Summerborn reception

[Userflower]

I just wanted to share some good news, my friends child started reception this week (deferred summerborn so is already age 5). There are 7 summerborn children deferred in her class. There are no children born in July or August 2021, as they’ve all deferred to start next year!
Times are changing!!

Deferral made a bit more sense in Scotland as they don't have Reception year. Although I understand their new curriculum is more play based.

I asked about this for my end August child. I was told that I could not send them, as legally they didn’t have to attend school until 5, but that they would then just go straight into Y1 having not completed reception.

anyway, we didn’t do this. Initially you could tell the difference particularly with the older girls but he’s been absolutely fine and is now in secondary school and doing great.

Assuming we are talking after 2013, you were given incorrect information unfortunately. Which is kind of the point of the thread...

Summerborn children starting reception age 5 is gradually becoming more commonplace. This means schools and admissions authorities are becoming more familiar with the process and parents are not constantly just getting told "you can't do that", which is an incorrect and unlawful answer.

Interesting. He started in 2016. I’m glad I didn’t hold him back though. They change so quickly and, unless there are developmental concerns, I don’t think it should be necessary. As others have said, there’s always going to be someone who is the youngest.

Just to add, in deferral circumstances it seems unfair that the youngest is then also in a class with a kid over 12 months older than them so it’s actually making the disparities in the class even wider.

Children born between April and August can currently defer.

Reception being a gentle step up from nursery totally misses the point. Summer born children, particularly boys, are much more likely to fall behind academically throughout their education. So while it may not be the right decision for every child, there is sound educational reasoning behind it. This is why the government changed the admissions guidance for summer borns in the first place, it wasn't just a whim.

I don't think anyone is gloating and that is a rather unpleasant thing to say about parents who are just trying to make the right choice for the their child? Just because it's a different decision to the one you made. We all are just trying to do the best thing for our kids, surely?

My son is summer born who is now in Y3, having started reception at just turned 5. He had an "extra" year at an excellent preschool and loved every moment (it wasn't really extra, it just meant he got the same amount of time in a preschool setting as a Sept born child). He started school with a level of confidence that he absolutely did not have the previous year. We had multiple complex reasons for feeling that delaying his reception start was the best choice for him. So far we haven't regretted that decision and he knows he could be in the year above, but is glad to be where he is. His school report sits him well within the expected performance for his current year group. His reception teachers didn't even realise he was deferred until the school nurse wouldn't weigh and measure him due to his birth date.

Blindly lumping all parents who make this decision for their child as "holding them back a year" is lazy and reductive.

Well if you don't think it's necessary then obviously it isn't. Silly me!😆

The really canny (and fertile) parents seem to have got this sorted out about 5 and a half years before their children start reception, at about 4 years 9 months.
DC2 is an early summer baby. At his academically very selective independent school, he is one of only 3 children in the year with summer term or summer holiday birthdays. Just back, and the September birthday party invitations are rolling in… More than half of the children are born before Christmas.

The perfect explanation, thank you!

Yes September is the most common birth month in the UK so always lots of September birthdays!

Eh? I’m talking about my experience - thought that was the purpose of a chat forum. Hope your day improves!

Thanks all for your contribution to this thread, appreciate all views. I must say, I am
not being provocative but I genuinely cannot see any valid reasons (other than financial) why someone wouldn’t defer their summer born. Particularly given the data that supports it, throughout education and into adulthood!

Because children are different and some are more than ready for full time schooling earlier than others.

Considering its only be allowable since 2013, and not common for the first few years, how is there data for adults? The first data is only coming on for GCSEs.

You need to be firm in your decision for your child, as its now been made, but there is no way of telling whether uts right for all children.

The benefits are for life into adulthood. It’s not about being ‘ready’ to play in reception rather than pre school/ nursery. A shame parents don’t think long term.

I also think if I was so happy I sent my summer born in their correct year and I was super happy with that decision I wouldn’t feel the need to come on here and be defensive and comment when the OP doesn’t ask for an opinion on it. I sense a lot of parents thinking ‘what if….’

The government changed the rules as one of the findings was summerborns were more likely to experience anxiety and depression into adulthood. Their theory being, always having to ‘catch up’ and being on the back foot affects self esteem throughout the child and teenage years

Not all summer borns are playing catch up - one rule doesn’t fit all.

