Summer born baby? Deferral of *reception* place IS possible/a legal right...

[bluesuperted]

Dear Family Roomers,

I have learnt today that my received wisdom, and what is presented in the press, by schools and LAs and relayed to parents, about primary start dates, specifically for summer-born babies, is incorrect, and in fact contravenes our parental rights regarding our children's education.

In short, I thought, as did every parent I know, if you wanted to defer your summer born child's schooling by one year, you would have to forsake their reception year and they would plunge straight into year one in the term after they turn five. To me this was untenable and would put the youngest children at an increased disadvantage, rather than help them.

However, it turns out this is not the case, and parents have a legal right to defer their child's place, crucially *in reception* until the term after they turn 5. For a summer born baby born in 2010, this would mean they could start *reception* in 2015, not 2014 as we have been led to believe. This would also mean they enter the year as the eldest rather than the youngest and this would follow thm through their whole school career.

Here is an article which outlines the issue:

http://bit.ly/1dR4n4a

And this details how the issue has been raised in parliament by one MP.

http://www.stevebrine.com/media/media-releases/issue-of-summerborn-children-raised-in-parliament/1923

I feel there may be many of us in this boat who, having learnt where we stand legally, want to challenge the status quo and exercise our right to defer. I am writing on here to:

A. see if any other people are interested and affected and want to take this further

B. see if there any councillors/MPs from Southwark, Lewisham and Lambeth who can get involved in this?

I am now galvanised into action on a personal level but know more than just my family is affected. I have already spoken to the school I think my son is likely to be given for September and expressed my desire that he now stays in (the same school's) nursery for an extra academic year and then join a new reception intake the following year.

To be honest I still feel a little shocked to have been misled like this and I wanted at least to publicise these challenges to conventional start date wisdom for others to see as well!

[Knomester]

We are, as you know bluesuperted, in exactly the same position as you being the parents of an August 2010 born boy. We have submitted his primary school application for September 2014 entry today, in case that is the route we decide to take, but are giving the idea of a 2015 start in Reception (rather than Y1) serious consideration. We will no doubt meet up to chat to you some more soon, so it's a case of watch this space.

The only small concern we have is the possibility of leaving our son open to teasing (bullying?) for being 'a year older' than his peers later on in his school life (if, in reality he would only be 2 days older than the eldest in the year). Does anyone have any experience of this?

[HOMum]

My child is August born 2010, I know she will be the youngest in her class, although I doubt anyone else could guess!

She can't wait for school and so she will go and I am sure thrive. I feel no need to hold her back whatsoever - how does anyone know that holding them back a year won't be detrimental to them?

[mybaby178]

I think you need to look at each individual child rather than assuming that all summer born babies will suffer from being the youngest.

My youngest started reception in September and her bday is mid July I can genuinely say that she is at no disadvantage she copes very well with the whole day at school and seems no more tired than any of the other children in her class. Academically again is doing fine, some people have commented on how well she is doing for a summer baby which I'm not sure if I should be offended or not!!! There is no reason why summer babies shouldn't do as well as their peers.

[bluesuperted]

I meant to add, obviously this is a personal decision and only you as parents know whether or not you feel your child is ready for school, or whether they would benefit from some extra time at home/nursery etc. Also every decision we make for our children could be detrimental or positive, what I mean to do with this thread is to highlight there is a choice, where it has been presented for a long time that there wasn't one.

Knomester, yes we need to discuss this fully! I think re bullying, it can sadly happen for all sorts of reasons - I think just as likely they could get teased for being the baby of the year. I know what you're saying as they will be a little 'different' to their peers in respect of an arbitrary bureaucratic line, but I'd hope this would never become a major issue - no guarantees but I think schools are hopefully more inclusive places these days than when we were at school so this should help.

