Are your summer born children under achievers or high flyers?

[whoknowswho]

An article in the telegraph suggests August born children struggle at school by the age of seven and are more likely to take vocational quals than go to a top uni . My very late august born DD is thriving at school (Y2) top of the class and loving it but she's still very young so this could all change I guess. What are your summer born children like?www.telegraph.co.uk/education/educationnews/8860219/Summer-born-children-less-likely-to-attend-top-universities.html#

When I was at school my year group was large enough for there to be two classes and the classes were split by age. From what I can remember this was for the whole of my junior school years. Does this not happen anymore? I think it was of benefit to us all.... It seemed normal so I don't think we thought anything of it at the time. I do remember that 3 of the class of those born in the first half of the year passed the 11 plus and only 1 in the younger class. Don't know if that is telling.

It is important that teachers are aware of birth month for children, but it is a problem if it becomes a prophecy.

While there will obviously be many exceptions, as a former teacher I can see an element of truth in the idea that summer-born children are at a slight disadvantage. There is nothing intrinsically different about summer-born children, but I think the approach of individual schools and teachers can affect outcomes later on. Many schools now monitor children with birthdays from April onwards for potential underachievement. A year's difference in age is hugely significant for younger children, and in the classes I have taught it has tended to be the older children who come up as as the 'high achievers' early on, often purely because they are more confident and mature. Sadly, from the Foundation Stage Profile onwards, children are often linked to a number/level, and when I was teaching Year 1, it was often the autumn-born children who came into my class with Reception scores of 8 and 9 in the various areas of learning. These children were then projected to be the academic successes at KS1 and KS2, while the younger children lagged behind, simply because they had less life experience. It's also the biggest, strongest (and therefore often oldest) children who make it into the school teams at this level - and who then get themselves a reputation for being 'sporty'.

I have a summer birthday myself (July) and while I was an academic high achiever and now have a Masters degree, at primary school I was consistently placed in a mixed-age class with the other July/August born children from my year and the older children from the year below. Although my teachers did try to differentiate the work by age as well as ability, this wasn't always effective and for practicality's sake, we sometimes covered topics from the academic year below, rather than what the 'older' class were learning. Summer-born children also seemed to be something of a rarity at my academic grammar school, as the vast majority of the other birthdays in my year group clustered around September/October/November. So there does seem to be something in this research.

I am summer born-I have a good degree and always did ok at school-not really a high acheiver though. My friend also summer born and later than me has a first degree in criminal physchology, and is did extremely well in her school days. She is also highly motivated and organised at work.

"Many schools now monitor children with birthdays from April onwards for potential underachievement"

Its so sad, isn't it? Underachievement labelling I mean. Its all relative - are they "underachieving" compared to others the same age? Or those nearly a year older?

It makes me sad and angry.

DD2, Year2, August baby.

Top set for everything, confident little thing.

I am a summer baby and always high achieving academically. BUT looking back, especially around age 11/12, my friends (all summer borns) and I were definately emotionally less mature than the autumn and winter born girls (the split was obvious as the younger half of our year group was put with the older half of the year group below every other year).

Because of that emotional immaturity I think I really benefited from the fact that the school system in my town changed to first-middle system just before I was due to go to secondary school, so I didn't move on from primary school until 12 rather than just turned 11.

Oh, and I used to do some voluntary reading help at a primary school, kids aged 9/10. The kids we worked with were those who were underperforming, either in general, or compared to their 'potential'. 7 of the 9 I worked with over 3 years were July/August birthdays.

Aaaaaaargh this is my worst nightmare, DS is August born and I do worry about him starting school at 4.
DP brushes it off saying he'll be fine but I know deep down inside a year would make a huge difference, especially as DS is not a very confident child
I knew it

When DS started grammar school his form (form groups are based on geographical area) were asked to line up in age order in a PE lesson. His birthday is mid June. He was stood at the end of the line. So that means no child with a late June, July or August birthday from our area got into grammar school, despite there being an age weighting in the test.

I would suspect part of that is because a lot of parents don't put their summer born children in for the test because they have been led to believe by Primary schools that their child is not that clever compared to others in the class. It will also be because some forms of Primary teaching are going to exacerbate the difference in ability created by the age gap.

