Which is more important for summer-borns, age on entry or school?

[WhereIsBlueRabbit]

I'd be really interested to get opinions on this: DS is due to start school in September 2019, days after his fourth birthday. I have serious reservations about whether he will be ready for school then and am considering not starting him until Sep 2020 when he will be 5 (ie CSA). We have a choice of three schools and the decision about the entry point will dictate the school, and vice versa, if you see what I mean....

School A: academy, 2-form entry. Really liked it when we looked last year (in relation to the nursery). Has a very good reputation. But won't accept applications for out of year - if he goes here, he has to start age 4. They have a reputation for being supportive and nurturing. Nearest school - we would probably get a place. Big advantage: we could stick with current childminder for wraparound care.

School B: smaller, one form entry. Not sure if we would get in but good chance. Good reputation. LA school and our LA allows entry at CSA for summer-borns. Would have to change wraparound care and it might mean clubs for three days a week as didn't like the childminder we found who covered it.

School C: 2-form entry. Average reputation. LA school (see above). Would have to change wraparound care, not sure what options are here. Not sure if we would get in but good chance. Some of teaching is done in mixed year groups.

We need to visit schools B and C and find out what their policy is in relation to summer-borns.

Basically, our dilemma is this: do we go for a school we like but start him very young, or delay him entering for a year but potentially have him go to a school which isn't as good? (I should stress that none of the schools in question have a bad reputation - we are lucky that the choice is between good and better.)

Reception should be essentially the same as nursery with the emphasis on learning through play. If he can cope with nursery he can cope with Reception.

School A needs to be reminded that a blanket policy of refusing to allow summer born children to start Reception a year late is illegal. They must consider each case on its merits and decide what is best for the child.

There is plenty of evidence that summer born children tend to perform less well than other children. Unfortunately, the evidence that delaying school by one year helps is, at best, weak and at least one study found that delaying actually made things worse (although I wouldn't regard that study as conclusive). Personally I would say that getting the right school is more important but, given the lack of evidence as to the effect of delaying school, I may be wrong. And, of course, what is true generally may not be true for your son. Sorry - that isn't very helpful!

As poster above says, a blanket policy is illegal so you may be able to contest the academy you like best.

It also depends. maybe on why you don't think he'll be ready. We've agreed CSA reception start for ds this year and very relieved as he's really not ready, but bucking the system is hard with lots of potential obstacles.

There's a really helpful fb group - flexible school admissions for summerborns. loads of advice there

Age on entry is more important, really.
All research shows that the summer burns do worse at Gsce and A levels. And they are rarely as confident as the eldest kids in the class.
They do catch up, obviously... But it stays with them - being the youngest, less mature in so many ways, etc.

And I say that as a parent to a very able summer born. Top of the year academically, etc. Socially - she isn’t the same as her fall-born peers. Even now when she is in secondary school.
And same with other summer borns I have seen.

If I had the choice, even with hindsight of her academic performance now - i’d have held her back.
Nothing to lose and only something to gain.

I would focus on your child and choose the school that best fits their needs, not on broad generalisations about summer borns. I was the youngest in my class, birthday was just days before the cut off. I did great in school overall. I struggled a bit socially in primary (I think that had nothing to do with age though, more to do with personality) and I was not at the top of the class, more middle of the road. But that had everything to do with the school itself, which was very competitive and not very supportive at all with terrible pastoral care. I changed schools about year 5, I think as we moved. I started at a wonderful school and carried on there through secondary school. I was in the top set and in terms of exams definitely top of my class. I did well at university and have a PhD now. I definitely did not suffer for being the youngest, though it did suck when all my school friends started to drive and I was stuck getting rides from my mum still!

What made a difference for me was the right environment and pastoral care. So I would choose the school that feels right, regardless of when you start.

Thank you - this is all really helpful.

I'm on the Facebook group mentioned above but appreciate you flagging it!

I know a blanket policy is illegal - but that is effectively what the system is. They worded it as "we have to consider all cases but we've never granted one yet". They were clearly trying to tell me there was no point applying as they wouldn't grant it. Hence why we want to take a good look at the other schools we're likely to be in catchment for.

We didn't start him in school nursery this September as we didn't think he was ready. He's quite young for his age, although bright.

