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'

There's nothing stopping you from applying, no, but there's also no guarantee that your application will be accepted by your preferred school.

Information sharing is important, but it's important that the information shared is correct. It's not as easy as just deciding that you want to delay your child's entry to school and it does vary area by area.

As long as you speak to them in advance. They can only refuse if they argue reception year is irrelevant. Some times is means a few emails but it isn’t as difficult as people like to make out on MN.

In your experience.

And yet on this 35 page thread on a very similar topic we have posters saying they had to submit medical evidence to support their viewpoint that school delay was in their child's best interests.

https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/am_i_being_unreasonable/5330936-unfair-to-defer-summer-borns?page=35&reply=144276730

@Userflower I completely disagree that this has become commonplace at all. I skimmed the thread-assume you are in the UK because you say reception?

One thing I will point out is that they have to play sport in their biological age group, not school year so they won't be able to play in school matches etc out of year. So a timetabling problem in later years.

This may not be a concern but later in your DC (PFB I am assuming) will be out of sync with their peers-going to clubs, driving, travelling etc and they will be going to Uni a year later-they may resent you for all of these things.
I don't know if you live in an 11+ area but this may complicate that too.

I had a summer-late July DS and he happened to be in a very old year-huge number of sept-dec birthdays.
Reception is a gentle introduction to school and I def think the only person I knew of who talked about wanting to defer was told their child would go straight to year one. They decided against it!

Edited to add that I think it is short sighted to look at it only from the perspective of how they will be at four-but to consider how it will impact them the whole way through their schooling.
They also might feel as though you didn't think they were able enough when they realise they were kept back and undermine their confidence.

There’s a thread on this every other day. It’s pretty widely known

April isn’t summer. Unless there is extreme prematurity or SEN, delaying spring born children is just playing for an advantage at the expense of other children.

Children who start school when they are supposed to should not have to be in a class with children a year and a half older than them.

It’s not that common. Over a third of DD’s class are summer born and only one is from the year above, 1 out of 12 or so of them. They’re year 2 now.

I'm a summer born, as is my brother and both ny parents. I'm glad I wasn't deferred, wouldn't have wanted to be with the wrong age group.

Friend of mine has a September born and tried to go the other way. She applied to our school for him to start a year early so a couple of weeks before his 4th birthday rather than his 5th. LEA refused the request but deferring clearly isn't right for everyone.

It’s not great to defer. Where does this end. Now summer borns who don’t defer and stay with their intended cohort will be 17 months younger than some kids rather than 11.
unless your child is not toilet trained and is speech delayed, then really, what is the point of deferring? You’re holding them back.

‘Edited to add that I think it is short sighted to look at it only from the perspective of how they will be at four-but to consider how it will impact them the whole way through their schooling.
They also might feel as though you didn't think they were able enough when they realise they were kept back and undermine their confidence.’

this is a really good point @MrsMitford3

its short sighted. All well at 4 but the op has focussed only on all the documents talking about how September borns do better, without thinking around it.

what message are they giving their child. ‘Yeah, I didn’t think you were clever enough when you were 4 so we put you in with the year below.’

because although you can talk fluffily about development etc, I know teenagers - they can be black and white, self absorbed and tend to look for criticism to confirm their narrative they’re not good enough.

I think this deferring which has taken off in the last few years to all and sundry, will come back to bite many in about ten years time.

Yes I absolutely agree it’s short sighted to only think about reception. Statistically summerborns never catch up with their autumn born peers, right up till A levels. So the benefit of delay is seen right through education.
Similarily year 6 classes often do visits to secondary school in the final term, a summer born would be age 10 on these.
I note a lot of opinions on this, mainly from those who’ve sent their summer borns to school at age 4 - I sense slight defensiveness. Perhaps they didn’t know this was an option or wonder if maybe their child would have been better in the year below for academic and/or social reasons.

All I can say is I’m very pleased the government have clearly recognised this issue for summer borns and are looking to legislate to stop summer borns being on the back foot.