[hellosailor]

In response to your question HOmum

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/education/9843971/Summer-born-children-at-bottom-of-the-class-warn-experts-and-parents.html

[nsm]

Thank you for starting this thread bluesuperted. I for one am quite excited by this possibility (although annoyed for being so badly misled when looking into this). Like knomester I have applied for my son's school in September 2014 but will seriously be considering a 2015 reception start date. Like others have said- it is obviously a very personal decision and different for every child, but I think for a variety of reasons my 2010 August-born (premature so should have been September!) son would benefit from more time in nursery (without missing reception) and also not being the youngest in his year. Emotionally I'm really not sure he would be ready for reception this year.

Questions I would have are:

Would we defer entry, and keep school places allocated on current cohort or would we need to reapply with cohort below?

I would also be concerned about consistency in practices across boroughs and schools, in case of (as we are planning) a move at some point?

[bluesuperted]

I have the same questions as you nsm :) I have also applied this year so it will be interesting to see what the response is to which cohort people deferring would join.

The cross-borough/area thing is definitely intriguing and v important to me as we expect to move out of London at some point during primary.

[HOMum]

Personally I think only you know your child. I know my child is ready it doesn't really matter what some statistics say, not every child born in summer doesn't go on to succeed, you just have to do what feels right for you.

I knew I could defer for a year and stay on at nursery if we wanted to, just don't see it making any difference in the whole scheme of things (for my child).

My friends boy on the other hand just wouldn't cope so it is very much a personal choice based on a your child alone.

[LI]

I would be very interested to see if any Lambeth councillors were interested in getting involved. Last year their admissions policy failed to make it clear that parents could either start their child later than September or consider part time attendance for those under compulsory school age. This year they have published an supplement to their school brochure making it clear that parents can request either of these but the school has the authority to decide. In fact, as bluesuperted's link makes very clear, the Department of Education intend it to be the choice of the parent not the school. I have gone down the part time attendance route, despite the school trying to convince me I could not legally do this. Among other threats they said it would lead to bullying. So far they are the only ones who have carried out any bullying (of me, not of my child!)

[Yak]

Interesting.

If you read the adjudication report, though, you'll see the argumentation is quite narrowly focussed on those children whose due date was after 1 Sept of the relevant school year. The premise seems to be that parents of, for example, pre-term children should not be placed at a disadvantage in such a case because they would otherwise have expected them not to be in that year group. So the revised admissions code for the LA in that case was found to be lawful because it explained the "expcetional circumstances" in which a child would be put in Reception year more clearly. So it would apply to nsn's case but not necessarily to others.

I think at best what you can aim for is a similar degree of flexibility in the LA admission codes for the schools you're interested in. But that does not guarantee you a legal "right" for a child to be put in Reception year if that's what the parents want.

[Mellors]

I went through this a two years ago with my August 30th born daughter (2008).

I always understood you could defer your reception place for a year from a legal perspective, but the issue is whether or not a place will be available at your desired school the following year? You can't hold open a place because, for example, the following year could be full of siblings.

I'm not sure whether you would have to apply again the following year? I'm sure Renata could advise.

As it turned out she was desperate to start big school and doesn't seem at all disadvantaged by it. She was most disparaging of the "babies" who started the year after ;)

[Mellors]

I also asked at open days etc about the possibility of part time attendance, and our school was very supportive (in the end we took the odd Friday off at the beginning of term when she was very tired, but she hated missing out so much we didn't do it on an ongoing basis). I'd be asking schools you are interested in about their policies/support for the youngest children in the year.

[Kes]

Could James or Renata perhaps clarify this?

Also, is there a specific definition of "summer born"

Really greater flexibilty for all children would be the ideal. A friends son had to effectivly start school a year early, having been due in October and born very prem in July, he would have been much better off starting according to his due due when he'd had more time to catch up from the delays caused by his early birth. Other friends have children born in September (in one case because of being overdue) who are desperate to go to school and bored of nursery as all their friends have moved on. The August/september cut off is ridiculously arbitory but if all/many July and August born kids start a year later isn't there a risk that we just move the disadvantage to those born in June or May?

