starting summer-borns in reception at 5, not 4

[lingle]

Is anyone out there wanting to defer the start of their child's education by a year? have you been told that if you do this your child will be forced to go straight into Year 1?
I've been investigating this in the Bradford LEA. There is a clear right here, recognised by the Council executive, to defer entry for summer-borns by a year and place them in reception. A friend of mine has just "taken the plunge" and done it and had no trouble at all with school or Council. The Council did try to remove the right (it creates admin for them). Various headteachers in the area objected: one described it as simply "cruel and inappropriate" to force children who are not ready into formal education at 4. Luckily this proposal was rejected.
I suspect that where LEAs try to force deferred children straight into Year 1 there could be a legal case: the statutory school starting age is 5, not 4.
Anyway, as you can guess, I'm mum to an August boy. I've lived abroad and seen the ill-disguised shock on faces of my old friends there (even in places like America where you would expect them to be pushy) when I tell them he is due to start school at 4 years and 10 days. I've also seen how hard the children work in reception at his school. And I've read the evidence of how few August children are at University compared with autumn-born children. So I'm prepared to fight for flexibility for my second son.

I'm pinning my hopes on Sir Jim Rose's investigation into increased flexibility for summer-borns: his report is due out in October. The Secretary of State specifically briefed him that lots of parents want their summer-borns to defer entry. And the government now accepts that, while some summer-borns thrive for starting school at 4 years, many, particularly boys, never catch up and are affected for life.

If anyone wants links to the Jim Rose briefing or to the report from the Institute for Fiscal Studies on long-term affects of going to school too early let me know and I'll dig out the link. The consultation period for Jim Rose's report is unfortunately finished - I wasn't on this forum until recently, otherwise I could have spread the word. His recommendations wouldn't come into affect until a few years' time.
They have flexibility in Scotland already I believe. Let's hope we get it in England too.

I have an early Sept dd and a May ds. My son started in January which seemed about right. He has always struggled a bit at school (was assessed for autistic spectrum issues and is dyslexic) and was considered a slow maturer. dd was very frustrated as nursery as all her friends went into reception and she was left behind. I would have been quite happy for her to start the year before. But she is a very compliant, helpful little girl who loves to please so ideal in any classroom, where ds is fairly disruptive. Now we have moved to the States she is considered to be in the next age group as they use the calender year. So they are both closer the the mean age in their classes, however the same patterns are showing. ds is struggling and dd is thriving. I think although age is important, temperament and aptitude are really important too.

it's reassuring to hear that summer born dcs often seem ok. ds is just 2 (april baby) and although i know he won't be the youngest child by far i'm already worrying about him not coping when he starts reception. i'm just keeping my fingers crossed that there are a lot of children in my village that were born september 2005 - aug 2006 as if there are enough the school has 2 intakes - one in september and one in january. i'd much prefer him to start in january.

I'm in Scotland and have exercised our right to defer ds2 as he's a January birthday which means he will start P1 at 5.5y. A colleague put her Feb daughter in at 4.5 and has regretted it ever since. Not because she isn't bright, coping etc but she is nearly always bottom simply because she is age-appropriate and as the very, very youngest that means being last. She will be last to turn that year's age every year, last to go to Rainbows, Brownies etc, 11 when she goes to senior school, last to learn to drive and just 17 when (if) she goes to University (we do one fewer year in senior school). I know that someone has to be last but to have it as your start in life and then your constant catching up to the next thing must be quite disheartening.

It was partly because he's a boy and a bit of a homebody that we kept him at home for another year, but mainly for the advantages of being older into secondary and tertiary education. There's no rush!

having moved to Leeds from Scotland when DS was three, I was horrified to find out that I had to register him for school for starting in reception the following September. I looked into deferring, but was also told he'd have to go straight into year 1. There didn't seem to be a lot of point in that, and I didn't want him to miss out on reception year as I think it's important for overall development adn the introduction to school life.....so he started reception at 4.25 years. He really struggled to begin with and it's only now, since about Easter term of Year 1 that he has started to show his true potential. His teacher says she has a group of what she calls her "booster boys", all summer born, and all struggling behind the rest of the class. she has been doing extra stuff with them to try and get them up to speed.

I would welcome the right to defer reception till they are 5 for summer born children.

In Scotland he would have started P1 the August after his 5th birthday as children there start in the calendar year they are five, not the academic year.

Is there a petition about this? I'd gladly sign, as I will have to go through this again with DD who is a June baby.

I have an August born DS and he has always struggled in that all his teachers have considered him to be brighter than his exam results show. He is now in Y12 (AS Levels) and we expect that he will have to retake his A Levels as he is still about 6 months to 1 year behind where he should be. His elder, March born, brother didn't start school until he was 5 and has sailed through academically despite having "missed" a potential two terms of Reception. I think flexibility would be great - one of DS' friends was born on 31st August and was always top of the class so in some cases holding back a child is not necessary.

FWIW, me, my sister, my dad and my nephew are all August babies.

My nephew got all A's in his A Level

I have a first class hounours degree

My sister has a first class honours degree and a distinction at masters

My dad has a first class hnours degree, and two masters degrees.

