Would you send your bright September born to reception a year early?

[Triadpeta]

My Dd was born in August last year. DH and I were chatting about delaying her when she starts school (she's only 6 months so bit premature I admit!) as my cousin has done it for her son. By that I mean she starts in reception a year later, not putting her straight into Year 1.

A quick trawl on MN and it seems it can be quite a divisive topic. Many people seem to say that they're glad they didn't delay their bright August born as they are thriving in their year and would have been really bored in the year below, even though they are only weeks, if not days, older than some September children.

So does that mean that there are a lot of bright September kids who are also bored? And if so, would you want to have / have had the option to send them a year 'early' (i.e. when they were at the very end of being 3, almost 4) instead of them staying in nursery or preschool for another year?

I guess what I'm asking is it seems it's possible to delay a child but not accelerate them - would people want the system to be flexible in both directions, depending on what's right for the child? And if you have a September child who seems bored in their year, would you have done it?

Acceleration isn't really done these days because the evidence is that at the end of education it isn't beneficial.

The way the U.K. system is set up teachers are supposed to be able to teach appropriately for all the abilities in their class.

If a child is gifted and talented then in theory the school should make provision.

She's 6 months old ! so right now you have no idea what she is going to be like in 4 years time.

When we did the delaying process (prematurity meant he fell into the wrong year group by birth date) there was an option to apply to start earlier. I don't know how commonly it is done though.
Would probably be beneficial to some smart children who are already in full time childcare, but not for children who are in part time preschool and having the rest of their time with a parent.

I think if you have a bright child, they will thrive in school in the correct year.

Our DS is an August child. He is the youngest in his class, he is on of the top of his class. I could not imagine him being a year below, most schools cant teach the year ahead curriculum in their class. So the kids have to go at the pace of the class. They can take them occasionally for accelerated classes and he can bring home further on reading books as his "choose book", but mostly they follow that years curriculum.
He would be bored to tears- and i would be setting alot of work at home to keep him engaged and learning.

If you have a child that is not ready of course keep them back- most people i know who thought of holding them back are due to them either being emotionally or academically not ready for school, so of course give them time, but if not i would definately get them into school

You might have problems at the other end of their schooling due to the legal requirements about being in full time education until 18 (or 16 in Wales) though. And possibly issues if they wanted to go to college for sixth form due to insurances etc (I remember as a teen not being allowed to do an evening course in a college as their insurance wouldn't cover an under 16).

I think the uk starts too early, so definitely wouldn’t have been interested in accelerating entry.

in general I would like flexibility though and lower barriers to delaying by a year - so let children start the year they turn 5 or the year they turn 6 (effectively starting in September age 4 or 5) and provide nursery funding until they start school.

I have a bright summer born daughter and considered deferring as she started school during the tail end of Covid so hadn’t had the same social opportunities and preschool experience that she might have had otherwise and I was concerned that she wasn’t emotionally ready. In the end we sent her at 4 and reception was hard - she was tired, found the playground a bit overwhelming and struggled a bit with pencil grip in reception. She is now in year 2 and deferring her absolutely wouldn’t have been right - she is flying academically and is in a year 1/2 mix and very frustrated that she can’t have harder work. Socially she finds the year 1s quite immature. She has possible ASD which gives another angle, but she is much better in her current cohort than she would be in the year below, as when she’s bored she zones out.

All this depends on the child - some are ready and others aren’t.

I have one child who absolutely was ready to start reception one year early and was completely bored in their second year of preschool. They are in an independent school which really stretched them in their reception year. Now they are 8 and many others have caught up so they are not particularly advanced amongst their peers and I have no doubt others will overtake them as they continue to mature and develop
I have another (also autumn born) who really benefited from the second year in preschool and absolutely was not ready for school at the time when they just turned 4. They are in the same school, comfortable but were still developing in other areas through reception

Oh yes, I know - this isn't really about her, it just came up because my cousin was saying about it. We won't have to make that decision for a few years' time. I was just wondering in general what people's thoughts were about it

I think unless your child is extremely advanced or extremely behind...it's best to put them in the correct year. Works better for them socially/sports teams etc

DD1 was a bright summer born (and premature as well). Academically she was ready for school the year before she started and was definitely too big a fish to stay much longer at her nursery by the time she left - but socially and emotionally she was not ready for school at that point. She started with her correct age cohort, but socially she could have used an extra year to prepare - but would have been bored academically so it was a tough balancing act.

