Starting Primary school one year earlier than normal age.

[bobthemoggie]

Hi Lovely Supportive fellow parents,

Any experience, in the UK Public school, of starting the Reception class one year earlier than normal schooling age?

As per Local Council's policies, It seems that it's possible to start school either one year earlier or one year later than normal schooling age.

But I would like to find out the admission procedure in this case.

Cheers

Why would you want to send a 3 year old to school. Enrol them in nursery.

In Scotland you can apply for early entry (usually parents of children whose birthdays fall just outside the February 28th cut off). In my local authority no applicants have been accepted in 12 years. They just can’t cope.

If you want to apply outside of the usual year groups then you need to contact your council school admission team and ask for their advice. It is very unusual for pupils to be taught in a year ahead of their age, I’ve only come across one in 18 years of teaching. Surrey have a very comprehensive document on their website for example explaining how it works and what you need to consider and what they will consider - it isn’t just academics, it is social and physical maturity too.

It’s difficult and rare, mostly because there aren’t actually many benefits. If your child is far enough advanced for it to be even considered, they’ll still be way ahead of their year group in the next year up, but with the extra social disadvantages associated both with being younger and with being marked out as different from the beginning. Instead, you need a school that will properly differentiate its provision according to the ability of the child.
Even if the primary accepts it, there’d be no guarantee that the secondary you choose wouldn’t require them to move back to their original year group. It’s also a nightmare if you move areas.
I’d also argue that children who are academically advanced at 3 are more rather than less in need of really good quality play based learning. There’s no benefit to taking that from them by pushing them towards formal study too soon.

Admittedly, this was a long time ago, but out of the 4 children in our primary who were in the class above - only 1 actually stayed in that year group through the whole school system. One was moved up late, so did year 5 and 6 in the same year; one repeated year 6 as the local grammar wouldn’t take them early; one relocated and was forced to repeat year 5, then was moved back up a year, skipping year 6 completely.

Why would you, and I say this a parent of a child born right at the beginning of September and is very academic, but it is now only she is in Yr 7 that she is finally making friends with people on the same level as her, as you have a wider range of children. But I do not think she would have coped being a year younger then her classmate emotionally which is as important as being academic.

Why on earth would you want to send a 3 year old to school?! Use a nursery!

@user1474894224 - Not sure how does funding is related here.
Anyways, like everyther child, late starter or early starter child's also gonna finish the education in 13 years.
Besides, working parents mean, they are indirectly paying through their income & local taxes isn't it?
One more, taking everything on 'funding' why don't we create a more Private sector market in Schooling and healthcare etc.. So that everything don't have to be judged from 'funding' stigma , as working people will afford to pay for themselves if sizeable private market is present. Thanks a lot.

@user1474894224 Not sure how does funding is related here.
Anyways, like every other child, late starter or early starter child's also gonna finish the education in 13 years, costing the same amount of money.
Besides, working parents means, they are indirectly paying through their income & local taxes. isn't it?
Apologies but one more, taking everything on 'funding' --why don't we create a larger Private sector market in Schooling and healthcare etc.. So that everything don't have to be judged from 'funding' stigma , as working people will afford to pay for themselves if sizeable private market is present. (Like for Grocery shopping working people don't have to worry about 'funding stigma' of ration funding as ample private market options are present like- Sainsbury's, Tescos & Asdas. Also, in case of property working people fund it 100% from their earning & individual mortgages as the broader private market is available) Thanks a lot.

That update makes even less sense than the original question. Children are entitled to full time education from the beginning of the year in which they become five and not before. You can enrol your child in a school Nursery class (if there are spaces) so they will be in the school itself but it will probably only be part time.

Children with summer birthdays are already at a disadvantage to some extent, emotionally and developmentally, compared to a child who reached five at the beginning of September. A year is a very long time in the life of a child that young. You should not even try to put a three year old in this position.

Bit confused, do you want the child to start school early in order to get “free” childcare?

I'm sorry but you really don't have any idea what you're talking about. Leave your child in nursery and let them start at 4.

I went to school a year ahead and went to Oxford. I was clearly extremely bright and it didn't help me at all. It is a nightmare for sports and especially once they leave school and can't go to some universities/medical schools as they aren't old enough.

Also you sound as though you're whining about childcare costs. Don't have children if you don't want to pay for their care.

Also with this private sector argument...if you don't want funding to be an issue then go and pay for a private education and do as you please.

Phone up your local council and ask :)

They are eligible for school from September after they turn 4. They aren’t entitled to start early. And as for 13 years education - in the old days a proportion of kids who went early/skipped a year then redid a year going back into their ‘proper’ year so had an extra year in school.
As for taxes, you pay those regardless of if you have kids in school etc so not relevant.
If you want the freedom to choose to send early, probably best to look at the independent sector.
But as everyone else had said - make sure you don’t sacrifice social and emotional wellbeing for academic advancement.

OP, are you really saying you want your child to start Reception aged three?

She wouldn't necessarily be 3. My son was 5 when he started school, and his younger brother will be too (birthdays first week of September). However, I am not aware of any process under which this is possible. Certainly not in either of the LEA's I have lived in. Nor would I have done it, tempting as it would have been to save ca. 10k on nursery fees (20k for both of them ). Academically my son was ready a year early. Socially, he was not.

A friend started her son at school this September 2019 aged 4. He’d only had his 4th birthday at the end of July so was barely 4.
She said she was starting him as he said he was bored at nursery!
The school have taken him at that age into their Reception Class.

@MC68 But he had turned 4 before the end of August so was eligible for Reception entry . Not same as op describes.

@MC68 the child was at school age. Nothing out of the ordinary there.

@MC68 that is normal school starting age. They start school the academic year they turn 5, and academic year is from September 1st. So a child could turn 4 on August 31st and still start school a week later. To start school a year early, if it were possible, the OP's child would be anything from just turned 3, to just turned 4 (as term usually starts a week into September).

OP, funding is a factor because the school will need to cover the cost of having a child in class who isn't eligible for funding. So either the local authority will have to arrange extra funding, or the school will have a child without funding to cover the associated costs.

It was a popular thing to do around 30years who when nursery schools were few and far between, lots of towns only had playgroups no care for working mums and dads so it was a good option to pay for school for a year, but I think generally they still started the reception year again the following year at a state school.

Even if you do get an early primary place, there is a high chance that most secondary schools will refuse to admit a younger pupil so you may find your child held at Yr6 for an extra year

Op if you want to privately fund your child to go into education at 3 (why???) you'd have to look into private, and then not even sure they'd take you.

For state education, they'll not take them early as there's no reason for them to start education early, whereas there IS a reason for them to start late.

However I repeat what the other posters have asked, why?