My concern is also about the longer term - competing with kids a year older at secondary entry points, doing GCSEs at 15, A levels at 17.... I feel like I can't see how it would help him to start next year, and I can't think of reasons why I would regret holding him back to CSA if you see what I mean?

OP - think of it this way - what are your reasons to send him sooner rather than delay?
Why would it be better for him to be the youngest, especially if he is young for his age.
If you find valid arguments - then 👍....

Otherwise - absolutely nothing to lose by delaying.

I think it depends more on the child.

I have one DD born at the end of August and one the very start of September. The September one has struggled far more being the oldest in the year - she is bored and got fed up with the “baby games” being played by the younger children.

The August one has had no problems academically. A few of the more physical things were tricky e.g. pencil grip and skipping but schools are on this sort of stuff. Reception is about getting ready for learning.

Remember that at 11+ the scores are adjusted to take into account summer borns and by GCSE they will have caught up properly.

There are some great reasons to defer but don’t just do it because you can. Look at your son and work out if he’s truly not ready.

it depends on the child. both my cousins and i grew up in a country where school starts at 6. waaaaay too late for us, we spend school being bored out of our minds and consequency hated it. years and years of missery.
my oldest is summer born and was you g for his age, but delaying him would have been a disaster.
Have a look at your child and try to be objective .
i only know of one child successfully deferred around here, and he was severely pre-term with health problems (should have been november, but born in late august)

Disadvantages to CSA start
If you have to move school they may move him up
Starting secondary again you have to apply so could be declined

However at no point do SB completely catch up. Even up to alevel.

I completely disagree about nursery and school being the same.
The curriculum is but that is all (depending on the nursery/preschool).
Nursery literally free play.
Staff will help with PT.
May have to sit briefly maybe 10min or so for story.
Ours covered briefly the phonic sounds and numbers.

School
Should be PT and staff will not help directly
A lot of sitting (phonics/maths/assembly/lunch/stories/pickup).
Writing daily and covered A-Z reading and writing them by oct half term.
Being sent out of class for not sitting still.
Possibility of exclusion
Playground with 4-11yo.

In all honesty, if you can keep him at Nursery until he is 5 then just do that.

It is not just educationally that August born children suffer it is socially and emotionally as well. I am an August baby. When I went to school educationally I wasn't much different from my peers. Middle of the class for most things, top for some but socially and emotionally I was very young compared to the other DC.

When you are at senior school and nearly a year younger than your peers it can be massively difficult. You are either pushed into doing things you are not ready for or teased for being a baby. Also as you get older you can't do things others in your school year can. If there are age restrictions on activities then George who was 14 in September can do X activity and John who isn't 14 until August can't do it. It is quite dividing when you are at school if you are not allowed to do things others are allowed to do. Movies/Paintball, Climbing etc. This can be quite upsetting if George invites John to his paintball party and he can't go because he is too young to participate.

As an example at our local school DC had to redo their thumbprint on the school lunch payment system. All the DC in the year over 13 could do this without parental permission. All the DC born in July/August had to take in permission slips from their parents.

Very child dependent I would say. For DD1 end of July birth, we actually turned down a local primary as they were insisting she couldn't start full-time until the April of that year. She had been in a Montessori from 6 months and was very mature and able, but they just wouldn't budge so we had to go private. She didn't ever have any issues with regards to ability or maturity, not being able to drive in 6th form was the worst annoyance. DD2 who was born in April, had more issues both in terms of maturity and academics, but she has now caught up in Year 10, and is flying. Only my experience, obviously, but I am not convinced that the age is a barrier, it's much more nuanced than that.

Remember that at 11+ the scores are adjusted to take into account summer borns and by GCSE they will have caught up properly.

This isn't actually true. Summer borns underperform at GCSE. They're also more likely to have social issues, be bullied and be diagnosed with ADHD.

When you are at senior school and nearly a year younger than your peers it can be massively difficult.

I never quite understand this argument because it makes it sound like the class will be 29 September borns and an August born and of course that's not true. I was a July born and my group of close friends at secondary school had birthdays in October, January, May, and then three of us in July. So perhaps we did clump together because we were socially younger, but there was never a situation where I was significantly younger than all my peers and I don't see why there ever would be?

I think the school is the most important. Regardless of age, good teaching, empathetic staff, good facilities will have far more bearing than how old your child is. My son could have been held back, although as an April born that seemed ridiculous, but his birthday is the middle of the class. His best friend is one of the oldest and it's made very little difference. He's getting on great. I'm sure we'd have been less happy with a different school, even if he was the oldest in the class!

