What is going on with deferrals?

[definitedeferral]

I'm wondering if any parents or teachers are noticing a growing issue with the number of children deferring in Scotland, and the impact on other children?

I'm referring to the change as of 2023 which means any child who is not age 5 at the start of P1 can defer and will now be entitled to another year's nursery funding. My child started school this year and is youngest in the year (Oct birthday), which came as a shock. I don't know exact numbers but there are numerous kids in the class who are already, or soon to be, 6 (ie they've all been deferred). So, in some cases over a year older than my child.

My kid is keeping up in terms of academic work, but on an emotional level it has been hard. They are mocked for liking "babyish" things. Their peers seem much older and are into different things, they're more confident and obviously ahead in a lot of the school work. My child has been in nursery for 4 years and everyone told us they were ready for school, so deferral wasn't really considered.

I now feel naive. Had I realised how many people were deferring and the disadvantage this would place on my kid, I would have done the same. Are we now at a place where you have to defer because so many other parents are? Not because your child isn't ready or out of genuine concern. Perhaps our case is isolated so interested to know if anyone else has found this too. Obviously might become more obvious as the rule change is very recent.

TIA

My youngest started in 2023 when the deferrals were first extended. I worried that my child with a late November birthday is going to be on the young side.
But I haven’t noticed a huge uptick in people deferring. Maybe because a lot of the classmates have older siblings and I think parents with multiple kids are less keen to keep kids back. From what I know only 1-2 kids in the class were deferred and there are multiple October and November birthdays.

We moved to Scotland three months before my daughter turned 5. She’s October born. I had no idea about deferrals but was astonished when a classmate turned 6 in the September and my daughter wasn’t even 5 yet! My two October borns are not the youngest in their year, there are other kids from Nov, Dec but I’ve not come across any from Jan or Feb.

I’ve noticed a big leap in deferrals. My older kids are Oct birthdays and while they were at the younger end, definitely didn’t stand out as the youngest.
In my p1s class there are kids who are now about 6y 2m old and 4y10months. It’s a huge difference.
I imagine the nurseries are now struggling to accommodate the numbers of children are being kept on a further year.

I’ve seen a huge leap of deferrals in my P1 class this year, which has been really positive for readiness to learn, emotional maturity etc in the class in general. But that may just be a one off. I always recommend deferring anyway but especially now and I do wish the government would just change the school starting (and in fact leaving) situation for more uniformity.

I have a suspicion the current situation will just increase inequality as it tends to be the more educated parents who are deferring - with no offence meant to you OP, or anyone else who didn’t defer - this is just on average. There was a thread on deferral in England the other day and someone pulled up stats to back that up.

I suspect the recent rises have been influenced by lockdowns and it impacting the formative experiences of playgroups / nursery etc.

I never understand how dome kids can be leaving secondary at the end of S6, potentially to uni, aged 17. It seems madness.

I teach secondary and I can see the difference in emotional maturity in the younger boys in each year group. I'm not convinced it evens out even by S6.

I think we start them too young, and I also think Feb is a stupid month to have the arbitrary cut off. They should align it with the academic years, so June or July. That way no child would be starting school at 4, and potentially leaving S6 as a young 17yr old.

This is something that has interested me as locally I was aware it was coming, yet was very much dismissed as being unlikely.

In my daughter's composite class, she is an October birthday, she is the youngest by a significant way. Basically the other in her year are there because the birthday was before august or deferred.

So we have age 4-7.

The teachers are moving primary one level to learn with primary two. Primary two to learn with primary three.

So what happens for other things. Sports day, the seven year old is absolutely ahead of the four year old.

The reading, same.

The comprehension same.

Now I don't say this lightly, I wanted the extra year, let them grow.

However, it needs to be an all or none.

This huge age range and ability cannot possibly have an overall positive impact for a class.

Thanks everyone for your replies! Some really good points raised. I suspect some of the effects of the changes won't be obvious for a while yet. @goodkidsmaadhouse I had also seen stats for more educated parents deferring. I've been blindsided with DC1. I didn't think of October to be particularly young, and never imagined so many Aug/Sept/Oct kids would be deferred. More fool us! I regret not looking into it more and feel anxious every day I send my kid to school now. They're getting stressed and saying they're "stupid" a lot, because they can't keep up with the much older children. It's awful because they're doing so well, doing everything expected of them, but they are just comparing themselves to their peers. I don't want their moral to be affected.

Good points around spaces in the nurseries (where are these going to come from?!), and the cost to public purse of funding these. I really hope they decide to just change the school entry age, sooner rather than later.

This is interesting and pretty much encapsulates my fears. My husband also brought up the element of sports the other day. Our DC is sporty, but again cannot compete with older, stronger, taller kids. Now I realise PE isn't necessarily about competition at that age, but they're on the back foot again through no fault of their own and feeling like a failure. I fear that eventually it'll be a case of "why bother" for the youngest kids in all elements of education. Ok things might even out, but that mentality might already be engrained at a young age.

I agree this system is ridiculous.
one thing I would say is that the oldest kid in my kids class who turns 6 before those who have turned 5. All the kids resent the fact they are unfairly winning all the sports as they are in the “wrong” year and should be racing kids in year above.

I had thought that it would be interesting to see how it plays out for sport. We are quite a sporty family and have a Feb born. If we don't defer and that contributed to him not liking sport because he was smaller and unable to compete against a child 18months older at a young age, i think that would be such a shame.

Agree with this in spades.
The Scottish government don't factor in anything and seem utterly unaware of the law of unintended consequences.
They are not fit for purpose and should go - I would say before they bring our education system to its knees but unfortunately, that boat has already sailed.