Well my mid-August born son, youngest in his school year (of two middle class university educated parents) wasn’t deferred and has been doing very well academically and socially. Interestingly his friends are generally the oldest in the year too.
It’s not always in the interests of the child to defer them. You have to consider them as an individual and make a decision not just assume summer born means they’ll be disadvantaged.
I say this as someone who planned to try and have a September born child but he was premature.

The data is for a cohort not an individual though. So yes there are consistent gaps on all sorts of measures, but if your august child is in the group meeting all the measures you can judge that for yourself. Not all summer born children are in the x%more likely to fail phonics, or be sen, or 6.r% more likely to not get 5 gcses. They might be in the other grouo who do just fine, pass phonics, arent mislabelled sen, pass gcses.

Well, if my youngest had stayed put as she was supposed to, she would have been born on the date my section was booked for at 39 weeks - September 15th.

Actually, it was my placenta that couldn’t keep going and she was whipped out on August 28th. Two midwives, my consultant and a couple of registrars all said it was such a pity we couldn’t have got to a few days later for school cut off!

They were stood round me discussing it as they were doing what turned out to be the final scan, debating if they could keep me in a monitor me for three more days so she wouldn’t have an August birthday. I wasn’t really fussed, I just wanted her out and safe.

Yes but the children are already on average 6 months older. No one is starting school at just turned 4 even in the correct year.

It wasn't clear from how your post was worded that you were specifically speaking about only your child.

"They change so quickly and, unless there are developmental concerns, I don’t think it should be necessary."

This sounded like you were speaking generally about summer born children starting school. Apologies if I misunderstood.

My day is going just fine thanks!

It's massively offensive that you think parents don't think long term.

You're being downright rude and goady. People like you actual stifle conversation on this matter - which benefits no child.

Seeing as children don’t legally have to be in school until they are 5 years old it would be far easier, and better for the children, as well as making it a more fairer and logical system if all children started school the term after their 5th birthday instead of their 4th.

But to be honest, no matter what system is in place there will be always be some kind of unfairness to some children and those children will sadly be at some kind of disadvantage.

Are summer borns at a disadvantage because they have to start school so soon after turning 4?

Or are they at a disadvantage because they are being measured against children who are potentially 12 months older than them?

Personally I think it’s the latter.

Based on how the current school system works there will always be a potential 12 month age gap between the oldest in the class and the youngest, and so in a lot of cases (not all) the youngest children will always be the disadvantaged group.

It’s not fair and you’re right, current guidance means that the Summer born children can avoid that scenario, but all that does is potentially expand the age gap between the youngest in the class and the oldest in the class.

However, I think in reality the amount of parents who have Apri-June born children wouldn’t even consider deferral. The number of parents who make that decision must be minuscule.

I imagine that is mainly only the late July babies and August babies who are primarily deferred, so although there may be some deferred children some Reception classes they are still only a few weeks older than the September borns.

Although I deferred my son he still went up to the year above for his maths and phonics levels as he is very bright, but emotionally, socially and maturity wise he is clearly ‘behind’ the rest of the class. The school have repeatedly spoke to me about moving my son up to the year he ‘should’ be in based on his academic ability, but if I did that, he would suffer in a lot of ways. When it comes to who is the youngest in the class and who acts the youngest (probably being viewed as being immature), he stands out like a sore thumb

School is about so much more than just academics and although I know he would probably be fine in that aspect if I moved him up a school year, I know the negatives wouldn’t be worth it in terms of how it would affect his confidence, his emotional state and his self esteem etc.

Just because you don't see it doesn't mean it's not there.

You seem to be assuming that people who don't defer just don't think about it, which is bollocks. People make the decision for their child.

For my child that I didn't defer I absolutely made the right call. Tallest in his class. Top set for all subjects. Top uni. By far my most academic, and mature, child. Holding him back would have absolutely been to his detriment.

The one I deferred - also the right call. Smallest in his class (started school still just into 3-4 clothing). Lower sets for everything in the early years. Multiple speech therapy and medical appointments. Really struggled and was far less mature than his peers. Actually took a year at college before uni so ended up two years behind if you're being picky.

Like every parent does I did what was best for my individual child at the time. That's all people can do and your tone toward other parents is hideous .