Advice on dd repeating year 6 (premature late summer born)

[mamamummata]

Hello,

My DD is due to go to secondary next year but we are thinking of holding her back to repeat year 6. I wondered if anyone had any thoughts or experience to share to help me decide whether this would be appropriate in our case or if this could backfire and why, as it is hard to judge and there is no research that seems to focus on similar children that I can find (i.e not with special needs or disadvantaged backgrounds confounding the issue, summer borns specifically, uk education system, prematurity, or some combination of those!). She has an early august birthday but was 8 weeks premature, so should be an autumn born in the year below. I guess my major concern is one of fairness and I do think that she is a bright in some areas/average (as opposed to gifted) girl compared to age matched friends. I am concerned she is being somewhat disadvantaged by a school system that compares her to the standards expected of a child a year older, and I'm sure she isn't alone in that.

What I do wonder is if an average october child from the year below had started school in her year would they thrive and be average in that year or struggle to meet the standards? In other words would she still be a year behind for a reason other than developmental readiness and the complexity of the work versus her age, or is it due to something like her speed at acquiring the new content compared to her classmates?

She has been consistently 1 year to 6 months (the gap has narrowed a bit recently) behind her peers since the day she started. She has been assessed as having no special needs, no learning disabilities, no IQ test given that I'm aware of so no idea about that. It appears that she is working at her own developmental level and she is 'slower' than her classmates (except in reading, vocabulary and creative skills). So she doesn't really get extra support, and I worry being younger and consistently behind (and labeled as an underachiever) won't translate to career and exam success, and it seems a bit unfair if this is not due to learning disabilities but just being younger. Is she 'slow' because she is compared to someone born over a year sooner than her? Or is it a problem with her? I have no idea. I have been often told if she was in the year below she'd be well ahead for reading, and solidly average for maths, which would be fairly normal for what should have been a early october baby. Instead she is on bottom tables, except in reading where she is 'average', grouped with the naughty children and as she said 'is thick'. Her self esteem is rock bottom and ALL her friends are in the year below anyway, plus one summer born boy; she just prefers their play. The other children tease her and call her 'baby' (she is also small for her age.) I would assume intellectually she is fine, she seems average with good verbal intelligence, or surely she would be falling further behind rather than staying solidly where she has been for years compared to her cohort? (We have tried two different state schools but it made no difference to her progress despite one being ofsted outstanding, although moving school perhaps holds them back a little to begin with).

I worry that if she sits GCSEs in her current year group she will achieve Ds and maybe Cs, that could have been Cs and Bs or better if she had been allowed to follow her own timetable of meeting all the standards 6 months/a year behind her non premature (or naturally more gifted) classmates. She might even go to university. It just feels like if I put her down she has more chance of a fairer outcome, whether that materialises or not. Or am I hoping for something unlikely or counter intuitively not the case?

She's currently in the state sector but we are thinking of going private (i.e private juniors then to private secondary) as that's likely the only option to repeat a year and gives her a fresh start. For what it is worth her state school teacher supports the idea of putting her down a year simply because her progress has been so consistent and normal, but consistently behind in everything except reading where she is now solidly average. I know some children have to be 'slower', but I feel that really shouldn't be just because of when they were born versus the 'age appropriate' (or not in this case) standards they are judged against, and I suppose variations in teaching quality make a difference. I suppose I feel that exam performance should be a factor of their IQ and motivation, since exams change lives and are meant to be meritocratic, rather than relative age to the other test takers. I'm worried she won't be ready for GCSEs in the year she is expected to take them (remaining consistently behind for whatever reason) and needs the extra year to do her best (or even pass!). I'm all for age standardizing tests but that doesn't happen outside of 11+ entry, so that being a fantasy, repeating a year seems more practical?

She is apparently not bothered if she repeats as she typically makes her best friends in the year below (although it's difficult to tell if she has thought it through.)

Hi

My twin daughters were born early and in July. They struggled all the way through primary school. They were in a year with lost of September kids and they could never catch up academically and socially. Despite being bright in English and average in Maths, they were always bottom of the class.

The headteacher was brilliant and explained that they would catch up in secondary school, as at that point success was based more on years of study and less about natural ability.

I was unsure, but now my daughters are 15 and in year 11. They are still in the bottom set for Maths and middle to high sets for English. But my goodness - how hard do they work. Their work ethic is amazing. Its taught them that ability isn't enough, that they have to work very hard to achieve success in life. They work so much harder than those who it comes easily to and that work ethic will set them up for life.

I honestly don't believe they would have been in higher sets if they had moved down a year (not that that was an option for us) and they would have been bored. They are expected to achieve grades 4-6 in their GCSE's and they (and us) are more than happy with that.

Only you know what is the right thing to do, but just wanted to share my experience. Good luck x

OP I think you need to trust in your judgement and looks for ways to make it happen.

I considered doing the same for my DD and would have done if she wasn't diagnosed with SEN and all that. In my view the problem is not only/ so much the date of birth as the setting system in primary that does huge damage to summer born children and those with SEN. Those 'ability tables' from reception compound the advantage of children at the top at the expense of children at the bottom. In my DD case the school only cared about the top tables, they were pushing ahead at a mad speed to please the pushy parents. So they left my DD and a few other kids behind as of year 1. DD progressed at a similar rate, but with permanent gap until it exploded in year 5 due to SEN. Half the class ended up working at Greater Depth at SATs, but my DD and a few other children with SEN paid the personal price for that in ruined confidence, mental health problems and ruined educational prospects. Setting in primary should be abolished.