after I turned 5. I wonder whether it might be better to have a system where, instead of waiting a whole year to start school if you are a summer born, there is flexibility about when to start during the year for everyone.

So if you are an autumn born you can start in September or January.

If you are a spring born you can start in January or April.

And if you a summer born you can start in April or the following September.

So in effect everyone starts much closer to their 5th birthday.

I'm not sure however, whether people would feel disadvantaged because their children missed part of reception. I'm also not sure how it would sit with nurseries/pre-schools etc.

Yes tiggy I am really worried as I would not want my April born being the youngest in the year as we are in a grammar school area but feel I will have no other choice than to defer her-based on the feeling locally. This is going to delay me going back to work for a whole year. I could cry, to be honest. But what choice will I have if I don't want her to be disadvantaged?

Can anyone advise me how this would work in practice for children currently in the school system?

My son is currently in Year 2 ?? but he is an August (27th) birthday and my local area refused to allow him to drop back a year on entry.

If the admissions code is changed can we force the school and LEA to drop him back so he repeats a year?

Also he has a chance to move schools when he goes into Year 3 (a local secondary school takes some children at 7) so again can we force them to consider his entry a year later?

Lastly if this change does apply to children currently at school as well as new starters, will this apply to private schools as well or are they negotiated on a individual basis as they have no obligation to follow the admissions code?

Or does this change only apply to new starters in which case a whole generation of summer born children will underperform!

Yes, I have a February birthday and stated school in the April (after Easter) so was already 5. I think everyone used to started in the term after they turned 5. The rules were changed as some parents of summer born children felt that their children were being disadvantaged at having potentially 2 terms less in reception.

I think this will only affect children that have not started school yet.

Theresomething There is no reason why your DD would be disadvantaged being the youngest in the year in terms of 11+ success. DD2 was the youngest in her year - she got into a superselective. The oldest child in the year also got in.

Letsget, would your DS be OK about being left behind when his current classmates and friends move up to KS2, if he was staying behind with the younger ones?

I know that holding children back a year is always a fraught decision as it can have a huge emotional impact on children as they get a bit older.

a whole generation of summer born children will underperform

What a ridiculous statement. Not all summer born children underperform at all, far from it. My October born dd has a best friend that is August born and has been in the top learning groups since she started reception. I have a niece and nephew both born in late August and both doing very well at school, no issues at primary level either.

Surely though with this new system there will potentially be younger children in years above older children? How does that make sense? It's not that I feel that she would necessarily be disadvantaged per se more that other children the same age as her will be getting an unfair advantage, if you see what I mean? I will feel obliged to give her the same advantage as the others.