My other son is the end of the July, no way we'll hold him back either.

I was an august baby and 10 weeks premature, always did very well at school and well ahead of my peers, but I can say for sure that my rubbish primary school did me little favours.

Username3145678 - a rather sweeping statement that summer borns more likely to have ADHD, a genetically disposed condition.

something worth considering is your son's current and predicted physical size.
my closest friend did not defer her late born child, he was considered and treated very much like the baby in the class, and his behavior was always that of the class clown striving for attention as the academics were challenging. this was exacerbated by the fact that mom and dad are both under 5'4.
his immaturity compounded by his tiny stature was a huge problem. we lived in a small village and half the year he socialized with the younger class and was much more settled socially, half the year he socialized with his class mates and was always trying to act more mature but failing miserably (think drinking, smoking and sexual activity).
looking back his mother wished she hadn't registered him for that particular school year.

Thanks all - lots of food for thought. Our main issue is the wraparound care - if we choose a school which allows entry to reception at CSA, then we have to completely rethink our wraparound arrangements as well as childcare. My first choice out of the other two schools would be the smaller primary with one form entry, but the only childminder I found who will cover that was not someone I clicked with.

We would potentially also want to get him into school nursery for next year if we chose to start at 5, and that would require us moving childminder (lack of choice) - or me quitting my job and working from home, as I can't see how the wraparound care could work. It's such a headache!

OP, this is tricky.

If you knew that schools A is definitely better than schools B & C, then I would go for A and starting at 4.

But chances are that it isn't. Already the fact that they do not really consider each case (of delayed reception entry) on its own merits is a warning that they like to apply policies to the average; they might be a school where children are shaped to fit the expectations/policies rather than expectations/policies are adapted to fit the individual children.

Its good reputation could be built on anything, and have nothing to do with how good a school it is for summer borns.

And even if it is good now, it could change very quickly, with a change of head.

Whereas if you choose to start your child in reception at CSA, then you will know that this is (all else being equal) the better choice for your child, and it is highly unlikely to change (nowadays, it is becoming increasingly rare to make a child miss a year on changing schools - schools are meant to put the child into the cohort that is in the child's best interests, and it is kind of impossible to argue that missing a whole school year is in the child's best interest).

So I whereas I think that 'a better school' outweighs age at school entry, the problem is knowing if a school is truly 'better'. So what you are weighing is a possible advantage (good school) with a definite disadvantage (starting too young), vs a possible disadvantage (not so good school) with a definite advantage (starting at appropriate age).

It is hard because it is so hard to know how good a school really is. In reality, you can only say in hindsight - and only if you have experience of other schools to compare to, as well.

I have 2 ds's who have late July birthdays. Both started in their correct year. The oldest 1 now in yr 4 has been fine, achieving well, lots of friends (luckily there are quite a few summer borns in his class).

Youngest ds now in yr2 really struggled. Started full time then reduced it to half days for the first term. His behaviour was awful & luckily the head teacher, who is excellent, reassured me that his behaviour was his way of communicating that he wasn't coping. We listened & made adjustments & he's much better now, but I think school will be more of a struggle for him. Messing about when something is a bit hard etc. It's a real shame but other than taking more time to help him with reading, writing, maths etc I'm not sure there's much I can do.

I thought about pulling him back a year but I think that would be bad for friendships etc now.

Also my dd who has a Jan birthday struggles more socially than either of my ds do! So it's a bit pot luck!

Is there any way of finding out how many summer borns likely to be in his class?

@brilliotic, you are basically voicing my concerns about School A. We have appointments to see all of them over the next six weeks or so.

We applied for School A's nursery earlier in the year, but ultimately declined the place as we didn't think he would be ready (I feel like this was the right call). We had a long chat with one of the senior staff on the open day, and again once we were offered a place. Prior to applying, it was all total flexibility - I suggested that we could start him with, say, three mornings per week and shorter sessions, with a view to building up to the full nursery week by, eg, October half term but seeing how quickly he settled. All fine and dandy, advised to apply for mornings and explain why (naps).

So we were offered an afternoon place and told it was first come first served for mornings . And that he had to attend five days per week from the start, even if only for an hour at a time. I was concerned about the impact of that for our childminder, who would have had to manage it - it didn't seem fair - and neither we nor she were convinced he would be ready so we declined the place.

