Want to delay entry to school

[MuddlingThru]

DS2 is a August baby with signficant language delays and some gross motor skills issues as well. By chronological age he should start school in Sept 2012. At the a meeting with EP, Inco, SENCO yesterday the general feeling was that a delayed entry to school would be an ideal solution for him.

I know from reading other threads that this can be achieved but is by no means an easy feat or guaranteed. However I obviously have to give it my best shot.

So for those of you who have been down this route... could you please share your experiences. Who was it useful to talk to? Are there any key pieces of legislation that I should be aware of? Any key phrases which trigger action?

TIA for your help.

From a flip side, DS2 is an "end of July" baby. He has speech/language delays, gross and fine motor skills (dyspraxia), ADHD, AS, and sensory problems.

He is now 5 and in Yr1. He started reception just after he turned 4. We discussed whether or not to delay it as he was undx'd at that time, and we honestly just thought he might be too immature to handle it. He handled it okay with support. It's going to be a huge change regardless.

If they delay him entering reception, don't they still make sure he is Yr1 on time? If so, will that be too much of a transition rather than the year of reception first?

Best of luck to you whichever way you go. It's a tough decision, we went around with it as well for awhile before deciding not to delay.

We delayed DD's entry for the same reason so she was just 5, but it was a very small village school and all the infants were in the same class and then moved up the school with her peer group. I don't know if I would have gone the same route if it had been a large school for the same reason as Triggles
I'm not much help am i?

Sorry if I didn't explain myself properly, when I said delayed entry I meant delay his entry to Foundation until 2013. Yes, if we were to simply defer his entry he would automatially join Y1 in Sept 2013 which would mean he would lose out on all the valuable things they learn in Foundation.

I appreciate hearing about the positives from those who chose not to delay - I may well be consoling myself with those perspectives if we aren't successful.

However I believe that the year's delay would be the right decision for us. I would be keen to hear from those who have successfully managed to delay their child's entry to Foundation and to learn how they achieved it.

Muddling, the best way to get your DS a guaranteed place is to get him a statement that specifies that he should be placed in the year below. I don't know what level of difficulty he has, so I don't know if a statement will be easy to get. You should start the ball rolling for statutory assessment now, it takes at least 6 months. There are some standard letters on the IPSEA website you can use to request it. It sounds like you have already got the right people involved but if you send in the request rather than them, you have more rights of appeal and you can be sure it's been done. If the EP recommends that your DS starts in the year below, the statement should say this. This would then guarantee him a place in the school specified on the statement in the year group you want.

If you don't get a statement it is much harder to get a place out of the correct year. The law on 30 DC per infant class means that in a fully subscribed school, they have to give the 30 places to children who are the correct age before they can look at those like your DS. He cannot, legally, take a place from a child who is the correct age who wants a place. If the school is undersubscribed, then it's much easier to arrange, but unless you try for a school that is regularly undersubscribed, you won't know until your DS has already missed a year, or it's too late, IYSWIM. Village schools with mixed year groups are also more flexible, but it may not be ideal for your DS. Schools with an intake (PAN) of 45 or other 'odd' numbers also have to mix year groups, have a look and see what the local schools do.

It is a very unfortunate result from a well meaning policy. In my LA there is a Special School for early years that always used to take DC up until the end of reception and then those that went on to MS schools used to repeat their reception year again, giving them this year's advantage, even when winter birthdays. Schools could be much more flexible about which class the DC were taught. That changed once the 30 max law took effect.

