summer babies and school

[nattysilv]

Hi there

I am just wanting other preliminary views.. What rights do mums have if they feel their summer born babies are not ready for school at just 4? Can we defer reception for a year (and still go into reception class a year later - you can do this in Scotland and Ireland)? Can we push for part time for the year? I know the Rose report came out which seemed to be happy for summer babies going to school at just 4 - but I am not (whilst realising that he may want to go at four when it comes to the time)!

I have a bee in my bonnet that he will have to start school so young (he is July born). He is not even two yeat, so its a way off, but I am want get clear what the current state of play is, or will be in a couple of years.

Why is virtually every other european country starting kids older, and we seem to be pushing them to start younger (I know childcare costs can come into it)... I know some parents and kids will be happy to start art just 4... but what about those of us who are not.. Do we have a voice/choice?

Cheers in advance..

You can defer, I think (but would mean going straight to Y1 - I would be concerned about playing 'catch-up')

Think you can defer a term (might be preferable if you think it necessary)

Or opt to remain lunchtime pick-up until Easter if you want

Not sure about rest of UK (am in England)

DC2 is 4 end of August so am interested to see how it goes... she will be but a baby

DS2 is Aug born. He started half days at 4 yrs 1 month and and then full time after christmas.

I think legally you can defer until the term after which they turn 5, but it's the practical issues that get in the way
e.g.

• schools not willing to 'hold' a place open for a year until Year 1 - so 'pot luck' as to where will have a place at the right time
• some basics are taught in Reception (phonics etc) so he could be 'behind' by Year 1
• friendship groups will be formed in Reception, so going in at Year 1 may be harder (although we changed schools at Year 1 anyway, and DS2 has been fine)

Your most flexible options are:

• to Home Ed
• to Home Ed (a bit) and then hoep for a place at Year 1
• go private and ask to defer him into the year below (if I had my time again, that's what I would have done, but we can't move DS 'down' a year now - he'd be mortified!)

You aren't generally allowed to delay for a year and still go into reception. With a summer baby you can skip reception completely and start in Y1 but he will still be the youngest in the class. You may also find that your choice of schools is limited if you skip a year as many schools will already be full.

The latest version of the School Admissions Code says that you must be allowed to defer entry until later in the year - this is a change which comes into force in September 2011. You should therefore be able to delay entry to the spring term and possibly to the summer term.

You have the right to request that your child attends part time but that doesn't mean the school has to allow it, although it is clearly the intention that schools should allow this starting in September 2011.

As your son is only two this may all change before he gets to school age!

I think the school now legally have to hold the place for you until January if that's what you want.

my dd is late June, my ds late July, so I am a little anxious, esp. as dd goes up to school in September, she will be 4yrs + 2.5mths, but to compensate I tried to do as much as I could, loads of reading, educational toys, jigsaws etc. Yellowmoon (google) are great for toys/games/puzzles from 3yrs old. She is doing great at nursery so I think that's the key, find a good nursery.

Do you have a particular concern about your ds not being ready or are you against children starting at 4 in general? I do think it is a shame that the system is so rigid but as the other posters have said, if he does not start Reception when he is 4 he is likely to have to go straight into Y1 at 5.

However, I have two summer-born dcs and I would say that in general, they were able to cope perfectly with school at 4 from an academic pov - and teachers will make allowances for immaturity in behaviour. A lot of Reception is learning through play and tbh it didn't seem like a major change from what they were doing already in nursery. Mine did half-days only for the first term.

Where children start school later in other European countries you will find that once they start it is often very rigid and academic and a big contrast to kindergarten. So not necessarily a better system.

You have a long time between now and when your ds will actually start and a lot can change. Ime some of the most immature dcs in ds's year are the older ones so age hasn't made much of a difference. Ds is one of the younger ones and has developmental problems (prem) however I reckon he would have been difficult and disruptive if I'd kept him back a year.

I'd consider a move to Scotland - their start date is later.

TMB, imo the most important skills you need to teach your dd to get her ready for school are how to dress herself (so she can change for PE) and to recognise her own name (and perhaps write it too)

we have deferred for 2 of ours, but they went into year 1. july and aug babies.
they stayed on at their nursery for what would have been reception year.

was not a problem going into school a year late. did not have the option to go into reception, but reception is pretty much the same as nursery, so work begins a bit more in year 1, so they missed nothing.

I would seriously stop worrying. 2 years is a long time at this stage of a child's life.

Age isn't the only factor in whether to start in the September or defer.

My DD is August and emotionally I would have preferred her to wait a few more weeks but academically she is way ahead.

My DD is a July baby. I enrolled her into her local pre school at 2 and a half when they first are able to take them. I do have to pay for those 2 mornings a week but I wanted to give her a head start now. She already knows colours, alphabet and numbers up to 20 and loves going. So hopefully there will be no noticeable difference at school if I carry on?

Who knows...

If you find out more about your local schools you might find yourself reassured. Ds is an August baby and was prem, so should actually have been in the next year's intake, which somehow makes me feel he's even younger to be going to school.