I sense children starting school currently in June, July or August (or summer borns) just after they turn 4, maybe some of the last to do so before the big changes!

It was highlighted in our council guidance that they cannot stop a deferred pupil leaving school at the end of Yr10. That is something parents should think about.

A

There's also the situation that we don't really know how it's going to pan out in the future.

If there had been the option to defer ds (summer baby) then I would have done. he was young for his age and not ready for school. I reckoned he was about ready to start summer term in year 1.

But now he's year 13, I can tell you it would have been the wrong thing to do. He would have been bored, lost concentration and would have not have ultimately benefitted. He commented the other day that he'd probably have opted to stop school at 16 - so before GCSEs because he'd have been frustrated at the others his age having the freedom of 6th form. It's not that he would have done badly; he got a good set of GCSEs (12x levels 5-8) and is now doing A-levels.
It would probably (though not definitely) made his first year or two easier, but it could have been at a cost for later.

Having seen children upset and distressed at watching their friends go up whilst they stay behind repeating what they already did wouldn't do it unless child was actively struggling with school readiness.....which is not academic.

I’ve seen this from both perspectives as a secondary teacher…

I can absolutely tell the student whose birthday is August 31st in their year because they are almost always the most immature in terms of silly behaviour/socialising/friendship dramas etc. Occasionally academically they stand out but not always.

HOWEVER, you are not solving a ‘problem’ for your child by deferring them, you are just presenting them with a new set of hurdles to overcome. The (extremely few!) students who are in a deferred year stand out, not because they are academically able or more able, but because they are usually miles apart in terms of interests, sporting abilities, or just general social elements… students always have a funny ability to compare ages, birthdays, who is turning teenager first… those who are deferred feel left out and slightly ostracised. There then comes teasing unfortunately.

I don’t think deferring solves anything, just creates new challenges to overcome. In my experience students who are August born, by the end of Secondary, have grown up enough alongside their peers and ‘grow up’ at the right point. Those who defer, struggle because whilst their year group turn 16, they are looking at 17 and learning to drive…. But can compare this with none of their school year peers? That’s tough. I would’ve hated to be 18 and going out for a drink… with nobody from my school year.

These decisions need to be made with the child’s entire school years considered (4-16/18) rather than just Reception year.

@moanafanI am glad it is becoming so common then, hopefully the delayed children won’t stand out as much when they reach secondary school

It definitely isn’t becoming more common. I understand you have your research but it is still going to be a form of segregation amongst a year group. I think unless there are exceptional circumstances it shouldn’t be agreed, as for most it isn’t needed.

It’s becoming a lot more common. Applications to delay summer borns have increased 250% year on year from 2021. This is a freedom of information act request from the government.

The government is looking to add supportive legislation as it’s become so common and it’s unfair on those who are not aware it is a possibility

Where do you see it as so common? One or two in a whole school year isn't common. Some years non have done it. The good news is that with so many not being school ready everyone should fit in.

But that means nothing it could be 1 child now 250 not many in the whole academic year.....you need actual figures.

I have the actual figures as well thanks and I can confirm how it is becoming.

You can access this data by doing a freedom of information act request

I think the real reason so very few people defer is because of the astronomic cost of another year of full time childcare.

Yeah definitely I agree I think this will be a huge factor. Funnily enough someone told me this week it’s actually cheaper for their family to have their child in nursery for the ‘extra year’ than school. As you continue to get the funded hours for deferred children and therefore it works out cheaper than the breakfast and after school clubs

I think we start kids too young but I also think it’s unfair to create a 17 month age range within a cohort. The Scottish system is better - they are all a bit older. My son started school a month after turning 4 and it’s been fine and he’s a happy confident little boy - but it does frustrate me when the 2 children who are 15 months older than him win every race on sports day - the gap is too big. I think they need to change the dates for all rather than creating such wide age ranges like it is now.

Yes I agree - the Scottish system would work better here