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.

In London most schools still have a twice a year intake, with birthdays from 1st Sept-Feb29th starting in September, and birthdays from 1st March - 31st August starting in January.

I wouldn't be that keen on an easter intake, one term in Reception is too short really.

Although DD was theoretically only in Reception for 1 term, in fact because the school had mixed-age classes, she was in a R/Y1 class for the summer & autumn terms & then moved in January to a Y1/Y2 class with a different teacher, before going in to a straight Y2 class in her last year at infants.

Whereas DS had 2 terms January-July in a R/Y1 class which then turned into a Y1/Y2 class in September, but stayed together with the same teacher, and then he moved for his last into another Y1/Y2 class with a different teacher.

Do any of you have any thoughts and opinions about my dilemma regarding private school and repeating reception year?

Any comments will be gratefully received, I'm in a bit of turmoil!

Ds3 is not 4 until Aug 29 and he starts reception on Sept 4th. I'm glad as well - he is ready and I think it would be really sad if he only got 1 or 2 terms in reception.

I agree with what someone else said - it's not all about academia anyway.

Let's not be writing off all summer born children - I know plenty of them that have done very well for themselves actually.

No one is 'writing them off'!!!!

But many are not ready for school, and we are saying there should be flexibilty for them.

If they are ready, then great they can go, and you don't have a problem. That doesn't mean that there isn't a problem for many other children!!!

LavendersBlue, Many private schools are not strict about school years so it's possible you could find one that would take your ds in reception though at this stage in the year depending where you live many will be full for reception in September. Obviously a highly selective school would not be a good choice and they probably wouldn't take him anyway, but if you can find one that has a fairly omprehensive intake that you like the feel of then your ds may well thrive there (with hopefully much smaller class sizes too). However you would lose the common school experience that he shares with his brother and you risk him feeling a failure for repeating a year. You are also pretty well commiting him to independent education throughout as it is unliklely he'd be allowed to transfer back to state without skipping a year. If you can make that commitment then I'd at least investigate what your options are.

Lavender- since my children have been in the independent system, they have always had children in their classes who are placed in the year below where they "ought" to be. (another friend even managed it with her severely dyslexic, tiny in stature, June born daughter, arguing her case on academic grounds; the child transferred at 12yrs 3 mth to Yr 7). All these children seem fine and settled and happy and without any of the hangups that UK people expect from children not placed with their immediate peers. In fact it seems to give them the fillip they desperately need, enabling them to feel on top of school work for the first time ever.

If you did decide to do this (and had I had my time over again I may well have considered this for my son), you will almost certainly find he is not the only one. And really, what difference between a child born August fraternising with fellow pupils who may be not more than a week younger, or with children born in June and a couple of months older? It's pretty academic really, as long as the child in question is happy yand settled.

In deciding what to do with your son, I would recommend examining what he has learnt this year- is it enough for him to sail in yr 1 (by his teacher's reckoning, probably not. Imo there is no sense rushing them through the foundation stages without them meeting the goals.

If he is not secure enough to cope well with yr 1 work, then I disagree most forcefully with those on here who have said that "academics are not everything". So immature summer born boys (in the main) are destined to become the road sweepers just because the system is too inflexible to cope with the 25% discrepancy between their age at the start of reception and their expected level of maturity? What rot!

Keeping him in reception and allowing him to feel confident about something may be the making if him. I will say again that I do not believe you can divorce happiness and academic success in children.

Forgot to say friend's daughter transferred into the state system in the year below where she "should" have been.

duchesse, two children have transferred to state from my dcs school and have had to skip a year. Our LEA is probably more strict on tha sort of thing than your friend's. The only area I can think of where being in the wrong year does make a difference is sports teams: in some competitions they have to be in the correct year which means they can be left off teams. Something else to consider perhaps LavendersBlue if your ds is sporty?

my friend's daughter has had problems with that now you come to mention it. I know that my friend did not find it easy to convince the LEA that putting her down a year was the way ahead. She had to go and speak to a panel.

I know our LEA is very strict on not allowing children to be 'kept back', which is a potentailly big problem if we opt for the private sector at primary, it will be hard or impossible to get him into Yr7 at seconadry.

I am really struggling to know what to do. I honestly keep changing my mind every ten minutes. I think, the social and community aspect is just as important so we'll keep him where he is and try to 'boost' him over the years.

And then I think, no, the disadvantage will be there whatever we do, we have to do waht is best educationally or we will regret it later.

my DS is very babyish for his age, still baby chub, and baby sounding voice. So I think that he is young in the class, and then young for his age anyway, it's like a double wammy.

I would love to start turning our anxieties/experiences into action here.

As mumsnet is a public forum, do people think it would be ok to write to the local LEA drawing attention to this thread? Is that ok with the mumsnet team?

We could also send it to Sir Jim Rose who is preparing his report to the government. I know the consultation period has ended but I think people still listen.

Or should we start that petition?

Or has anyone got a better idea?

Is anyone interested in communicating about this on a different web-group where we can exchange details and make an action plan?

Flexibility seems like such a no-brainer and there are no Scottish parents complaining about having the slightly older children in the class.

Please accept my apologies if any of these suggestions breach forum rules or etiquette. I'm still quite new here.