Has anyone had success requesting early Reception admission for a September born child?

[edelweissss]

Just wondering if anyone’s had any luck getting their child into Reception early when they were born shortly after the 31 August cutoff. We completely understand the rules, but it feels tricky when a child seems ready and just misses out by a few days. I’d love to hear from anyone who’s tried this with either state or independent schools was there any flexibility? Also, is it possible to ask for an assessment outside the normal age group, just to see if the school agrees the child is ready, without it affecting the usual application process? Any experiences or advice would be really helpful

I would really focus on finding the right setting for your child rather than going down the route of starting her a year early. There is really no benefit to her starting formal education at the age of 4 vs at the age of 5.

Enjoy the extra year with your child, it's like a gift.

Yeah - don’t do this. My child is the oldest and the difference between them and the youngest in their class is astounding. Also re; fees. Don’t forget, it’s not JUST fees. It’s the private music, international trips, local trips, camps, uniform, charity fundraisers, sports etc etc. and yes - while you can opt out of most - your child might feel left out. Consider it carefully. No idea what ‘thinking like a Brit’ is tbh.

I think it’s incredibly unlikely but let’s say a school agreed it - what do you think would happen at the end of year six?

Either she watches all her classmates leave primary without her and repeats a year, or (assuming any high school would agree to it) you send a ten year old to secondary school, where they’ll always be the youngest in the class. Is that really socially or emotionally what you want? You want your 15 year old having 17 year old classmates?

You need to think about the long game - it’s not just whether your three year old can handle starting reception, it’s whether your child can handle the y6 residential a year early, independent travel to high school early, whether you want your child sitting GCSEs a year early, being surrounded by peers who can all drive/drink/go out alone earlier than she can and all the rest.

I think it’s a very very bad idea. Enrich her education in other ways. Learn musical instruments, take sports lessons, join rainbows and be patient.

I don’t think this is a thing - I work in a school and have never known this happen.
your child would be the youngest in the year and at significant disadvantage versus being the oldest next year .
put them into a pre school or the school nursery instead.

September born DC are at an advantage as they have a year longer either at home or in nursery. My DS was September born and was the oldest in his class, going to university at 19 - it was no disadvantage to him or me that he stayed at home for another year. DD was April born - youngest in her class, a definite disadvantage.

Do not do this. It's not in your child's best interests.

I have a September child.

I do have some sympathy OP. My youngest had a due date of 31st August so he was always destined to be either the youngest in one school year or the eldest in the next. He was late. And yes, at the stage you are at now it seemed like a negative. He is bright and was only a few days younger than the youngest in the year above him at nursery and tended to gravitate to towards playing with the older children. When his friends all left nursery for "big school" he was - temporarily- very upset about it and I can't deny that I was a bit miffed about having to pay for another year of nursery. Even the head teacher at his elder siblings' school said she would have been happy to take him into Reception that year if she'd been allowed as she was sure he would have coped.But there is no mechanism for that - in the state sector at least, you may find an independent school who will consider it but it could become a problem if you don't want to stay in the same school throughout your DC's education.
Anyway, DS stayed in preschool for another year and they worked hard to keep him stimulated, then he started reception just as he turned 5. Whether that put him at an advantage I honestly can't say, but I am pretty sure it wasn't a disadvantage. He has thrived both academically and socially throughout, did extremely well in his exams and now is at his first choice University doing exactly what he wanted to. What seemed like a big thing before he started school has actually been a complete non issue. He may have done equally well if he'd been born on or before his due date so been in the year above, or maybe he'd have found things hard. We'll never know. But I can't see how he could have done better as a result of starting sooner.
Obviously population statistics are exactly that - they describe a population, and can't act as a predictor for individuals - but there is evidence that as a group children at the older end of the cohort perform better than the youngest children and that difference lasts until at least GCSE. September born children are on the whole not underachieving as a result of their birth month and if anything the opposite is true. I do understand the frustration you're probably feeling now as I felt it too, but looking back on it as being at worst neutral for DS and very possibly a significant advantage.

This happened to me at school. I went to the nursery attached to the school and they decided to put me into Year 1 instead of doing reception. Which was fine throughout that school. But then all my friends moved on to the next school and I was left behind.

So @edelweissss even if a school will accept your child a year early, there's no guarantee they'll be allowed to stay in that year group.

I’m American, and honestly, whenever my American friends and I share an opinion around Brits, someone ends up calling it “odd” or “peculiar” and I do find that a bit offensive and the word "odd" was used previously. I hope I've made myself clear this time

I really wouldn’t. I have a late August DD who is the youngest in her year, which is effectively the situation you’d be putting your child into. She’d been at FT nursery since she was one, her reading and writing were way ahead of where her older sibling had been when he started reception. Her toileting, eating etc. we’re all great. She couldn’t have been more “school ready” and you wouldn’t have known she was the youngest amongst her pre school peers.