It's unlikely they'd allow that.

My Xmas born dd started nursery in January. After a term in nursery they put her into reception because the learning in nursery was too easy for her.

She could definitely have managed starting school a year early. My September born son was barely ready for school and turned 5 just after starting.

Children are all different.

I think in general I agree - especially in terms of sports where I think it can get quite messy. But I do wonder about those children right around the September cut off where they're essentially exactly the same age, but those born a week earlier have to go to reception, while the other stays in nursery. They're the same age but the expectations and workload are vastly different

So your dd is in the year above? How has she found it?

Its in the ruoes people can request for a child to move up/advance a year to stzrt early.
However they wouod need agreement in the same way as a csa start.
I do know a girl who went up to y2 for maths in reception. The mum was really pushy and had told the school all about the dc before they even started.

My dc has started at csa now y3.
It has been amazing. With the curriculum changes children are just being pushed too hard in y1. The youngest can hardly write so lose confidence.

My eldest now at secondary out of about 300 kids.
At 3 they were very bright. Could read fluently by 5. But out of so many secondary kids (who can be 9m older than dc) dc is coming out average. (Even with high sats results)
Overall in education what is more important is their memory.

I have an early September child and a late August child and they'll both be going in to reception in the correct year.

However, if it had been an option, we would've definitely considered putting our September child in the year earlier, which she should've been in based on her due date. We probably wouldn't have done it (as it might complicate things down the line) but it would have been a serious consideration. She was very ready and nursery said it would've been beyond great for her if it was possible.

My August child is still too young to apply to school but keeping her back a year just doesn't feel right for her and for us.

I was this child, September birthday, started reception 2 weeks before my 3rd birthday. Managed fine academically and socially. I was 6 before it was realised it wasn’t a good idea because I couldn’t sit the 7+ for an academic prep until a year later and stuff like sports and later uni might become an issue. So I did Y3 twice. That was boring. Then my parents moved out of London, I went to a state school for Y4 which was essentially doing Y3 again for a third time because the private schools I’d been at were working a year ahead. I was in Y6 before I stopped coming against repeated material. But it was definitely better to be in my correct year, especially for 6th form and being amongst the first to drive or legally go to the pub!

Absolutely. I have a bright September born, we live in a country where the cut off is on the 1st of October so she is one of the youngest in her year.

She is still really bored at school, I dread to think what it would have been like had she been delayed another year.

I've got a very clever September born child who is now in year 6.

He has coasted through primary school. Spends a large chunk of the day reading because he completes all his work quickly. His school simply don't have the time / resources to continually push him, not when they're dealing with so many other children who are at risk of falling behind etc.

But I still think it's important that he is able to interact with peers his own age. For me, my main concern is whether or not he is happy and if he has a good group of friends around him. Thankfully he's in a lovely "gang" of boys who are all very sweet characters and they look out for each other. That's pretty priceless!

In the rain surely you mean 2w before 4?
As sept usually start nearly 5.
August are 4y1 day etc.

My son is summer born. There's a high proportion of summer borns in his reception class, more so than autumn borns. I think delaying him wouldn't have benefited him especially as, it turns out in his class at least, most of the other children are closer to his age anyways. If he was born in September, I don't think I would have put him into the year above (for a multitude of reasons, none of which are due to academics).

No.

I do know a girl who went up to y2 for maths in reception

Did this only work whilst on reception though, as when the child moved up to year 1 they would then miss out on the year 1 work being done, whilst she visited year 3 for maths ??
Just curious how the school managed them throughout school.

That's really interesting, thanks. Have you seen any downsides to your September born not being accelerated? Is she unhappy or bored?

I’d say advancing is a bad idea. Far better to add extra curriculars than push a child forward out of age group. It imo stunts social development.