[Renata Hamvas]

Hello everybody. I'm happy to get involved with looking into this. The legislation is linked to term dates. The start of the summer term is usually at the end of April, so loosely, summer born children for admissions would be those born in May to end of August. The child is supposed to be in school/full-time education from the start of the term after their fifth birthday. This is very woolly as term dates vary between LAs, from year to year and free schools/academies can set their own dates! The previous system (in operation until January 2011) meant that most Southwark schools had two entries, September for Sept-Feb birthdays and January for March to August birthdays. I think the legislation was changed to give younger children more time in school ie a full reception year. The majority of children now start in September in Southwark, some do defer, usually until January. This can be if the parents feel their child is not ready to go to reception or occasionally, as they are high up on the waiting list for a preferred primary and hope a place comes up by Xmas. I don't know of any child who has deferred a year within Southwark. Children who have arrived from overseas with different school start ages, and have missed reception eg Ireland have gone straight into Year 1.

Reception, like nursery is "Foundation Stage". Year One and Year Two form the first formal stage in education, Key Stage 1. From my experience over the last couple of deferred entries, that there is usually no problem with deferring and starting reception later, this needs to be sorted out with the school directly. The problem with deferring for a year is that this would certainly involve a re-application with no guarantee of a place. From what I know, a child applying for a September entry would be considered by Southwark to be an in-year application for year 1. There could be exceptions eg the very premature child mentioned by Kes, on a case-by-case basis, similarly to a child who due to illness misses the best part of a year of school. I think the legislation isn't clear-cut enough and is open to different interpretations!

We do start our formal education very young, in most of Europe, 6-7 is more of the norm.

Renata

[luciam]

Thank you for posting this info and I am watching with interest. I have three children, whose birthdays are July, August and October, so I have children at both ends of the spectrum. My eldest has an August birthday and is now in year 3. She is very able academically but initially struggled a bit socially and emotionally. My youngest was born in July 2011 so will be starting pre-school in September of this year. I would love to think she could have an extra year of pre-school before starting reception as her development has been a little slower than that of her siblings. On the other hand, I have a very bright but bored but 4 year old (October birthday)who just wants to be at school (and if I had the choice, I would probably have enrolled her for September 2013).

I find it ludicrous that parents have no say in this and that there is so little flexibility. In Scotland, if your child's birthday is near the cut-off date then it is fairly straightforward to arrange for their starting date to be deferred by a year (this is added to the fact that children start school on average 6 months later than in England).

[akc74]

This is very interesting, as a mother of a boy born late June 2010.

My hunch is that my son will be ready for Reception by September, given it still has quite a heavy emphasis on play. He loves his 2 days at nursery - I'm sure he will be exhausted at first but I hope otherwise will settle OK.

I am slightly concerned by Kes's point - there seems to be quite a momentum here, but surely there has to be an arbitrary cut-off point, as must be impossible to manage and plan for without? Especially in heavily populated areas like ours.

If maximum flexibility was offered, would lots of competitive parents suddenly want to delay their child's start to maximise the chances of them being among the most able in the class? (as Kes says, just moving the potential disadvantage along a bit)

[enjoy]

Hi Knomester,

My son is an erly september baby.

He willbe always the eldest in his year.

A friend's from my NCT class was born end of august.

So he is two weeks older than my son. But he had to start

a year erlier.

I can't imagine that someone would tease him if he would be in the

same class as my son.

I think you are considering the right thing here.

[telemum]

I have two summerborn girls (one 4 and one 6) with nearly identical summer birthdays (end of July). They're both in school now. The first was not ready, and I deferred her for a term before putting her into Reception, and I am still glad I did. Even in Year 2 I can see that she would find it easier if she was older in her year - fine motor skills still hold her back for example. All of her friends are learning joined-up handwriting and she's still not ready, and she doesn't always grasp concepts fast enough, despite reading fluently and being (biased mummy) a bright little button. And the worst thing about it is she doesn't have much confidence in her ability as she compares herself with much older friends.

