Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Child-safe in minutes.

Meet the Other Phone.
Child-safe in minutes.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Original poster

WIBU to ask school if they take summer birthdays into account?

78 replies

OceanPlay · 11/03/2015 12:18

And I mean just to enquire, not complain. I have a daughter in year 7, her birthday is 29 August. She does pretty well at school and left primary with 3 level 5s. Two of her friends achieved a level 6, they both have September birthdays.

Last month the more able children from her year were invited on a science trip, my daughter wasn't included even though she is working at the same level as some who did go. However, I am aware that they have to draw the line somewhere and if they are just pipping her then so be it.

I am tempted to ask the school if they ever look at the data for those invited on the trips for more able children, is there a notable difference between the number of autumn born and the summer born? I realise that there will be a lot of older children who struggle and summer born who fly but I'm taking generally.

I suppose what I'm getting at, is my daughter just going to miss out on these opportunities through her school life just because she is young? If she had been born three days later, she wouldn't have even done her SATS yet?

OP posts:
Hoppinggreen · 11/03/2015 12:20

I doubt they do.
I realise there s a big difference between a just turned 4 and an almost 5 but I would have thought that this levels out by year 3 or 4.

WorraLiberty · 11/03/2015 12:23

It would have well levelled out by now if she's in year 7 as that would make her nearly 12yrs old.

SoupDragon · 11/03/2015 12:24

Why do think you would unreasonable to ask a question?

Original poster
OceanPlay · 11/03/2015 12:25

Apparently it doesn't even level out at age 16/17, although I would have thought it did by then.

I don't want to make a fuss, I'm just curious really. Afterall we can't ever do anything to change it! A couple of her friends can boast quite a lot so I do sometimes remind my daughter that they are a year older, but that that's the way it is.

OP posts:
TeenAndTween · 11/03/2015 12:26

Hopping There is data that summer borns continue to do less well than autumn borns all the way to GCSEs.

research report

guardian

CunningCat · 11/03/2015 12:28

My twins were premature and if had been born nearer due date would have been in the year below, but that is not taken into account at their school. I think it is unfair, teachers go on about what level they are at and need to try harderSad. YANBU IMO.

ClassicTron · 11/03/2015 12:30

I doesn't level out - 11+ is weighted to allow for the summer born disadvantage. However, I can't see how it could be taken into account for the type of reward OP's talking about, which is based on a subjective view anyway.

Personally, I would argue summer borns are disadvantaged all though life Sad

TeenAndTween · 11/03/2015 12:31

Initially they are less ready, this impacts their self confidence when they see they can't achieve what the infants nearly a year older can achieve. So less likely to try, vicious circle.

Generally, younger kids can be perceived as less able so they get fewer stretching opportunities (see OP's question), this then means those who are being stretched get further ahead etc, vicious circle.

Impacts clearly in sport where size and coordination impact a lot. See Malcolm Gladwell's book Outliers.

Original poster
OceanPlay · 11/03/2015 12:38

That's interesting thanks Teen.

I agree about confidence being knocked sometimes. The Dad of a friend once said to my dd, "you always seem to like trailing just behind my dd".

OP posts:
Original poster
OceanPlay · 11/03/2015 12:46

It will be the same for G&T trips at primary.

OP posts:
CunningCat · 11/03/2015 13:10

G&T trips are really unfair IMO, kids can't help their academic ability and wealthier parents can pay for extra tuition. Discrimination.

NeedAScarfForMyGiraffe · 11/03/2015 13:24

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

CunningCat · 11/03/2015 13:28

Bully for you! IMO the whole G&T thing is ridiculous! My twins still in reception so we will have to wait and see what their academic ability will be. I just don't agree in G&T.

LulaMayBrown · 11/03/2015 13:28

I think parents of summer-born babies who don't feel their children are ready for school should keep the pressure on the govt. to change things.

My DD was an august baby and really struggled with school in the UK. She was totally ready though to go to school a year later (it seemed to me)

My DS was born 7 days before the cut off date in the country we emigrated to. I asked the education board if he could wait a year (he is really short and quite 'babyish' for his age). They were more than happy to facilitate this. He is thriving at school in a way my daughter never did. I felt as though she was being dragged through her work all the time.

