To think a child born on the 5th august isn’t that young for their school year

They will definitely feel much younger in the year. Seriously consider deferring school for them. It will make a long term difference in school.

Depends where you live, in the part of the U.K. I live in, a child born in August would be one of the oldest in the class.

Not "many children much younger". A handful of children a week or two younger maybe.

5th August is 339 days into the 365 of the school year (starting with Sept), 26 days before the end.
336÷365×100= 92%
So 92% of the year will be born before 5 Aug assuming an even distribution of bdays.
In a class of 30, maybe one will be younger.
In a year of 150, 10-11 pupils will be younger.

But I think actually there's way more born in Sept than Aug cos people plan for babies in Sept/Oct to avoid this very issue so yes, 5 Aug will be one of the youngest if not the youngest.

Mines an adult now and was born more than ten days later in august than yours @Penny779 and was never the youngest in year or class.

My son us march born and the youngest in tbe year…. pretty much all june/july/August borns are deferred in our area.
Took me a while to figure out tgat all these amazing june/July/august borns in his year are actually quite a bit older than him, not younger….

Well statistically there aren’t going to be many out of a standard class of 30 born in the following 3 weeks. In my DS’s current class it would put them 2nd youngest (the youngest has a birthday of August 15th).

Mine was born on 5 August, the youngest in the year group. She started school at CSA at just turned five. Best decision ever.

Of course that makes them young in the year. Its unlikely there'll be many children born after them in their year group.

DS1 was born 21st Aug. He was the youngest in his year at primary, and as far as we knew, the 2nd youngest at secondary.

I was born on 31st August. I was the youngest at primary, 2nd youngest at secondary!

Yes they’ll be young in their school year. A class of 30 could have 2 or 3 in each month, and lots try to avoid August babies for this reason so there aren’t as many. The youngest in my DDs class is 2nd August.

Yeah mine is late July and she’s always been either the youngest or very close to.

Are you trying to convince yourself or someone else?

A couple of weeks isn’t going to make a noticeable difference whereas it’s likely six months plus might 🤷🏼‍♀️

I have two (prem) July born and one August born. All three of them young for their year. What a weird question- why do you ask it?

I teach a mixed age year 1 and 2 class…this year’s class have no birthdays in August for either year group!

Of course they are young in their year. There will be kids in the class who were born the September before and will almost be one year ahead. My son was 10th August and one of the youngest. It was pronounced during primary - he had an individual education plan but then at secondary he flew and graduated with a first. Proud mum!!

This is a well trodden party in developmental research. The disadvantage of being the youngest in the year reverberate throughout kids’ lives - worse at sport, lower academic attainment (yes yes even though you know someone who is an Olympian at 13, and went to Oxford at 7 despite being born in August 17th)

If all the other children in the year are born before August - then no, they will be among the youngest. If many of the children in the year are born in August, then yes, they will be average age.

But many women actively try to avoid having babies born in late summer for this reason. My eldest DD was due to be born on the last possible day for the intake, she most definitely WOULD have been the youngest (or maybe joint-youngest) in the year. In the end she was late and born in September, one of the oldest in her year and she reaped the benefits of this all through primary.

One of my DS’s was born on 20th Aug, he was 2nd youngest in the year (the youngest was born on 31st Aug). Neither of them suffered academically or socially throughout their schooling despite this

Of course they will be one of the youngest in their year. However, there may be older children in the year who are less mature.

Of course it is, my children are winter babies and I definitely saw a difference when they were younger when comparing them to summer babies!

Very weird post - the child is born in the last month of the school year so yes they will be among the youngest children of the year. In the same way that children born in September will be the oldest of the year. It’s not really up for debate surely?

Yes this is young if you live in England/Wales. 92% of kids will be older than you.

Those three weeks won't make much difference in the terms of maturity in the school year, 3 months would but not 3 weeks. Yes, they will be young in terms of the class cohort.

In a class of 30, 2.5 are born each month (I acknowledge that you can't have 0.5 of a child).

So they'd typically be one of the 3 youngest. That's quite young.

It depends on the year entirely. In my DS’ year group of 35, 12 of them have birthdays in the summer holidays. They’re still young for the year but it’s a young year. I think that’s quite unusual though.

If there’s 20-30 kids in the class there aren’t going to be many born in the 3 weeks after. He’ll likely be one of the youngest if not the youngest in the year.