Yes not really sure how it plays out on average. But the oldest are bound to do better in sport. The peers aren’t stupid though and never let them forget they are in the “wrong” year. Or at least that has been my experience.

but I suppose on the football field they will always be welcomed in to a team as being bigger and stronger is such an advantage.

I’d agree that the Scottish government are not likely to have thought this through at all.

some school sports stick rigidly to the proper school year. If a child was deferred then they would be running against the kids in the year above in the Scottish senior athletics champs for instance. But yeh it is rubbish about the school sports day etc.

I think it should be jan/feb only. The aug/sept born mid of the year do not need to be deferred even if premature births. Then the age gap is narrowed, the class is roughly the same level and all learn together.

currently it will have to pitch to the very emotionally developed 6 year old, alongside a non deferred premature 4 9m old who may only be a age correct 4 1/2 year old!!

I also think Feb is a stupid month to have the arbitrary cut off. They should align it with the academic years, so June or July.

The point at which you can chose which year to start school is aligned with the school year - whether or not you are six before the school commencement date in August. It seems crazy that this is a different date to the usual cut-off in February.

As for starting Uni at 17 (which means some students may be forced to take a gap year if they wish to study medicine in England). It is worse than that as you can go to university at the end of S5 when you might be 16.

Always remember there is a year less of formal schooling in Scotland than England. People seem to be unaware and perhaps we should be campaigning for equity.

Tbh in my DD’s class at least it’s the younger (non deferred) kids who are seen to be in the wrong year. This was before autumn deferrals so the age gap isn’t quite as wide but there a few winter born non deferred kids and even in P6 I have heard them referred to by other kids as ‘too young for our year’.

It depends on the sport if an out of school club if that helps rather than PE lessons. It also depends on the school to what they do - ours has mix PE rather then only based on running or balls so different children excel at different aspects regardless of age.

DS1 (5 and a Jan deferral) plays rugby with same age as its based on birth year rather then school year. Same if he did football league/club out of school. His other sports are age range rather then school year.

We deferred him as said and will be deferring DS2 (also Feb) because the ability to sit and to actually want to learn has been stark for DS1 from 4.5 to 5.5 when he started P1.

We deferred him as said and will be deferring DS2 (also Feb) because the ability to sit and to actually want to learn has been stark for DS1 from 4.5 to 5.5 when he started P1.

We deferred DS because teacher friends told us the ability to sit and to actually want to learn was stark from 15 to 16 when they took exams in S4…

It's certainly an issue. I am in an LA that started this voluntary deferrals earlier than other areas. There's a huge developmental gap between 4 and 6 year old but also as they get older and the onset of puberty etc it has implications there too.

My ds school is a 2 class entry year and they split classes by date of birth,so we have the 'young' class and the 'older' class, but ds says the young class gets called the 'dummy class' by the others. This makes me so sad and frustrated as they're not any less capable they're just younger.

We couldn't contemplate deferring ds, even though he might have benefited as the council nursery couldn't accommodate what we needed for childcare so we were paying a private nursery and we simply could not afford to do that for another year. It's the better off, middle class kids that can take this up. I bet fewer kids in deprived areas/families are being deferred than affluent ones, it'll widen the attainment gap.

For sports out of school they should play with their birth year, not their school year. Even just physically the large age gap makes a big difference!

It’s interesting everyone seems to defer who can in our school. I deferred for middle child as like the op he’d of run into the previous years deferrals and would of been v. Young comparatively. We got an extra year nursery funding without issue. Hardly anyone defers in the next town along though. It’s well worth speaking to other parents and considering moves. I know people who have moved into school and been surprised to find out all the kids are on the older end . It’s too late to defer then though.

My daughter is in p2. There are no deferred children in her year and one in p1 (his birthday is late feb). It's a relatively small village school and there are plenty of end August through to Feb birthdays in p2 who could have been deferred from a range of socio-economic backgrounds. I'm not totally sure why some of them didn't to be honest.

My oldest is in p5. He's deferred (late feb birthday) but he's the only one and he's 3 weeks older than the next oldest child in the class and in fact had he been born on his due date...we wouldn't have had to defer. I think it was absolutely the right decision for him for a range of reasons.

It will definitely be interesting to see how it plays out Scotland wide.

I did the English system so they already seem older to me.

I have wondered what happens at the end of primary. I'm used to the move to secondary at 11 rather than 12 (could it be higher with deferral?)
That seems a high age to still be in primary, especially in small village schools like ours with three year composite classes.

It's very obvious especially in the girls how much they charge in the latter years. I can't imagine things like starting your period and still using tiny primary school toilets with a cubicle about four foot high (although maybe other schools have moved on from this set up).

Similarly boys absolutely shoot up as they hit puberty. The difference between those I know in p7 and the end of S1 is remarkable. They all seem to grow about a foot and I can't imagine them on little primary school chairs.

You are also hitting ages with more bad behaviour. I wonder how many of those deferring also like the idea of their six year old sharing playgrounds and facilities with those pushing 13.

It is only six months older. Primary schools are already designed to manage those things. Normal puberty in girls starts between 8 and 13. The average age of first period is currently 12. So girls starting periods in primary has been happening for a long time.

I’ve chatted about this with friends before, our conclusion was deferral benefits the individual deferred children but not the class as a whole. Our school is in a mostly affluent area, with educated professional parents and most kids are deferred.

If the current situation leads to all children starting later, that would be great, particularly if they then limited to 12 month cohorts.