The school he has just been accepted into is making this much easier for him though. He is currently a pre-schooler in their foundation stage unit (3 afternoons a week) and is really enjoying it. When he starts proper school in September he will still be in the unit, actually in the same room but just round the corner a bit, and have shared playtime with the pre-schoolers. As he is summer born he stays in this room for all of the first year before moving up to the main school and is encouraged to start mornings only.

I was really worried about him starting school but feel much better about it having worked out this way.

it isn't advertised but some schools do allow you to hold them back a year and then start in reception but this is very unusual and would usually be reserved for children w difficulties. If you are still concerned when it comes to applying for a school go and visit all your options and ask. The problem though is that when your son gets to secondary level he may have to go straight into year 8. IMO the summer born babies seem tiny when they start but they catch up really quickly.

I am in the same boat as you, with a very young August born DS, very young and immature for his age too. However, I would never dream of sending him straight to Y1. In our case, I have seen how much DD1 has done in Reception and I think he would be hugely disadvantaged unless you think you can cover everything they do at school (including the socialisation aspects, learning independence skills etc - the hardest things to cover at home IMO). I personally think it would be better to bite the bullet with reception, but that's just my personal opinion - I might change my mind once he's started and struggling!!!!!

Hi there

great to read all the replies..

I am not worried so much as have a bee in my bonnet that I will have one year less at home with my son than my daughter simply because he is born seven weeks earlier (and boys are generally less emotionally mature to start with)... I know there has to be a cut off, but surely the parent should be allowed to choose whether to defer or not and that it should be easy to do this (as is the case in scotland). My friend who lives in scotland is deferring her son for a year... Easy. She feels her son will be more emotionally ready if she waits a year and her nursery have said that children who are deferred in this way usually do better in exams later in the school life.

When I say defer reception by a year - I mean that the child would go into reception NOT year one the year later (I don't agree with the whole deferral to year one process...).

My daughter is a september birthday and there is no way she would have been ready for school last year. She is now a completely different child and will be fine (I think)..

Where I live, we don't have pre-school, but my daughter (and soon my son) will attend a wonderful local nursery that I have absolute faith in.

I have not spoken to a mum or teacher who thinks it a good thing that children go to school just after their fourth birthday. But yet we all do it - no questions asked (usually).

It is true that age is not necessarily an indicator of emotional or academic maturity... But from what I see around me, it is an important factor (and I am most interested in the emotional and also physical tiredness side of things... Academia in my view is not so important at this age)..

So, I still come back to the same point - why don't we have the same choices that parents in scotland and ireland do (i.e. deferring the start of school by one year and still going to the first year of school?). I am glad to hear that we may be able to defer for a term or two, I just hope that schools will allow this option..

I'm in NI, and its not the case that you can defer,
its that your child has to be 5 or turn 5 in the school year (1st July to 30th June)

therefore an August baby (like my ds) is 5 when starting primary 1

whereas dd1 was 4 starting primary 1 and turned 5 in the March

dd2 will be 4 this november but will start Nursery, and will be 4 starting P1

I should add on that I have no idea whether I will defer or not and hopefully my wee one will be fine to go at just four.. I am just a little put out that I may not even have the choice...

DS is a late July baby. Up until 6 months before he started school I was anxious, felt he was too young, etc. In the last 6 months he suddenly grew up, and I was confident that he was ready.
Also, the Reception 'curriculum' was exactly at his level - it is very play based.

I think they only way to really make this work is if you go private and hold him back a year. Even if you were happy to plunge him into year 1 (which would probably more traumatic that starting reception at 4), you would never get your school of choice because the places will be filled when all the others entered reception.

My son is May born and he is just fine in reception. His handwriting is a bit behind. But, frankly, it would be anyway. He is getting some extra help at school and is cathing up with the writing. He is doing fine with numeracy, phonics, etc. And he knows way more about bloody dinosaurs than Ross on Friends.

Oh, and DS has twin friends who were end of August babies. And they cope fine as well. So you might be worrying about something that actually won't be a problem.

If it is a problem, I think a more workable strategy might be for you to talk to his teacher and express that you don't want him pushed into anything he's not ready for. When they start sending home books, read them.... if you want to.

I don't really understand the reasoning behind the rigidity Alphabetti - I grew up in Ireland and there was no problem with children repeating a year at any stage for example - eg I had a friend who was a September baby and started school the Sept she turned 4 - she repeated a year later on as her patents felt she would be too young leaving school.

I suspect it is something to do with government targets. Has it always been rigid or only since league tables were introduced?

It is because all children in England take this test or that test when they are this age or that age and if they don't push you onto the next greade you won't have covered the material on their test. Sh this is for their test results, and not because it is in the interest of the child.

You can also hold a child back in the US. i agree it is way too rigid here. Not in the children's interest.

DD1 is a mid July baby and will be off this Sept.

She can't wait to go all day (currently half days at the pre-school attached to the school). Educationally she's ready to go - they have said she's a bright button and I know she'll cope with the reading etc just fine.

What she won't beable to do is cope emotionally. At 4 and 6 weeks she won't cope with the full days and will be shattered.

So although I'n not looking forward to this side of things for her I'm looking forward to her going so she doesn't miss out on the phonics, friendship groups etc.

Poor things are going to be shattered though.