Are your children’s vaccines up to date?

Set a reminder

Please or to access all these features

Primary education

Join our Primary Education forum to discuss starting school and helping your child get the most out of it.

Starting Reception a year late Summer Born

35 replies

threelittlerapscallions · 06/05/2016 10:52

My 5 year old is home ed at the moment as she didn't settle in at school (and we only got the far away school anyway!). Now she has a chance of getting in to the school we want but I think she is a late developer and much more suited to starting in reception in Sept than in year 1. I will ask the school about this but has anyone done this with their child and how has it worked out?

OP posts:
Are your children’s vaccines up to date?
Lollylovesbones · 07/05/2016 08:54

From a teaching point of view she will have missed a year of phonics/literacy and early maths so may be behind her peers if she then joined in year 1. Not that I think that should necessarily influence your decision.

NynaevesSister · 07/05/2016 08:55

If they bring in 30 free hours for 3 & 4 year olds that would negate that though wouldn't it? Son's school has also secured funding to allow it to offer full time nursery care for all if parents want it. Combined with before and after school care this gives them the chance to have affordable childcare (desperately needed in this area).

RaisingSteam · 07/05/2016 08:59

The problem is that there isn't really a perfect answer. Don't defer: your DC is youngest in class and more likely to under achieve/ feel outpaced. Defer and start in year below: risk they will catch up and be coasting soon, stretching the age range disadvantages youngest in the year below.

My DS is August and now in yr 6, capable academically but does lack confidence and TBH struggling with pressure of SATS now. But I am glad there are not 4 or 5 confident nearly- 12 year old in his class making him feel even more the smallest and youngest.

hazeyjane · 07/05/2016 09:04

A preschool like ours will not be sustainable if the 30 hours funding comes in - we are in a building used for after school and early birds clubs, so can't extend our hours, we have waiting lists for places and would not physically be able to accommodate more children in a session, without overcrowding, there would also be staffing and ratio issues.

The 30 hours thing is fraught with difficulties which don't seem to have been considered, not least the fact that early years education seems to have been mixed up with childcare provision, to the detriment of both (IMHO)

However, I think some of the reasons are not about childcare, for the parents I am thinking of, they want their child to start school, with the other children that are starting school, and I think this might be true for a lot of parents.

Having a later starting school age for all children, with a proper foundation of preschool, early years provision, would be better for all children.

RaisingSteam · 07/05/2016 09:05

I do think there needs to be the potential to adjust children into correct year group later and parents will have to accept risk that might happen and they miss some of he curriculum.

I am very suspicious that parents will play the system to put their precious petals at an advantage and just like admissions there will be massive faking of how non-ready a child is for school.

tiggytape · 07/05/2016 10:20

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

NynaevesSister · 07/05/2016 10:42

That's in a system where all parents have the right to delay.

In a system where all parents have the right to request it doesn't. And the Admissions Code 2014 doesn't restrict this to Summerborns but also to children who through illness or developmental delay will benefit from delay.

The problem is that local authorities and admissions authorities that really don't allow this. Many academy's just outright say no. Other people have gone in with the support of the head teacher and their child's nursery and been told that no, they will only consider it if the child has a statement.

Even if they get a statement or/and letters from medical professionals they are still told no, because they consider the school capable of supporting the child.

But a child who will require that support all the way through primary but wouldn't if they were just a year behind probably won't have been flagged up to medical professionals at age 3 - or is likely to still be on waiting lists to be seen. And most certainly won't be bad enough for a statement.

tiggytape · 07/05/2016 11:09

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

FlaviaAnsell · 07/05/2016 11:17

It's one of those things that sounds lovely in theory but if available on demand would have all sorts of consequences for everyone else and the system as a whole.

For every child allowed to defer, there will be a child who will not now get a place in that Reception class, who otherwise would have done. Where will those children now go? The authorities have to take into account the interests of all the children in the cohort.

tiggytape · 07/05/2016 11:55

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

New posts on this thread. Refresh page