We all started school when we had just turned 4.

I think that while there may be a slight disadvantage at the start it all evens out at the end.

I'm interested to know if there is any research on outcomes for autumn/summer borns? I might have a look but does anyone else know already?

just wanted to add that I was barred by the LEA too, from starting DS in reception at 5; he has an August birthday and was not ready for school, but I was told I'd have to put him in yr 1 which obviously as a loving parent you just won't do to your child.

I really do feel that many summer born boys DO suffer for starting so young. My ds is in year one now and will still be five when he LEAVES year one; and there are some, particularly girls, who are already six and their development is so way ahead it's not true

My ds also has some physical difficulties so it has been doubly hard for him; any child with some 'extra' needs is even more disadvantaged IMO

We have luckily got a very confident boy who does not seem to have been ground down by his difficulties but his 4 yr old cousin, now in reception, is having a dreadful time and hates school - it's just such a crap system and yes we NEED flexibility for our children; it needs to be based on what's best for THEM rather than what is best for the school, eg getting names on roll in order to claw in the funding!

Yes, WilfSell, it used to be thought that the difference went away after a couple of years but there is now clear evidence that summer-born boys suffer permanent damage for going to school too early (see Institute of Financial Studies Report cited earlier). The key finding is that there are far fewer July and August borns than you would statistically expect entering Universities. This is statistical evidence: ie it says nothing about what whether a particular child will thrive or suffer. And the fact that some August children thrive doesn't weaken the evidence.
Lackadaisical, I'd start a petition if I could think how to - maybe via the Downing Street site? Anyone done this?
I've just come back from holiday with old friends in the Czech Republic whose daughter goes to Kindergarten and will start school at 7 1/2 (highly educated parents). When I told people that my youngest was supposed to go to school at 4 years they said "that's absurd, hold him back". But what truly shocked them was when I told them about the forcing of children into Year 1. Anyway, in the Czech Republic, the rule is that you start children when they are ready, and it's up to you whether that's 5 or 7 or even 8. No-no-one has ever suggested that you should make your child suffer on the grounds that "someone has to be the youngest" - not since they became a democracy, anyway.
I feel so angry on behalf of the mums who are regretting being forced to start their children so early. Maybe I will start that petition......

DS1 (August baby) now in year 2 has struggled socially, emotionally and intellectually for nearly three years. It is only now that it is starting to come together for him - just before he starts his new school in September - hurrah!

DS2 (May baby) is in a class where about half the kids are summer babies so they have actually worked them less hard. Great for DS2, bit of a nightmare for birthday parties as they all turn 5 at the same time .
He is fine, though very tired.

I am the mother of two summer borns and a spring born.

My son, (10th July) struggled in all ways possible for the first three years of school life. He is very bright, but I hoiked him out of school at Easter of Year 2 after his teacher told that "unless he pulled his socks up, he wouldn't even get level 1 on his SATS". (erm...bovvered? I think not). I didn't want him to feel like a failure right from the get-go. Whatever academic year he has been in, he has wanted to be in the year below. I would honestly say that he has not "caught up" until this year. He is now 14 (15 in July) and in year 10. The only reason he is not a failure is that we have extremely judiciously chosen his schools since he was 7.

Second child, April birthday, now 13 and in yr 8, is a complete academic high flier. Never had a problem, ever. Don't know whether it's the extra age, or superior levels of organisation, but she has always sailed academically and socially.

Third child, 27th July, now 10 and in yr 6, was very small and young for her age for ever such a long time. We actually held her back in nursery for an extra term, so instead of starting reception at 4 yr 1 month, she was 4 and 5 months. Best.decision.ever. She gained in confidence, arrived at school already reading (which further boosted her confidence in a class where she was the smallest by several inches), and let her feel a little less lost.

She was still struggling (socially mostly) at school for the first three years, although she is superlatively bright. Was unhappy, bordering on depression, completely switched off school. I was really really concerned about her at 7. Again, judicious choice of school (really laid-back common-sense environment) for 4 years now, and she's ready to fly (flew into a very academic selective senior school). If she had stayed as unhappy as she was, the picture could have been very very different. I just thank my lucky stars for finding the school we found.

Without it, 2/3 of my children would be branded academic failures. You really can't divorce happiness from academic success in children.

I am so heartened to read all your postings - makes me feel not alone. Have July born boy/girl twins having to start school full time in our LEA in Sep. DD loves nursery and am confident will be fine - DS hates it and cries. School they will be going to is small and all parents love it, but when I raise concerns about how DS will manage they are dismissive. When I collected them from 'tester' morning yesterday had usual tears and tantrums from DS. When I asked how he got on I just got - fine. When I pressed further I waas told he cried on and off and tyhen teacher went back in. Found his packed lunch barely touched. Makes me so cross in his behalf. I would love to hoik him out but with DD not appropriate. I know he will always be unhappy.

So sad to read these messages about how the system is damaging children. I feel complete rage about marmadukescarlet's situation in particular. It is outrageous that the LEA will not follow guidance from the child's doctor.

