holding children back a year

[royalair]

I've heard some mums in our toddler group recently saying that they would like to hold their summer born children back a year when it comes to starting school. None of these children seem overly young for their age (to me anyway) and have no special needs and seem emotionally and socially good. I can't help but think it's simply so they can have children who are 'the best' in terms of academic and sporting ability. My own children are summer born but I think they will benefit from being with older children when it's their turn to go to school rather than being the oldest by some months than everyone else.

Also I wonder if other parents (perhaps me included) might be a bit annoyed if a child who starts school a year later for example wins all sports day events simply because they are physically the strongest (ok so I'm competitive too!). And am I being naive never to have thought it necessary to hold my children back a year?

Someone I know doing it says that the school is obliged to hold a reception place open to her son, and offer him another one next year, meaning that they will have an empty space with no funding for this year.

I think she must have misunderstood, as there is no obligation to do this.

A parent has the right to defer their child's start date until they reach statutory age, so once a place has been given, they can delay starting their child until January or Easter in that reception class if they wish, and that is their statutory right. The place in that class will be held open for them until they do so in that case.

For a summer born, this might mean 'deferring" until the following September, but in that case, they will normally go into Yr1, unless prior to their application, they agreed with the LEA that they can delay school entrance for a year and go into reception "late". (as discussed endlessly above!).

What they can't do is accept a place for reception this september, defer for 3 terms, and then say "actually we want a place in reception for 2017 , thanks". The decision to enter YrR this Sept but delay entry until Jan/Easter, or to request to defer entrance and enter YrR next Sept, is a decision that needs to be taken now. It's not a choice she gets to make at some point in yrR. If she accepts the place for this Sept, that is the school place she has, and it needs to be taken up at some point in this academic year, or in Sept as entry into Yr1.

Someone I know doing it says that the school is obliged to hold a reception place open to her son, and offer him another one next year, meaning that they will have an empty space with no funding for this year.

Not only it is untrue, it is even unlawful, the school cannot "hold" a place for a child for a year even if that child misses reception and then goes into y1.

The opposite is true, summer born child who applies for a school place as part of "chronologically correct" admission round must take up the place by the summer term - up to 5 months before they turn compulsory school age. Any other child can start school at CSA and still go into reception at least for a term. See school admissions code 2.16 b) here

If a summer born child is sent to school at CSA they parents have to request the admission authority to grant them reception place. There no certainty whatsoever it will be granted and if not the Y1 will be given where places are left.

A couple of people have mentioned sitting the 11+, IMO any child that is delayed enough at 4 to need to defer entering reception, i.e. has significant SEN, is unlikely to be trying for grammar school.

The 11+ is only taken by children born within a particular school year, the oldest child could be born on 1st September and the youngest 31st August, and marks are age standardised. A child can only sit it in the correct year, the year group they are in at their current school is irrelevant.

30/06/2016 23:05 christinarossetti

I agree with posters who say that this policy will simply increase the advantage that already advantaged children born into articulate, middle class, living in stable accommodation families have.

Deferring school until after 5th birthday should be mandatory for all children or none.

Having read all the replies I think this is my viewpoint. Except where there are special needs of course but even then those children would probably be socially more included in their own year group with extra teaching help in correct year

Do I understand you correctly - you advocate making all summer born children who enter school at CSA (ie September after their 5th birthday) miss reception and be placed into year1. This often will be against their parents wishes and against child's best interest, therefore illegal under EU and UN legislation on all agencies having to make best interest of individual child a primary consideration when making any decision about them including learning opportunities. And against evidence that missing a whole year of learning is significantly damaging to attainment and has consequences in the later life.

Because this is not just a matter of "opinion" - there is a legal base of primary and international legislation that is at the heart of how these barely 5 year olds can be tested by the system. And you are ignoring that legal base completely. Local authority policies cannot trump primary legislation brought about by the British parliament or, indeed, the primacy of international legislation that Britain is a signatory to. Incidentally, the primary and international law don't contradict each other. But by forcing a blanket rule you will make that blanket rule contradict both. Incidentally, SAC specifically states that any decision must be made taking into account individual circumstances and dfe in its communication with the parents specifically states that any blanket policy (ie "no reception for a summer born child unless SEN") are not allowed under 2.17a and are unlawful.

Not "tested" but "treated by the system" - autocorrect fail

It's only in relevantly recent years that all children have been offered a whole year of reception in the year that they turn five.
I'm sure it varied from LA to LA, but when my child started school in the school year 2001-2002 children could go for half days in the term they turn five and full-time the next term.
This meant summer born children like mine could only attend half days in the summer term and full-time in September in year 1. A lot of parents opted to keep their child in nursery, where a full-time place was often offered, and start their child straight into year 1.
Funnily enough these children still went on to do very well at school despite not having to learn phonics at just turned four.