The UK should do something about this.

ShadowSpiral · 11/03/2015 13:37

I think it'd be worth finding out what criteria they've used to select the 'more able' kids, especially if your dd is working at the level of some of the kids on the trip.

As in - have they decided based on last years test scores, or is it based on their current levels? Given 2 kids working at the same level, what method are they using to class one as more able than the other?

Of course, it could just be that most of the kids on the trip were at a higher level than your dd, and a few remaining spaces were filled with randomly picked kids working at your dd's level.

But you won't know unless you ask.

JohnCusacksWife · 11/03/2015 13:55

I never understand the English system when i hear things like this. Why not just set the threshold for school strating age a bit earlier in the year to increase the minimum starting age and avoid having just 4 yr olds starting school. Seem scrazy to me that they persist in the summer threshold.

TeenAndTween · 11/03/2015 13:56

Need Maybe you should just accept your kids aren't as able as others in all areas and try to move, I don't really understand obbsessions over summer babies once they get to an older age tbh

I refer you to the research report I posted upthread at 12:26.
People just want the best for their children, and if there is an unintended bias, who else is going to advocate for the summer borns if not their parents?

PenguinsandtheTantrumofDoom · 11/03/2015 14:02

John - I can see the argument that it would be better if the youngest child was, say 4.5 rather than just 4.

The problem is that changing it would be a massive logistical and budgetary issue. A huge spend. Unless it was a high profile issue and a vote winner, I can't see any government committing money any time soon.

I'd argue that an easier solution for the time being would be to focus on reception being far more play based and move away from Gove's silly changes. Not a perfect solution, but it would improve things.

CunningCat · 11/03/2015 14:05

Here here Teen!!! Smile

TheWordFactory · 11/03/2015 14:11

I have summer born prem twins.

I banged on and on about this. I didn't let school or other parents pigeon hole their ability without the context of their ages.

I'm sure they thought I was a PITA. I'm sure of them said the same thing as need behind my back Wink.

But the proof of the pudding is in the eating...

Both DC are teens, doing exceptionally well at school and have out performed many of those early high fliers whose parents rolled their eyes.

Morelikeguidelines · 11/03/2015 14:14

I would ask, yes, in a nice way.

Don't ask, don't get.

PurpleCrazyHorse · 11/03/2015 14:15

DD is a late August birth (2.5wks early so should have been mid Sept!) and is in Year1. I'm not so worried about her as she was ready for school. She's not top of her class, but the September children aren't top in everything either. Some are better at reading (DD is about middle of the class) but DD is in the top set in Maths and is very articulate.

We purposely don't say anything to DD about her being the youngest, we focus on what she's good and and practise what she's not, with incentives as necessary (she's a reluctant reader). We had to have words with my MIL (retired primary school teacher) as she just went on-and-on about it. It currently isn't possible to hold DD back a year if I wanted her to, she will always be (one of) the youngest in her year. It's not ideal and I'm sure it'll cause problems in the future, but it can't be changed.

I would however ask the school how they choose children for the trips and maybe they could look at something for children who have improved the most, rather than achieved the highest levels. I think focussing on improvement is the way forward, recognising effort and not just the highest levels. It enables all children to participate in a reward not just the top few competing against each other for limited spaces.

grannytomine · 11/03/2015 14:18

My son always seemed quite young, I "home schooled" him. Well just let him play and discover until he was year 3. He started at the bottom of the class in everything but numbers. By the end of the year he was on the top table. I think just 4 is so young to start school.

IreneA78 · 11/03/2015 14:21

Can you notr see the irony of your post?
being 'Gifted and talented' is just as much an accident of birth as their birthdays

ragged · 11/03/2015 14:29

No matter where the cut-off is the curriculum will be pitched at a child who is on average 6 months older than the very youngest kids. There is nothing you can do about that unless you start dividing the year groups up into sub-groups.

Why should high achievers who happen to have December birthdays be disadvantaged? There's no way to make everything totally fair.

Swipe left for the next trending thread