With PCs, I get really upsewt with schools that put a high premium on what they call "maturity" when in fact they merely mean chronological age.
easy child started school at 4 and a half, we could have waited another year, possibly two. But she had already spent four years working her way through a comprehensive education prgoram in the child care centre and was already very bored. Academically, she was more than ready. When she started, her teacher (who was also the principal) monaed to me, "I have a classroom full of leaders and no followers!" easy child especially was a handful, she did best when given work to do. The next year she had worked through all the year 1 work and was being given Year 2 and 3 work, when I had to transfer her to the local school. There, she stagnated for three years. Then I transferred her back to a school with mostly the same students and same teachers as before (the original school had been merged with another). They took easy child 2/difficult child 2 as an accelerated student at the same time. Of easy child (who had been labelled "immature" by the local school), they said "She has made absolutely no progress since she left us."
easy child caught up.
easy child 2/difficult child 2 was also four and a half on enrolment, although her enrolment was a bit later in the school year than easy child's (due to red tape problems).
I strongly believe we did the right thing with both girls, in terms of enrolling them at the right time for them. easy child 2/difficult child 2 seemed amture enough at the time, it was later she seemed to fail to mature. "Little professor" syndrome - she talked and functioned so well when very young, that she seemed mature enough. But she was wilful, determined, had her own very strong ideas and wouldn't acknowledge authority.
difficult child 1 seemed bright enough but wasn't coping, he started school at 5 and unlike the girls, was barely ready. But it was fairly clear, another your would make little difference.
difficult child 3 - we'd been told he would never attenda "normal" school and would have to wait until at least 6 before being placed in a Special Education placement. But academically, he was doing maths problems and reading, well before starting school. Pre-school couldn't meet his needs. And again, it wasclear tat waiting wouldn't help enough to justify the problems it would have caused.
We have had the luxury of repeating later should it be deemed necessary. of course, there is the problem of a kid who refuses to be repeated. We didn't force the issue because we knew just how stubborn the kid would be. But another option we have in Australia, we have availed ourselves of with the boys - part-time. They do half the subject load each year and in that way can concentrate better on the work. It also reduces the anxiety and social problems made worse by stress.
I would seriously consider - will another year make enough difference in maturity? I would also be concerned about his size; we have a boy, I'll call him K, at the local school (just graduated to high school) who has always been big for his age and who has a reputation as a local bully. Now, in my experience K is not a bully, he is a gentle, loving kid who has always been very kind to difficult child 3 (even though this boy is younger). But I keep hearing people say to me, "Is K one of the boys attacking difficult child 3? Because he really is a bully, you have to watch him," when they have absolutely no basis for saying this. I watched K in the playground, I watch him around the village, I talk to his mother and sisters, I've seen him at play dates. And while occasionally there can be some push and shove, in which K can stand up for himself if he has to, I have never seen him do anything mean or to start anything. I HAVE seen him chase a bully and thump him, for attacking a smaller kid. But rarely. Most of the time, other kids are friendly with K and everything is smooth around him.
However, K is a fairly socially astute kid, he just happens to have always been big for his age. he's not the brightest at lessons, but he's streetwise. He can look after himself. His size keeps him fairly safe, but he does have a social advantage also.
My worry with a big kid who is also older - they get treated as "the class dummy" and they can really suffer. Sometimes a larger kid is treated as if he's older, people act as if he is "supposed to know better". This happened to K also, with people treating him as if he were several years older and several grades ahead. Again, it takes a socially astute kid to be able to recognise what is happening and to say, "Miss, I'm only in Grade 2."
Will another year "on the bench" make enough difference? WIll any benefit be enough to outweigh any disadvantages incurred in making him wait?
It's a very personal decision, but I've seen husband's niece, a very bright girl who was made to repeat a year, even though she had just got the top marks in an academic exam to get into a very academically exclusive school. "She's not mature enough," her parents were told. I didn't agree, I found the girl delightful to chat to, remarkably aware of current political events and able to discuss thme at a complex level. The trouble was, when tose teachers were talking about "maturity", they really meant "age". For a girl so bright, she was the youngest in her grade.
So her parents made her repeat. I thought at the time it would be a mistake. I still beleive that the problems this girl is having now in her life, in her late 20s, can all be put down to being held back at a time when she needed to move ahead. She is now caught in feelings of not being valued, of being never good enough no matter how hard she tries, of having to settle for second-best. She is constantly eclipsed by her younger sister (who was never held back, she was born in the correct half of the year).
husband feels that the problem started further back, with the older girl's parents always comparing her unfavourably to the younger sister. This may have led to teachers feeling that repeating could help boost her confidence. Again, influenced by her being youngest in the class. But added to everything else, I feel moving ahead would have validated her at a time when she really needed it, to be shown that yes, she was bright and it was acknowledged. To be thr youngest in te class and told that maybe being young explains your "immaturity" is one thing, but to be the oldest in the class and told "you're still not good enough" - a kid can stop trying.
It's chicken or the egg, with husband's niece.
It's not an easy choice to make. Ultimately, every kid is an individual and you have to make careful choices according to so many factors in the child's makeup.
I beleive that jsut as children have growth spurts, so they also have "learning spurts". And if a kid is ready to move on academically, because they happen to be in a learning spurt, then let them. But there should be equally as much freedom (and no stigma) to deciding that maybe they are in a period of slower development and could benefit from a slower year.
Marg