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?

Thanks movingnorthsoon! I think social stuff is more important too. Providing extension materials outside of school seems much easier than consoling a child who is unhappy and feels out of place.

I'm thinking about that too - that dd will miss out on a whole year of her very early childhood of carefree play if she goes to school when she technically can. While my friends dd who was born 10 days later in September will have it as a given.

Maybe everyone should go back to everyone starting the term after you're 5 like the old days. Although of course that's not perfect either but at least there wouldn't be such extremes in age

I have a September child who was very ready for school and a July baby who started after Christmas. Worked out fine for both . Youngest is January and he started in September and was absolutely fine.

It’s definitely a different story when it’s your own child as their benefit trumps any ideology!

I wish we'd had the choice. My DD is late October born, Year 6 and absolutely hates school because she's so bored. She struggles socially anyway (ASD) meaning that it's a place of boredom and anxiety for her. I wish we'd gone private where perhaps she would have been more academically stretched.

God no - leave where they are. GCSEs are not age adjusted. It pays to be the oldest. Also it's a huge advantage for sport.

That's a good viewpoint, although I'm sorry to hear your daughter is unhappy. Can you ask for her to go in to year 8 when she starts secondary school as it will be a time of transition anyway?

Very unlikely state schools would be allowed to accept September born a year early. You'd have to go private. Far better to be oldest in class than the youngest.

I have a DD who has a beginning of September birthday; she was due in August but hung in there for another few weeks.
She is very bright & enjoys academics. She could definitely have started the year she turned 4 & if she'd been born on her due date would have. As it was she had a whole extra year of nursery & started Reception aged 5. By the time she reaches Yr6 she'll be the oldest pupil in the school.
We're fortunate that she goes to a very small village school & so when she has advanced through the relevant year group work she can work with the older year groups & attempt work aimed at the upper years.
However, she hates PE/school sports - she's good at more alternative sports (archery, swimming etc) but not classic ball games or athletics. For this reason I do think her being in her correct year is beneficial.

I would like to give an alternative perspective. I have had 2 x autumn babies, and for me, parenting becomes an absolute joy around 4 years of age. They can chat and you’re not ruled by routine and food and naps. They’re great company and honestly, having that extra year of them at home was really beneficial for both of us. we had so many little adventures, just us. And don’t we have them to enjoy them? I did work 25 hours a week at the time. But we still had 2 days off together. Mine were at childminder or with granny, not nursery so never got bored.
decisions about starting school don’t have to be made solely around educational reasons.
If mine had been August babies I wouldn’t have hesitated to delay

I had an end of August born child who was accelerated to the year ahead in early primary. So some of the children in her class were almost two years older than her. She was put back into her correct cohort before moving to secondary. Please remember, it's not just academic abilities, it's maturity that's just as, if not more important.
Lots of parents talk about how their academically able child is bored in school, mine was never bored, I think they quite enjoyed 'easy' work.

In Scotland you've been able to delay for a long time (and children go to school.older anyway). All that happens is that there is an even bigger gap between kids that are extra old who come from families who can afford to hold them back vs kids who come from families who can't. There's a massive argument for starting school later than we do in the UK but there is not a good argument for allowing children to delay (except in the case of premature children).

I have 3DC, one autumn, one winter, one summer. The summer child took the longest to settle at school but as a teenager is the child doing the best.

There's no way I would for a second consider sending my 3yo to primary school.

My youngest will be the eldest in her class and start at 5y 2m, and I'm delighted about it.

My eldest is in the youngest quarter of her class and while she was well able for school and used to nursery etc, her immaturity in comparison to her classmates has shown on occasion.

Interesting question!

It was a long time ago, but DH was bumped up by a year. He did very well academically (coasted through school basically as he's very clever) but struggled socially - I think it's particularly difficult for boys if they're later to develop etc, especially if they're not very tall anyway, which he isn't.

We now have a summer born daughter, who seems pretty bright, and we're (probably) going to delay her entry to school.

I think she'd do fine in her normal cohort tbh, but out local school is very pushy and academic early on and I don't think it's ideal for development, so that is swaying the decision for me.

Lots of parents talk about how their academically able child is bored in school, mine was never bored, I think they quite enjoyed 'easy' work.

True of my children too!

Let them coast through primary school, is my view. It’s not just about academics at that age. There’s so much more to learn in terms of behaviour, school routines, social skills, emotional regulation etc.

Secondary is the time when they’ll be more challenged (and usually streamed) by which point very few people are still going to wish they child was accelerated.

Thanks for everyone's replies, really great to hear people's opinions and experiences, especially those who say they would have liked the option to apply early, I'm not sure I expected to hear that (although still a small number) so that's interesting.

I've fallen down a rabbit hole now of reading about birthdate effects so that should keep me busy for quite a while!

Nooooo don't do it. To start school that big taller, bigger, more confident with talking, personal care, fine motor skills etc. is SO MUCH better than pushing them a year earlier because they appear to you - their doting parents - to be especially bright.

I was that child - a September born, only child - who seemed really bright and advanced and my proud parents sent me off a year early, and I was always paddling frantically to keep up with my peers, even through secondary school.

I look at my oldest DC who is the oldest in their class, and it's so obvious what a difference it makes for them.

You're impatient, I get that, but your patience now will really help your child much more than pushing them in a year early. Do Kumon or Mandarin lessons now, if you feel that you want a head start on academics.

I have a very bright September born. He's thrived at school, there was definitely some boredom lower down the school years but the more school goes on the better it gets.
I know of a few who were accelerated and it's never ended well for them, It went wrong either in secondary or when they went to uni.

There is always going to be children who are the youngest. I think it is wrong to hold a child back because you could have a massive problem when the child is older ie resentment etc .

How on earth can a 6 month old be bright?

Don't all parents think their kids are bright?

I would wait till school age then decide being in nappies won't help

Indeed, someone has to be the youngest in the class, but is that really an argument to ban summer born deferrals? Not that you’re calling for a ban, but whenever I hear people say “someone has to be the youngest” there’s always the implication that deferring is wrong.

Fact is, hardly any families defer their children. The vast majority choose to send their summer borns to school after their 4th birthday. The fact a tiny proportion of children defer each year has very little impact upon the education system at all.

Not entirely sure what you mean about causing a massive problem, and children growing up resentful though.

I kind of wish I hadn't mentioned my Dd at all 😂. It's caused a bit of confusion but really it was just a way of explaining why I had started thinking about the august/September thing. She's an August baby so if anything I'll be delaying her not accelerating.

I don't think I said she was bright? She's perfectly normal for a 6 month old as far as I can tell but doing calculus she is not. Based on the absence of any bonafide geniuses in our family I should think she'll be perfectly and beautifully average.

Of course there's still a few years before I have to make a decision for her but this thread has definitely helped me focus what what people think about birthdates in education, which is sort of what I was after. And some have raised some great points which I didn't expect which is a bonus!

Yes. I'm fairly sure that children could be resentful of any number of things or none at all, so making decisions based on avoiding that is a bit crystal-bally. I guess it's the dice you roll!

That's a good point. In the same way that people say the youngest children 'catch up' I guess that means that it's likely the oldest children could 'settle down'. Streets ahead (and possibly bored) in reception but much more equivalent later on. Huh. Good point.

There will of course always be outliers, as some have already shared on this post.

I love this reply. They're only little for such a short time 😊