Summer born defer/delay of reception

[Userflower]

Just an FYI post as I've realised it isn't widely known/theres alot of misinformation out there.
If your child is born after 1st April they are classified as summerborn and can therefore start primary school into reception class at age 5. They will never have to skip a year and will stay with their adopted cohort throughout primary and secondary school. There doesn't need to be any reason to defer other than being summerborn.
It has become so common for parents to do this especially if their child is born in June, July or August. Who wouldn't want their child to be the oldest in the class rather than the youngest!?
For more info join the fb group:
'Flexible school admission for summer borns'

I have mixed feelings about this. I’m sure there are cases where it is better for a child to defer but in a lot of cases I don’t think it’s appropriate. A large number of my child’s nursery friends parents wanted to defer because they were anxious about school but they didn’t and their children are doing well. In any case our primary school does not allow it. My friends deferred their DD as she was August born. She now towers above her Y2 sister and is vastly larger and more advanced than her cohort.

The issue is children mature at different rates. And what is right at 3/4 may not be right at 8/9 or 15/16. But parents don't have a crystal ball so just have to make a decision on the evidence they have.

It would be better all round if Nursery and Reception were properly combined (since on the curriculum they are both Foundation stage!) So that the younger ones were not under pressure in their first term of school, perhaps combined with formally shifting the age range to August then July.

Does the 'go through with their cohort' apply to 11+ areas or do they need to sit the 11+ a year before they've covered year 5 content?

Can’t you see the contradiction there? The August born pupil would have benefited greatly from being in the year below.

I do think deferring is the best for some children and it’s good that it’s an option.
But I really think it should be a case by case decision based on the individual child, with most children not deferring. I know a lot of summer borns who were ready to start at just turned 4 and have had no problems in school (including myself as July born), being bored held back a year with younger children can have negative consequences.
My DD is April born so she technically could have been held back but she was so ready for school I never would have considered it.

It applies to 11 plus, the scores will be adjusted as if they were September born.

Nobody is “held back” they are starting school at Compulsory school age rather than months earlier.

Surely a better solution to the problem would be to have the age range run from April to March instead of September to August. Children would start school between four and a half and five and a half. That way nobody would be starting school just after their fourth birthday, and all of the children would be within twelve months of each other. There would still be older and younger children of course.

I have two June born boys who both started school just shy of 4 years and 3 months. I can see how being deferred would have helped them, but I can also see that it would have caused them problems too.

My friend was born 31 August. In the evening. She thrived at school, was Head Girl and is now a very senior nurse.

I agree with this as the solution.

Yes agreed that solution would be good!

Indeed…but this particular girls parents couldn’t accommodate that…pushing her to be even more disadvantaged

My eldest has a 31st August birthday. We never considered deferring, luckily, as she flew through school academically. Socially, she needed more guidance than some of her peers. By the end of reception she was reading like an 8 year old and now has a first class mathematics degree.

No one should automatically seek to defer their child's entry to school. I say this as a primary teacher, who once had two premature August babies in a year 1 class who were both very able. One even had multiple disabilities and was still outperforming many of her peers. Let's not underestimate what they can do, and I don't mean just in relation to academic performance.

That's pretty much how it works in Scotland, except that it's March to February and they start in August. Except that we don't have reception, so they all go straight into the equivalent of year 1.

It’s inappropriate for many children, my ds being one of them. He would have been bored rigid had he not started with the correct cohort, and is academically extremely able.
Many parents can barely afford childcare as it is, another year of nursery fees or limited preschool hours isn’t an option.
Unless there is a definite need due to Sen, or the premature baby situation described above, I just don’t see there’s any reason to defer. It just smacks of being precious, quite frankly. Infantilising kids when there’s no good reason does them no favours. Reception teachers are very good at what they do, get the kids into school and let them get on with it.

My birthday's in April and I went to school at 4, and one of my strongest memories of primary school is just how ready I was to leave at the end of year 6. I think it probably didn't help that I had the same class teacher two years in a row, but it honestly felt like every day was the same and I was beyond jealous of my older brother who was at secondary where they had different teachers for different lessons and got to change classrooms. I later moved up a year and did my GCSEs at 15 anyway. It would have been pointless to hold me back from starting at 4.

Yes, they have to accept as children don’t need to be in education until the term after they turn 5. But they don’t have to start to start them in reception. The school can start them in year 1 if they’re able to argue it’s in the best interests of the child but they would need to argue that children don’t learn anythin in their reception class.

These threads are always as controversal was ff v bf, crying out v cosleeping. The thread will be full of people justifiying either way that what they did was the best decision for their child.

Ick. The provision should be used as intended - if a child would genuinely struggle - not to confer an advantage. Suspect the govt will tighten up guidelines on this imminently, as it is doing for other forms of lost learning like (low quality) home education, flexi schooling and persistent absence.

The governments guidance is becoming more and more supportive of summer borns, they now have set guidelines and are currently conducting a survey of parents who have delayed starts for their children with the view of creating supportive legislation.

I guess the government have looked at the statistics and how it is not beneficial for any child to start school just days/weeks of turning 4

It is also possible to repeat the whole reception year (this is what we are doing). We didn’t defer and it turned out to be a mistake so we asked to repeat reception and the school agreed.

Not if there's no space in Year 1 at your chosen school. That school is under no obligation to go over PAN because you have decided to delay entry for your child.

I am late June born so always one of the youngest in my school year, not a problem at all.

@Userflower “I guess the government have looked at the statistics and how it is not beneficial for any child to start school just days/weeks of turning 4”

It was wholly beneficial for my 28th August child to start in her correct school year having only turned 4 a few days before. She is academically gifted. This is why sweeping statements like yours are getting pushback on here.

There are many children who would not benefit from deferring in the same way that many children would do better if they were deferred. It should be down to the needs, abilities and skills of the individual child and not just lumping them all in one bucket based on age.

I was born on 28th August so started school a few days after turning 4.

DS was born 1st August so, same again.

Both of us were top in classes from reception to age 18. DS is a biomedical scientist with a first. I've got a first in psychology.

So, is starting school early such an issue? From someone who has done that, I'd say no.

No but you can apply for reception. There is nothing stopping you from doing that.