I've also heard that, incredibly, your child is more likely to be diagnosed as having special needs if born in summer - logically, this means that a significant proportion of those diagnoses must be wrong, and must be influenced by the fact that summer-borns are being pushed too far too early.

Duchesse, you sould like a great mum. Have you had to go the private school route to protect your children though? From your post it sounds a bit like it.

I feel so angry about this stupid system and wish parents could be empowered. The trouble is that, unlike other groups (parents of special needs children, faith groups, etc) parents of August-born slow-to-mature kids don't form a natural community.

Unfortunately Lingle that is the case. Anecdotally, from a glance at the "age at 1st September" list they pass out at Son and Daughter 1's senior school, there is a surprisingly high proportion of summer borns there. Either people with 9 grand a year "to spare" tend to have babies in the summer (hahahahaha at "to spare"), or all those summer borns are there for a reason...

that's fascinating. I wonder if any other private school parents have noticed a high proportion of summer-borns.
If I'm driven (which I hope I won't be) to checking out the private schools in our locality I will ask......

You do save money on the extra year of non-childcare for a summer born so perhaps that should be saved and spent on the extra tuition they will need in the state scheme. My daughter has three summer borns (all July and August) One girl and two boys all have degrees and one of the boys got a first and they all went to state school (non-grammer) but had plenty of extra tuition. One now high flying trainee accountant in London. My sister was born in June. I was born in October and she has got a better degree than mine. I think if you help them and support them. I think it may be that summer borns get more help from their parents in the early days this should help. My DS struggled at first but is quite hard working now as a result in Year 3 and much better behaved than some of the older kids who do not pay any attention.

Should have said my aunt and not my daughter. Would be very young grandmother of kids in their 20s!

We are in Scotland and our 2 oldest children are Feb birthdays, meaning we could start them at 4y6m or 5y6m - both went at the older age and we have never regretted it for a moment, they both benefitted hugely from the extra year in nursery and are doing very very well at school.

Feel nuts commenting on this cos dd2 is a Nov birthday meaning she will start in Aug at age 4y9m and I am freaking out that she will be too young!

I like the flexibility we have up here - you can do it by individual child and dd1 at least has a friend in her class 13 months older. I'm glad we did it this way though.

lingle, thank you for being cross on my behalf the whole situation is bonkers for SB's.

For my DS being nearly a year younger and having a year's developmental delay means he will be (in a state school) developmentally/educationally nearly 2 years behind the other children in his class. Also I live in the countryside where they have tandem (2 years in together)year groups in one class - so the oldest child in his class would be up to nearly 3 years in advance of DS' development.

I wouldn't be at all surprised if SB's are more likely to be DX SN, as emotional maturity/social skills can have affect all areas of learning. Let's hope it doesn't have a too negative effect on their self esteem (to be unnecessarily labelled) and that they come into their own as the gradually mature.

Dh & I both born in September. We are both teachers. We had a sex window each year start in December and continue til June at the latest for TTC. How calculating! But... it is all because we a re totally aware of the problems that some children may have with starting too early at school - see it all the time in class and i teach only 6th form

Yogabird I do think it would be a sad world if everybody did that though. It is writing off anyone with a summer birthday. Do you think Tony Blair has done badly considering he was May or Paul McCartney May or even Mick Jagger (I believe he was August. When they were kids nobody bothered about when they were born. My DM (May) did better than my DF (Jan) at school. Are we trying to breed a superior race or children that may have other talents and not just be academic. Believe me I sometimes wish I had not been academic and had done something practical such as graphic design and I would have had a job I enjoyed with the same amount of money, not the boring job I am stuck with.

I'm so glad I found this thread!!

My Ds2 is a may birthday and just turned 5. He started reception last Sept. I didn't want him to go, I knew he he wasn't ready, but had no choice in our LEA.

He was immediately put in the 'bottom group', has said recently he is 'not clever' and his tecaher has commented that he is not ready for Yr1.

I have been to look at a private school that will let him start again there in reception this Sept.

DH and I now have a dilemma. Do we take him out of the school of which we and his older brother are part of the community (catholic school) and Dh thinks he will just 'catch up' and 'do Ok'. I on the other hand don't want him to go through school with a constant struggle against this inbuilt disadantage.

Ther MUST be more flexibility, parents can judge whether they are ready or not.
thanks for thr links they are really helpful!!!!

I will sign any petition.

Those saying your sumer born dc's or you are/were fine is great, but it doesn't disprove the statiscs and evidence which proves that there is a general and signifcant disadvantage for summer born boys.

Does anyone know why they did away with starting children in January or at Easter as well as September depending on birthday?

I was wondering the same thing evenhope - when my two started (1993 & 1995), our area was still not taking them until the term after they were 5, but they had 3 intakes.

DS was 5 on 28th December, which counted as the term before, so he started in January, aged about 5 & a week and had two terms in reception.

DD was a February baby & started after Easter, so she had one term in reception & went into Year 1 in September.

For summer born children who were 5 between April 30th & the start of the September term the parents could choose whether they started in reception in April or went straight into Year 1 in September.

A couple of years later they switched to starting children in the term in which they were 5, but still kept to the 3 intake system, but I don't know when or why they moved to the once a year system.