So my concern is that School A is all about flexibility and supporting the child - I think they will deliver on the latter from what others I know with kids at the school have said - but I'm not convinced on the former.

Incidentally, DP feels very strongly that we should go for School A, which he really liked on the open day, but I'm concerned he is not fully thinking through the issues and is looking at the short term hassle rather than the longer term benefit. He has also pointed out that we know a number of people with kids at this school and nobody has a bad word to say about it. Everyone praises the support available and the staff (it has been turned round in the last five years).

Unfortunately DP is not on board with my preferred option of going for DC2 and timing it for me to be on mat leave for most of the year before school, which would totally solve the wraparound problem .

And at present we don't know anyone with children in schools B or C....

The academy school would allow him to start in year 1 I assume as they don't allow out of year. That would mean he would be a whole year behind. I'm not sure that would benefit him in anyway as he would have to catch up and would be struggling in comparison to his cohort. Also state nursery would not be available if you defer him starting for a year, regardless of which school you choose to apply for.
I am a late summer born and I started school a week after my 4th Birthday. It was never an issue for me and I have excellent gcse and a level results. I was also one of the more mature girls in my primary and secondary school. Immaturity is something that is part of personality rather than when you are born I think.
In reception it is a continuation of nursery and learning through play rather than serious formal learning.
To start in reception your aim should be to get your child to be independent in tolieting, able to dress and undress himself, able to understand taking turns and sharing. Used to looking at books and being read to, singing nursery rhymes. If he can do all of that he is able to go to school and begin learning.

I would say school A sounds best, particularly as you can then keep the same childminder and not have 2 major changes in your little boy's life. Lots of children start school at just 4 and cope well.

I have similar deliberations over CSA. Im pretty sure i will request it for dc2 but
I have dc1 at the school already so it is that one only
Dc2 already has at least 4 friends who would be in non csa year (most of which are at her nursery too)
I dont want to increase the number of years between the dc.
Dc1 is also SB but not as late. She struggled a lot in yr r due to tiredness etc, we could nt do anything at weekends. And this lasted into yr 1. She was fine with reading but struggled a bit with maths. Was last on sports day etc.
We do know some kids in the csa year but have not gelled particularly with any yet.
Our childcare issues are likely to be that dc with hardly be in the same school for any years. Plus if we move eventually to get i to secondary then that is more years of driving dc2 about.
I think schools moving them up is a realistic concern as some HT are only interested in their own opinions. This could happen at secondary transfer/moving schools or even if the HT changes.

Completely disagree with pox

You can stay in nursery as the funding is up until 5yo. So all dc could stay in up until at least xmas of yr r. And SB the whole year.
Obviously maturity is relative to peers!
The list of things for a reception child will not mean they are fine. (Especially academically).
Something like 1/4 Aug born boys will not hit the EYFS writing target... I would think they probably could have done the ready for school lists though.

Personality does make quite a differenve though.

One little jul boy was crying at the end of sports day in year 1. Combination of tiredness/losing/heat/frustration. How he dealt with those is possibly impacted by age.

Naty
Something like 1/4 Aug born boys will not hit the EYFS writing target...

It's worse than that.
The statistics for 2017 (latest available) show that 64% of ALL summer born (so April-August, girls and boys) at least meet the 'writing' expectations at the end of EYFS. That is 36% - more than a third - that do not.
The difference between girls and boys in writing is 13 percentage points. Assuming that the difference is constant across the birth months, that would mean that 57.5% of summer born boys (April-August birthdays) meet the writing target, and 70.5% of summer born girls.
The average 'summer born' child has a mid-June birthday. The average 'August born' child has a mid-August birthday. That is an age gap of 2 months.
The age gap between average Spring and Average Summer born children is 4 months (mid Feb to mid June). The attainment difference in writing for those 4 months (the difference between Spring and Summer born attainment) is 10 percentage points. Again assuming that the attainment difference by age is equally distributed, that would indicate that August-borns vs 'All Summer Borns' (so those 2 months younger) means take another 5 percentage points off.

By that measure I arrive at the conclusion that about 52.5% of August born boys met the EYFS expectations for writing in 2017.

2017 was an improvement over previous years.

So, no, it is not 'something like 1/4 of August born boys won't hit their writing expectations. It's more like 1/2 of August born boys.