To get annoyed at 'summer baby' used at school

[hufflebottom]

That is it.

Last time I looked children developed at their own pace and whether or not they were the youngest in the class wasn't really a factor.

I'm an August baby, I was the youngest in my school when I was in reception. But my reading/ writing was above some of my classmates who were older.

My brother on the other hand, again an August baby (August is an expensive month for us. My parents must have got really bored in the winter) is the complete opposite.

My dd (5) is on par for doing well she's a March baby. My friends kid is a week older and is just below Dd's reading level.

When did the whole children learn at their own pace get taken over by the 'my child is a summer baby so will struggle'

Am prepared for flaming

Gov stats here. Being a summer born child makes a big difference in early years, less so at age 11, and nearly none by 16.

DD has a good friend who is a late August birthday.
The girls are now 9/10 and to be honest although the friend is generally a good kid whenever she does misbehave her mum says it's because she is the youngest in her year. If she falls out with anyone it's because she's the youngest in her year, if she's not top of the class academically it's because he's the youngest in her year etc eyes etc. the child is pretty good at milking it as well with the thumb sucking etc if she thinks she might be in trouble, although this is getting less effective the older she gets.
From experience even if there is a difference between the oldest nd youngest it usually irons itself out by the time they are in year 3

My birthday is the 31st of July and I was the top student at school, in the top 2% of the country and ended up being put into the year above from Year 5 - making me not just the youngest in my year, but also in the year below.
[not so stealth boast ]
I've never heard the summer baby thing until now!

fragile it shouldn't be an excuse - it has been highlighted that schools should "look" at their summer-borns in comparison to the year group as a whole - to check if they need any additional support in order to make the same progress as the rest of the class, not to excuse poor performance!

The attitude you're experiencing is the exact opposite of the expectations of the external inspectors; if the school have identified that your DC needs more support because he's summer born, they should be demonstrating how they are addressing that, not resigning themselves to the fact!

It's all about progress - based on where the DCs are assessed when they enter school (controversial, I know) - but if summer-born is being used as an excuse for lack of progress by a particular DC compared to others, then the school needs to look at the quality of it's teaching!

I don't think it does equal out or that there is no effect by 16. Summer born children are 20% less likely to go to Oxbridge or Russel Group universities (www.theguardian.com/news/datablog/2011/nov/01/birth-month-affects-results-well-being)

There is extensive research on the subject. One of the reports that I have read was a 2011 report by the institute of fiscal studies (www.ifs.org.uk/bns/bn122.pdf).

They looked at outcomes all the way up to choice of university and concluded "there are large and significant differences between August- and September-born children in terms of their cognitive skills, whether measured using national achievement tests or alternative indicators such as the British Ability Scales. These gaps are particularly pronounced when considering teacher reports of their performance. They are also present when considering differences in socio-emotional development and engagement in a range of risky behaviours."

This reflects my experience (dd has a late August birthday) - a huge amount of "damage" is done by teachers having lower expectations from the outset and that then becomes self-fulfilling.

Interestingly they also concluded that the degree of parental engagement and support did little to offset these differences.

I understand that some of underperformance in the older studies may be due to the fact that summer born babies used to start school later (staggered intakes) so not only the youngest but compounded by only a term in reception.

DD's class is pretty much split by age though - oldest in the 'top' group is April born and has been since reception. They are now yr 4.

My eldest was born September 3rd and the second was born in July. There is 22 months between them (one is 9 and the other 7) but there is only 1 school year. The younger one is struggling with his maturity, writing, reading, maths, the lot. The eldest is top set for most things but is ASD so has some challenges.

I would say it really has affected my youngest and I wish we could hold him back a year.

This is another example of people (even summer borns) being unable to distinguish between their own experiences vs trends born out of data taken from more than one random family source!!!

See also the "trusting the GP's advice" thread.

OP in your experience it has made no difference to your child. One child. One family from one area of the country. As others have said there is plenty of evidence to support the opposite view. Teachers (in my area) have to declare how many summer borns they have as the academic and physical delay can be so pronounced it can affect the school's results. So to be frank your anecdotal evidence to the contrary is pretty meaningless.

Go and read the decades of studies that demonstrate clearly the disadvantages of being a summer born - academic and others which continues on into adult life. Then come back and start this thread from a point of knowledge, rather some passive aggressive goady whatever.

DS1 is the youngest in his class. He found it hard to settle into nursery but hasn't really struggled academically.
He has a friend a day older who does struggle however his Mum seems to blame everything on him being Summer born.
He is also friends with the oldest in the class who was born 51 weeks before him who also struggles.

It has been documented but it's annoying when it's used as a reason to discount your concerns about their development, or to have lower expectations of them, or both.

My ds is an autumn-born and I'm glad he started school comparatively late.

The same gets trotted out about boys compared with girls (so lets just give up if you are an August-born boy!) and I do wonder if the reason they do less well at times is because expectations are lower. Actually in my son's year, in his junior school, the boys did better than the girls based on SATS results!

