Starting school earlier?

A question about : Starting school earlier?

Hi, my DD2 was born on 3rd of September 2011, so she missed admission cut off date for 2015/2016 by three days. Is it possible she will start reception class in 2015 or do I have to wait to 2016. My DD1 was born on 26/12/2005 and she started school in September 2009, so she wasn't 4 years old yet. Now I tried to apply online for a school place, but been told she is to young. Is there any way around, like talk to school/council or what else can I do?
Thanks

Best answers:

• Having had 2 summer babies and 1 autumn baby, I would say to let her go when she's older. My DD born in October started Reception when she was almost five, settled in quicker and started learning quicker than her younger sisters did. My DD2 started Reception just after she turned 4 (born end of July) and only really started to show her full potential in Year 2. She's now in Year 4 and seems to have caught up but it's not been easy for her. DD3 (born end of June) is still getting there in Year 1. Those extra few months really make a difference.
• If you do have to wait the "extra" year, whilst it might be a pain for you, it may be beneficial for your daughter long-term. It's quite widely accepted that summer born children sometimes struggle in the early years when they first start school. Obviously, that's not to say that September babies will definitely do better than August babies but your daughter may well be oldest in the class and you may find this puts her at a slight advantage.
• We've got a Sept 6th baby (2011 also..) and we're expecting him to start in the nursery attached to his future reception school next september, with 'proper' school starting in 2016.
  On the plus side, the eldest in the year do seem at a considerable advantage for the first few years.
• I wouldn't be rushing to send my child to school but appreciate circumstances may mean you have to. #2 was born in January which means here in Scotland she could go at 4.5 or 5.5. After speaking to a variety of people we chose to send her at 5.5.
• My first went at 4 years 10 months, second at 4 years 9 months, third at 8 years 9 months and 4th at 7 years 8 months. I think the later the better and wish I had kept them all at home till 8 or 9.
  They all went to grammar school, all went to university, all got firsts, two have post grad qualifications, just wanted to add that in case anyone thought they would lose out by being at home longer. In the end they all did well but the younger two had more of a childhood and lots of fun with mum.
• It depends on the school and what the class is like, but younger children may struggle with academic school. A P.1. class that has lots of play, crafts and less formal learning may suit a younger child more.
  In N.Ireland, summer babies start school at age 5, the rest at age 4. My August-born daughter was very much ready for school when she started at age 5, and has never had any trouble with the workload. My end-of March born DS is one of the youngest in his class and it broke my heart to peel him off my legs sending him to school, I don't think he was ready. He has accepted it, but I think the learning curve is huge for his age - they don't do any learn-by-playing, like they did in nursery.
  Anyway, to get back to the OP's actual question, it might be possible to get a place if the school is not over-subscribed. Children who legally are supposed to start school will always get preference though. If you think she is ready for school and would actually benefit from it a year early (although many studies show that children who start later, around age 7 even, tend to do better in the long term), you could try to prove that to the council.
• My DD was born on 1st sept and I wondered the same thing but I've been advised that they are generally at an advantage to wait the 'extra' year.
• I'm in England, my boy was born at the end of June 2010 so started foundation stage 2 at primary school this September. He was more than ready. He is already reading but his writing is a little dodgy. He loves school but it does wear him out. Horses for courses as some of the already 5 year olds don't seem to be enjoying it so much. Every child is different. His cousin who was born in September the same year is no where near ready for school.
• My son will start school next September (he will be 4 on the 28th August) to be honest I can't even imagine it - he is still very much a baby in so many ways. I'm really working on his concentration skills ATM as they are quite poor. My friends Daughter was born in the March of the same year so is 5 months older and is strides ahead in writing letters and concentration and just seems so much 'older' than he is. Dreading him starting school!
• Only anecdotal evidence I know, but in support of the 'later is better' theory, I was born in early October, my two younger sisters in June and July. I was therefore one of the oldest in my class when I started school, and they the youngest. My mum said my sisters experienced more difficulties in their first two years at school than I did and took to the academic work less readily. She wished they could have started later like I did. I also left school with around twice as many 'O' levels as either of my sisters - so it seems that later was better in our case
• That is most tricky, having a 3rd of September birth!
  It doesn't always follow though that a child born at the back end of the academic year will be more academically behind. I know many people who were born in May to August who were in top class, and are now at uni, or are in very successful careers. And some born Sept-December who are not academic or talented and gifted at all, and have never done anything more than unskilled labour as a job.
  I think if a child is not academic, then they are not academic. And if they are academic, then they are academic. It has little to do with the time of year they were born.
• I seem to feel quite differently to most about it (although I admit I'm not a parent). I do however have a September birthday.
  My very first day at school was my 5th birthday and I absolutely hated it. I was very advanced as a young child and have previously been at a pre-school a few afternoons a week which allowed me to learn things at my own pace. I then ended up in a class of 30ish with a teacher who was trying to balance working out what we were all capable of with keeping us under control as we were getting used to the school environment. She used set ways of assessing us and didn't know what to do with a child who aced all of her assessments straight off. We were expected to spend weeks learning our first 50 words, with a view to recognising them by the end of the first term, then progressing through books of different levels. I however, knew them all before starting and had in fact read my first (small) novel by the end of my first term. I am quite ashamed to admit that my behaviour probably wasn't great for the first year at school, but the teacher just wouldn't listen to me, nor my parents.
  In some ways I feel like I'd have been better off starting at least a year earlier, when I was actually working at that level. In other ways I feel like I'd have been better off starting late and skipping the initial stage because my experience really put me off school and it became a battle of wills just for my mum to get me out the door every morning. Of course I went, but my memories of my early school years are nothing but traumatic.
  I now have a degree, postgrad qualifications and a professional job, but I don't think the age at which I started school has any bearing on that whatsoever. It's all about when the child is ready to start schooling at that particular age.