Her sister, on the other hand, is totally and utterly fine in Reception, and would have been extremely bored if left in Nursery. She's the left hander, so I thought she would struggle with writing, but it isn't so. Her confidence is sky high. Interesting that school-readiness in the two of them is so different - I assumed that given they have similar opportunities, birthdays, upbringing and plenty of books etc at home they would both have similar school experiences. One size doesn't fit all.

Sorry for waffling on. Horses for courses I guess, but I would definitely have deferred my oldest if I could have done.

[Smiler]

I am trying to pursue this with Surrey County Council (late August 2010 daughter), am not hopeful! The July 2013 DfE guidance is clear that there should be parental choice, including to start in reception aged 5, but it doesn't have legal force in the same way that starting PT or later in the reception year does, so it's down to the local/admissions authority really.

There's a facebook page.

[legalalien]

Just to add another point for parents to consider - at least some organised extra curricular sports set their age groups on the basis of age at 1 Sept rather than school year. If your child defers a year, and ends up playing club or representative football or cricket, for example, they would not be able to play in teams with children in their school year group, but instead would have to play "up a year". Something to think about if you think your child is going to be a sporty one.....

[hellosailor]

In several papers today

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/education/educationnews/10711927/Mother-wins-victory-for-boy-too-young-for-school.html

[sand12]

Wondering if more folks are considering this option. Does anyone know what the procedure is to ask for a year deferral? Who do we contact the school or the education authority? A name phone/email would be very helpful. If any other parents also want to get together to discuss this please get in touch. The Facebook group for summer born children is very helpful if you need more information. Thanks.

[Canteen]

Hi all,

We have completed the process for deferral and we are very close to keeping our son back a year. He was born on August the 28th so will be very young if he starts this September.

Just to let you know the process is as follows:

You must apply for school places as normal. Once you have a place you speak to the school about holding them back and present a case if necessary based on the needs of your child. If they agree you tell the council you don't want the place and the Head/Governors of your chosen school will send a letter to the council confirming that they will let your son/daughter start in reception out of their age group the following year.

However, there are some key issues that are concerning us and stopping us from informing the council that we don't want his current place.

These are:

1.Once you reject the place with the deferral agreement you have to apply again next year for a place. You are not necessarily guaranteed to get the place at the school you have an agreement with. We are pretty sure this is not a problem for us as we live next door to the school but for others it could be a real problem if you don't get the place. There doesn't seem to be a solution given to this issue or say what you are supposed to do.

2.The council warns that you may have problems when your son/daughter moves onto secondary school. They may have to go straight into the second year and miss the first which would be disastrous. We have contacted some secondary schools in the area to find out their admissions policy and it seems to come down to making a case at the time which is not guaranteed. Hopefully this may change in years to come as the scheme gains popularity but it is a risk/worry for current parents thinking of deferral

3. What happens if you move house to a different borough or different area? Again it all seems to come down to trying to negotiate and put a case forward to whatever school you are trying to get in to, again nothing is guaranteed.

Currently the scheme doesn't join up primary and secondary admissions in Southwark. So in a nutshell you can defer your summer born child as long as the school agrees but after that...who knows. I will add that the council have been helpful on the matter, they just don't seem to have the answers or the solutions to the issues stated above. It is all made worse by secondary schools having different admissions policies (academies, state schools, free schools etc)

Has anyone else who has done this or is in the same predicament? Our son is due to start this September 2015 when he will be 4 and 3 days. We really don't know which way to go.

Cheers

Canteen

[cactus]

Thanks for highlighting the many issues involved.

I'm completely confused now, as I always thought you could defer the Reception place, but keep that place and

say start your child in the Spring or Summer Term of their Reception year. But deferring a full year, would mean your

child would start in Year 1 in the following September. I think I've just given a parent client of mine some incorrect info!