Would you defer school entry for one year in my situation.

Jagraf

End of August for mine, didn't defer her I didn't notice any difference at all with her peers. Where do you draw the line? Someone is always going to be the youngest and the oldest? When he's the oldest someone will be a year younger in his class, and so on.

Jagraf

Mojisola wrote: »

I would hold him back as long as the nursery he is going to is still stimulating him.

We start children in formal education far too early in the UK.

I don't think we do, well that hasn't been the experience fir me anyway.

You can mix formal with play.

GwylimT

Mojisola wrote: »

I would hold him back as long as the nursery he is going to is still stimulating him.

We start children in formal education far too early in the UK.

We used montessori primary schools for that reason, we shouldn't be expecting four year olds to be sat on their backsides counting. We should only be focusing on developing the natural PIES characteristics.

balletshoes

I wouldn't consider either his current accent or where he'll start school at age 4 in primary one as any reason to defer (as both of those things are subject to change anyway, through his school years).

If you think he would not be ready to start primary 1 at age 4, then defer, you have that option.

I'm a November baby, started school in primary 1 in Scotland at age 4 and a bit. It didn't disadvantage me.

Counting_Pennies_2

Jagraf wrote: »

End of August for mine, didn't defer her I didn't notice any difference at all with her peers. Where do you draw the line? Someone is always going to be the youngest and the oldest? When he's the oldest someone will be a year younger in his class, and so on.

It is good your child is able to cope. Not all are one size fits all. My daughter struggles and I know a year would have helped her.


We all have personal circumstances that influence us and resulting in us differing in opinion

silvercar

He is one of the oldest in the year in England, if you hold him back he will be the only the child of his age not at school. Who will he mix with? Children at nursery will be nearly a year younger than him. I wouldn't do it. Plans can change then he will find himself jumping straight into year 1 without the foundation of reception class.

Children grow up a lot between the age of 3 and 4, holding him back would be the wrong thing in my opinion.

pigpen

no.. I wouldn't even consider it.. he is moving house and starting afresh in a new area now.. and if you defer he will be at nursery a year then have to start again at school with a bunch of children he doesn't know.. far too much upheaval and disruption.

My 5 year old started school 4 weeks after her 4th birthday and is one of the highest achievers in the class... I had concerns, she is not very mature for a 5 year old but she settled quickly and is doing great.. the hysteria is ours as parents and all the learning in reception and mostly in year 1 is play based so it is just an extension of nursery but with the children they will go right through school with.

My youngest will be starting school 3 weeks after her 4th birthday and again will be absolutely fine.

Yours will be far from the youngest.. November to February is a huge amount of time.. there are 10 children born between September and the end of February in my daughters class.. that is 1/3rd of the children!

Tsmee

Wow! This must be an English v Scottish thing!

I'm from Scotland, and the received wisdom is:

1. If you can choose to defer, you should
2. This is particularly beneficial for boys (logic is they take longer to be ready for sitting still and listening etc.)

In addition, I'm sure I read once that studies have shown that children who are the youngest in the class are disadvantaged, and this disadvantage lasts throughout their schooling (no, I don't have a cite for this, I just remember reading about it)

Now, the above may or may not be gospel, but it's just astonishing to hear English people say the exact opposite to this!

balletshoes

Tsmee wrote: »

Wow! This must be an English v Scottish thing!

I'm from Scotland, and the received wisdom is:

1. If you can choose to defer, you should
2. This is particularly beneficial for boys (logic is they take longer to be ready for sitting still and listening etc.)

In addition, I'm sure I read once that studies have shown that children who are the youngest in the class are disadvantaged, and this disadvantage lasts throughout their schooling (no, I don't have a cite for this, I just remember reading about it)

Now, the above may or may not be gospel, but it's just astonishing to hear English people say the exact opposite to this!

I'm not English, I don't think this is an English v Scottish thing at all. My niece's birthday is 3 days before mine, so she also is a November baby, she is 7 and at school in Scotland, there was no question that she would be deferred, she wasn't, she started primary 1 at age 4 and a bit.

susancs

OP, all children are individual and you are the expert on your child, so will be best placed to make the best decision. Some children will benefit from starting school later and some children will be ready for school, even if they are amongst the youngest in the class.