We have 4 August-born children in my class. Of those, two are exceeding, two are emerging. The three born in July are all emerging. Summer-born isn't used as a get-out in my school, but if a child is struggling we do factor it in.

ES is an October baby, his best friend A is an August baby. There's 5 weeks between their birthdays, almost an entire year developmentally. It might not be the case for every child but for A, it's hampered him at times. He's noticeably less mature than the rest of the class, struggled to sit smartly and take turns when they first began. Now they're in Y4 he's still labelled the naughty one by each new teacher.

I am summer born and I was fine but that doesn't in any way negate the large body of evidence that suggests, on average, summer borns are at an educational disadvantage. I don't understand why people get so sensitive about this data, its not mapping out your child's life prospects or automatically condemning them to do badly. However, it is a pointer that it you have summer born children they may need some extra support and back up. Both my DC are also summer born and certainly in the early years they did need a bit more support but it's evening out now that they are getting older.

Just about to meet with DD's (4.5) teacher re this :-( she is brilliant, chirpy and bright but I have already had the 'she's behind the rest if her class, you need to do intensive work with her' speech at parent'a evening. I shd know it doesn't necessarily matter (DS end August and now too set for everything at secondary) - went through it all with him. Total confusion then of attainment and ability - he was nearly pushed down a year based on nothing but his age. So - no it shouldn't be an excuse. But at the same time there is a real issue here in reception, vast changes take place across a few months. And the stats re summer borns are pretty depressing. So OP don't sneer about It's great if some schools accommodate the different needs of children at different stages. Sadly sone don't. And it's bloody upsetting to deal with when someone is telling you your 4.5 is not as good at reading as the 5.5 year old.

I remember a newspaper article twin brothers born just before and just after midnight 31st August so a school year apart (article was about that not being able to start school together) Would have been 5 ish years ago, think they were in northeast. Wonder how things have worked out for them?

My second is a summer baby and I'm so worried about him starting school. I think he will really struggle being the youngest and is much less emotionally developed than his sept peers. He has s&l issues which I think Wouldnt be such a big problem if he was the older end of the year - I wish I could defer him

Sorry appalling typos (big cracks across screen!). Meant to add to last sentence 'as if it's a personal failing rather than an inevitable fact.'

Nitpick: unless you were both premature, your parents were going at it in the fall rather than the winter. I've got an August baby and am expecting another baby in July, so I know.

Of course, some parents and children would love to find something that is neither the parent's nor the child's fault to blame for their child struggling in school. Some teachers would probably like an excuse that doesn't blame them, too.

Chance- I don't think that the 10% more in the number of children not achieving expected levels in GCSEs is 'nearly none' of a difference! And that is before you even look at at a detailed comparison of qualifications achieved in those that do recieve 5 gcses.

Yes, we can all dish out anecdotal evidence of August borns doing well, but that doesn't mean it's not a disadvantage to be the youngest. A bigger picture is needed.

YABU. Huge disadvantage to summer babies when they start school and are learning alongside children upto 25% older than them.

I am a summer baby but was always ahead of my classmates academically, luckily for me.

My august baby is now 16 and in college and it is still a factor for him as an individual, he has always struggled through school and I'm sure if he had been born 4 days later and started school a year later it would have made a huge difference to how he has developed and learnt.

I am due on the 27th august with DC4 and desperate for an overdue baby so this is an issue again.

Expectation definitely has an impact on their perfomance. The IFS study I referred to below looked at this. It concluded that teachers were are 2.5x more like to percieve an August born child as underperforming compared to a September born one. This in turn feeds in to children's perceptions of their own ability and August burn children have lower expectations and are significantly more likely to take vocational qualifications than Septemeber born ones. There is also increased bullying reported by August born children (possibily because they might be smaller or less mature).

Those of you who dismiss these problems on anecdotal evidence do summer born children a great dis-service. There is a genuine issue and to dismiss it as merely an excuse is fatuous.

The Government clearly recognises the problem and has contemplated age adjusting exam scores.

Of course, YABU. Yes, anecdotally, LOADS of Summer birthdays do great, but statistically it takes a while for the whole cohort of younger children to get on an even keel with the older ones. Obviously.

When my dd2 started school (early Sept birthday) she's had a whole year longer on this planet than her Aug born friend - she was 25% older than him. If she weren't just a little bit more ready for learning, a little bit more dexterous at buttons and shoe and coat fastenings, if she weren't just a bit more 'ready' to sit and listen for a while, etc.,etc.,etc, then I'd have had to ask what she'd been doing for that extra year on the planet / whole extra year of being a Nursery and Playgroups, etc.

Well, good for you for being well up the bell curve for children born the same month as you, OP.

The median developmental level for children just turned 4 years old on August 31st is quite a way behind that for their classmates who turn 5 on September 1st, though. It's 1/5 of their lives.

Look at the statistics.

I didn't used believe it either.