I suspect that the gap will get bigger as some parents who are really concerned with academic achievement attempt to have Autumn born children. There were certainly children in my son's year whose parents said they had taken it into account when planning their pregnancies.

Why do people keep saying 'well my daughter did very well'? Great, I'm sure she did, for most people it doesn't matter, but for about 20% it does, those who do worse at every stage, from SATS at 7, to exams at 11, to having less A*-C grades aged 16. This is a well-known and well-researched effect in education research, not some anecdotal survey.

It does make a difference overall to someone's children, even if not yours personally.

2.1 in MFL (and distinction in spoken Spanish) for DD born late August. If she'd been born in September I assume it would have been a First from Cambridge
I think if you've got it, you've got it, whenever you were born.

There will always be some children who are the youngest - Fact. It doesn't matter if you delay their school start they will still be younger. I don't see what can be done to change that....

Braindead, as the statistics show, it doesn't make a difference to all children, it's just overall, more children born in August are in lower performing groups, but there are plenty of August born who do very well.

The whole point of knowing about this phenomenon is to recognise it and counter it, not make it worse by thinking those children are less bright or will do less well. Actually, entering school early is exactly what lots of educationalists advocate i.e. not waiting til Jan for that age group.

Anyone for a read of 'Bad Science' on statistics?

Just read hardgoing post. DS and DN share a late summer birthday. DN got First in Russian and Czech, DS didn't complete degree. DN was diligent and able, DS was diligent but didn't make the grade. I don't think their birthday was the significant factor, DN was just more able than DS. (Although ironically DS now has the better job, but that's a different story)

Thanks Hardoing feeling slightly better but not totally reassured - you can never know can you....
Good to know teachers do take notice of the younges ones. Gives me an idea of what to ask when I go see some schools!

I agree with Hardgoing. As a parent you can counter what goes on in the education system with what you do at home, and your belief in your child.

Milly R you say you suspect the gap in achievement between autumn and summer born children may get larger as more aspirational parents attempt to have their babies in the autumn to give them the best opportunities.
I wonder if the number taking this into account could already be approaching 20% ?

ie. I think this factor should be taken into account as possibly statistically significant

• That is more planned babies and babies from a high socio-economic and well educated background being born in the autumn.

If you strip out the high achievers and the low achievers, from those left, yes, I can believe what I read today.

My daughter is a summer baby. When she started school she was not only the youngest but had two terms of half the time of teaching of those that had been 5 in the September term. It's a big disadvantage for the 'average' ability child compared to another, but slightly older, average ability child.

I am a July baby and did fine but am in one of the groups I mentioned in my first paragraph. Clever children will surpass their peers and no one will know whether they would have done better or not with more time at school purely because no one cares - they did brilliantly anyway.

It's also important to note, as Malcolm Gladwell did, that it's a cyclical thing, children who do very well at any given time point in relation to everyone else then get to receive more resources, more attention, better self-esteem (they can read and write and others) can't, so it's not their fate.

I didn't read the research carefully but I've seen elsewhere that the effect is countered by educational level of the parents, in other words if you are middle-class and well-educated, it has less effect. This is not surprising, but very sad for those who have less well-educated/advantaged parents and who then are behind in life before they even start really :(

my ds1 is an august baby he nearly passed the grammer school test, i also have twins born in september ds2 is average and dd is well behind and statemented

What happens if you give birth to twins, one at 2355hrs on 31st August and the other 15 minutes later on 1st Sept? Do they go into different years?
Just a thought...

Apparently they do Alice - someone told me so anyway

I have two July/August children, and whilst they are the lights of my life, if I had my time again I'd stay on the pill for an extra month or two. One has thrived academically but struggled socially, and one has suffered both academically and socially.

I also skipped a year when I was 9 and went up to Cambridge aged 17 - clearly it did me no harm academically, but socially it was a challenge and of course I was already entrenched with academic success when they moved me.

I am late Aug and I was top set and acheived well despite being dyslexic.

DS is also late Aug and now year 3 - he's top set for Maths and bottom for Literacy.

I guess it is all relative depending on individuals strengths and weaknesses.

Why can't the school terms run from April to April? Oh hang on, that would make kids born Jan/Feb/March the youngest...
No good for DC 1 (Jan birth).
Just the way it has to be then. There will always be kids who are almost a year younger than the eldest ones in their year.