We had such a sad reception year. It sounds silly that we didn’t think of it with hindsight, but moving from a nursery class of 16 with 2-3 adults with primarily adult led activities compared to school where there is so much independence, we just hadn’t foreseen it. She was miserable, she didn’t have the emotional skills or language to make friends in the same way the older kids did. She became quiet and withdrawn, unhappy and just not herself. I appreciate the transition to school can be a shock to any child, but with hindsight, I would have completely avoided having an August baby. There’s no way I’d proactively choose to pull forward a September baby.

Do you not think wanting to knowingly disadvantage your child is odd though? Surely that's a perfectly reasonable assessment of the situation you are outlining?

You haven't actually said yet why you think this would be in your childs interests or responded to the very well explained flaws other posters have taken the time to put across to you.

You will be removing a huge life advantage from her. Summer borns consistently have lower outcomes long term.

Im in state and have been for around 15 years and never heard of this happening, I cannot imagine any school accepting as they are risking their data which impacts ofsted etc.

I know so many cases where being the youngest (not in the UK, in a country with a flexi start) is a disadvantage. Maths and main language may be fine, but it’s not fun for them to be tiny in sports and socially challenged. It may even out during primary, but there is another jump at secondary. In our system you can have little kids alongside teenagers at that point. It is possible to go up a year or stay back for nearly two.

Most people here try to keep their kids down one year as the classes are generally older and it is a huge advantage with streamed secondaries. In the last few years it has become a bit of a thing for a few parents to push their kids up a year and the teachers I know say the children often struggle, but mask the issues.

I think that’s a bit of an assumption, to be honest. I’m not trying to disadvantage my child. I’m just asking a question to understand what’s possible and to hear from parents who’ve been through it.
This thread was never meant to be about my child’s personal details or interests. I was just curious about how schools approach flexibility around admissions and whether assessments outside the usual age group are even an option in the UK.
It’s interesting to hear different perspectives though. That’s exactly why I asked in the first place. Thank you.

OP, I didn't realise you're American. I have a lot of family in America and I do understand there is a different attitude both to accelerating children / moving them up grades and to more able children in general. In the UK, as you've doubtless realised now (!) it is incredibly rare and considered actively harmful. The last children I know who were moved up in UK state schools are now in their mid 30s. The approach to more able children tends to be about mastery / breadth rather than acceleration.

My friend was moved up a school year but she was older I think and was v v clever! Her bday was 3rd of Sept.

At reception age there’s no point, it’s a big advantage to be the oldest in the year.

I haven't rtft so this might have already been mentioned, if she starts early and stays with that cohort, she could end up not being old enough to leave school at the same time as her friends.

Many years ago (I'm very old!!) a very bright girl at my school was allowed to take her 11+ exam with the year group above her as it was the last year for the exam in our area. She passed and was then the youngest by a full school year all through the next 5 years but she wasn't able to leave with the rest of her friends. Just something to think about, it's not just the beginning of her school career this could affect.

Not in state. Lots of parents would love an early September baby. It’s not just at beginning it affects, it’s miserable yr13 and being youngest.
I know one dc who did at private primary but she had to repeat yr6 as going to grammar and needed to sit with her correct age group. Miserable to see all your friends going off to secondary school.

Thanks, that’s really helpful and yes, I’ve definitely picked up on how different the UK approach is! I completely understand that the focus here is more on mastery and depth rather than acceleration, which makes a lot of sense.
I’m not trying to challenge that system at all just trying to understand what flexibility (if any (!)) exists, especially since every child develops at their own pace. It’s been interesting hearing how schools view it in practice.

You’ll potentially face issues down the line eg having to apply to start secondary school a year earlier (which they might not allow) and starting university a full year before they’re legally allowed to drink.

According to op this is because the ‘think like a Brit’ 🙄

Why would you do this? I have two children; one born mid-July and one born on 1st September. Early schooling was so much easier for the child born on 1st September, who was five starting Reception, apposed to my child born in the summer. Just let your child be the eldest in the year… it’s a huge advantage.

OP since you’re American and obviously comparing to that system which yes can be more flexible with ages, it’s also worth keeping in mind that British kids do start school a year earlier. British kids in reception at school would still be in a pre-K class at daycare if they were stateside. And this is very broad and I’m really not wanting to start some debate about the different schooling systems (which have their different pros and cons!) but just looking at national statistics for maths and English the British kids stay working about a year ahead of Americans throughout school. So not that matters really but if you did want to compare to the US system you can sort of already think of your DC at a British school being a year ahead.

I was moved a year ahead with a mid September birthday years ago. It didn’t particularly disadvantage me then, but I’ve looked into this recently (have two children born in the first week of September) and my understanding is that now it is simply not an option because it has ramifications at every ‘transfer step’ in their schooling. Eg. They may not be accepted into secondary early and have to repeat year 6. If they were accepted into secondary early, they technically wouldn’t be able to leave school when they finished because by law they have to be in school until they are a certain age. I also wouldn’t do it now, having seen my two start school with early September birthdays. With my younger ds in particular, I was convinced he was ready for school a year early. And academically, he was. But emotionally, I can see now, after watching him start at 5, that he wasn’t. He wouldn’t have really struggled.