Thanks for that EllenJaneetc. Off to look at the IPSEA website :-)

We looked at this last year for our daughter who was born prematurely (born in May but due in September so effectively going to school a year earlier than she should have due to her prematurity). She also has delays with her language and fine motor skills delays. We got absolutely nowhere with the LEA and the schools we spoke to about it said she would need a statement and that she would have to jump a year somewhere before she reached age 11 as they are not legally allowed to have children over age 11 in the school. The Educational Psychologist seemed to think there were ways around it but the LEA were not that keen to do it. The usual procedure is for kids who do not start in reception at the usual time and do not go to school until the term after they are five go straight into year 1.
The Bliss website does give some cases where parents have successfully been able to persuade the LEA to allow their children to go a year later but these arguments are based on prematurity.
We have decided to send her to school in September and are currently going through the Statutory Assessment process and hope a statement will be agreed at the next SEN panel.
Good luck and if you have the support of the EP that should help.
Michelle

Hi muddling,

We started DS2 (major language delays+sensory issues) in reception at 5.0 and there is a consensus that this has transformed his life chances. He needed the extra nursery year and he needs his peers to be his age and younger rather than his age and older. His education will be "offset" (ie he will stay with the same peers) until he is 18. We are in Bradford LEA. I recommend the use of the word "offset" by the way- people find it harder to use against you than "delay" or "deferral" and it makes your expectation that this is a permanent choice clear.

If Ellenjane's statement that "The law on 30 DC per infant class means that in a fully subscribed school, they have to give the 30 places to children who are the correct age before they can look at those like your DS. He cannot, legally, take a place from a child who is the correct age who wants a place" is based on a law coming into force Sept 2010 or later then go with that. But otherwise check this carefully - maybe EllenJane can expand? My DS2's application was assessed for his deferred year exactly as it would have been a year before - by sibling status and distance from the school. Be careful, very careful, of words like "law" and "legal" generally. Policies have a different status to statutes but may be described as "law" by those who oppose you.

As I understand it, you have the support of various professionals (EP, Inco, SENCO) for your position. This is absolutely fantastic and is your key starting point. Can you get this recommendation in writing as soon as possible? I'd start by writing confirming what they recommended and confirming that you agree with their view that this would be in DS's best interests. You need to reinforce to outsiders that you and the professionals have a joint agreed position.

As soon as you have done that, you've got something in writing to show the bureaucrats in your LEA when they start to try to block you.

Next, when your professionals have confirmed their position in writing (so can't deny what they said) have a think about which of the professionals has most clout and ask them off the record whether they anticipate any trouble from the LEA based on their experience with other children. If you possibly can, keep them as allies, think of them as key players on your team that you have to coach to get you the result you want.

Of course, you may have to get very antagonistic with the LEA but fight smart.

I have posted on many threads on this topic, usually in education, you may be interested in digging out a few.

Hi lingle. The law requiring 30 only being taught by one teacher in infants came in in 1998, but schools had a grace period to introduce it, including funding for extra teachers until 2004.

It badly affected the SS where I was a governor, as it was common practice up until that point for all the DC who transferred to MS to have their reception year in the SS, then repeat it in the MS school, therefore having the rest of their education offset, as you mention. This came to a grinding halt in 2004. Children had to either have the offset specified in their statement, but in most cases, a year's offset was enough for for them to stay at SA+ so they didn't have statements. They had to try to find undersubscribed schools. In some cases they were allowed in reception for a year, but had to transfer straight to Y2 after that.

The issue about an offset child not being able to take a place from a child of the correct age was related to the governing body by the LA repeatedly. Of course, the LA may have been mistaken or economical with the truth, but TBH, it caused such a lot of problems and lots more DC applied for statements due to it, so it certainly didn't save the LA any money.

Thanks for all the advice.

Lingle - I have searched your past threads (feel like a bit of a stalker lol).

I have used the IPSEA site to draft a letter requesting statutory assessment - I will send that recorded delivery tomorrow.

New term for me to remember: 'offset'

If I can get EP or InCo to put something in writing in the meantime I will.

thanks ellenjane - sounds like spin to me but it's another thing for the OP to watch out for.

can't see the connection myself (though appreciate how hard it must be as a governing body).
school has to have 30 kids or less.
school is oversubscribed
in first year that OP's child could have gone, she doesn't apply so another child gets lucky - and gets a place despite living further away than OP
in second year that OP's child could go to school, OP does apply and so OP's child is assessed in a pool with all the other eligible children.

again, the LEA will use language like "correct year". If there is a choice, then there isn't a correct year, there is a first year and a second year.