New report suggests adjusting August born's test results.

[Suzieismyname]

www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-22469216
This will be ignored by Gove, won't it?

I'm not sure maths skills are too effected any more than anything else by being summer born. I have a first class honours degree in maths, award won for top of department at uni. I always found maths easy. I had to work harder at other things though. Maybe I'm a freak.

I'm august born and did fine at school but I realise that's not exactly proper research.

My eldest is august born and a boy to boot. He's now in yr 4 and as Bonsoir has experienced is beginning to come into his own but its taken a while. I was told by his teachers that its pretty common for it to take until year 7 or 8 for the age advantage to begin to disappear.

In some of the super-selective independents there are far less summer born children than those born sept-dec.

I don't think GCSE's should be adjusted but there should be more consideration for summer born children in primary. And being told repeatedly by a teacher 'well he's very young for his year' isn't massively helpful.

My primary school decided half-way through year one to split the classes into Sep-Feb births and March-Aug births. I was born in July and went from the middle of the pack to the top and it gave me loads of confidence. I don't know why more schools don't do this.

Personally I think there is an awful lot of kerfuffle about this here when surely what's really going on is that summer borns are being labelled as underperforming early on in their school careers rather than there being adequate scope for differentiation based on very natural differences in development.

Every school system has a start and an end to the academic year: therefore there will always be children who are younger/older when beginning.

Dh was end of September born was in Ireland in the 80's and he was taken in early in order to give another teacher a job) when starting school. His sister was younger (same story, November born ). He is a highly qualified chartered professional with two degrees and a postgrad, she is a doctor.

I think that setting these low expectations rather than providing good educational practice and working with children's development and catering for their zone of proximal development (which really should and probably is the case anyway) is a bigger problem than the actual age of Summer borns.

I really don't think that this is a good idea. It moves us even further towards the notion of exam grades as a 'sorting' function, rating people from top (clever) to bottom (to be shuffled off into some 'non-academic' hole).

The point of GCSEs was meant to be that they were criterion based, identifying whether you had learnt a certain set of skills and knowledge.

Frankly, as an employer, I don't care whether you got a C grade at GCSE at age 10 or 20, I care whether you can write a coherent letter and work out percentages correctly every time. And indeed, under this suggestion, how would mature students' exams be marked?

Its a bit like a driving license - you have to achieve a certain level in order to be able to drive. We don't say 'you're not a natural driver, so stay on your bike' - we say 'you need to take more lessons and work harder to achieve the required level.

I absolutely agree that summer born babies need more support. As others have said, why not just relax the absolute rules that say 'you must stay in your age cohort entirely' and allow teachers and parents together to make a decision as to when it is appropriate to move a child out of year.

DD's year has exactly the same issue at the other end; the two oldest children in her class - who are also quick learners - should patently be in secondary school now, not kicking their heels in primary for another year getting into trouble because they're bored.

Golly, I'm jealous of the German system! That would be great for my DD1 all kids.
It's very heartwarming to read all these anecdotes of brilliant summer borns but unfortunately this research shows that on average summer borns fare worse than September borns.
Some summer borns will be brilliant, some September borns will be much less able.

It can have an impact on the other end of the school system too. DS (16) will be having a gap year (or even 2) before university, he was born in July and would struggle to cope away from home at just 18, particularly as he has mild Asperger's Syndrome.

We noticed ever since he started school that he seemed to lag about 6 months behind his peers in certain areas - it would take him longer to grasp certain mathematical concepts, so he'd have a lightbulb moment just before the exams and not have reaped the benefit of all his practice papers, consolidation exercises and revision while really understanding what he was doing. This was in spite of private tuition and lots of help at home - the cognitive skills required to do really well just hadn't developed.

This is still true during 6th form - getting the hang of exam techniques for GCSEs, and now AS levels, always seems to happen in late Spring instead of late Autumn when it might make a big difference to his final grades. We always got the impression that he's just failing to reach his full potential by 6 months!

Being pragmatic, I can't see extra money being ploughed into getting children to start later or defer or have extra help in the classroom. I do think that prevention is better than cure...
So if this adjustment means that summer borns get some compensation for being disadvantaged then that's great.

Purely anecdotal, but I, my husband and our two eldest DCs are summer born (3 of us in August, 1 July). I don't feel it has affected us as both my DH and I have achieved well, and are/were confident individuals; and both DS and DD are well above average according to their teacher's recent communications. We have a third child with an October birthday, so it will be interesting to see the difference....

My ds summer born talked himself into the top group for literacy in year 6 after complaining that he got very high results in a test but still in middle group as had only got 2c in KS1. He had a teacher that have him the chance and ended up getting one of the best KS2 results. He did it without my knowledge. Teacher told me after. I was proud of him for sticking to his guns. Now Year 8 one of the top 5 kids. DD now Year 4 complaining work too easy. Again only 2c in Ks1 for everything and in low groups but teacher reluctant to move her now as gap too wide between groups even though she does not ever have to learn her spellings etc. therefore the issue is not as many people have said making GCSEs easier but either leaving formal education to later which has no material impact on later learning or scrap KS1assessments and leave these formal assessments to the last two years of primary. The problem is education trying to be done by a tick box approach rather than by children being left to develop at their own pace. Teachers are intelligent enough to realise when kids need extra help and there is more resource to do this than the days when we grew up with only one class teacher and no assistants. It is a disgrace that some children are disenfranchised from learning at such a key age. My dcs are both the type to speak up but there are many who are not able to do this.

When I started at primary school, quite a few years ago, there were three intakes a year. In September for Sept, Oct, Nov and Dec babies, in January for Jan, Feb, March, April babies and April for May, June, July and August babies. All in the same year at school all the way through, but some had started seven months before the others.

I don't think it made much difference to me, I was born in July, I didn't do brilliantly at school, but that's just me. My brother was August born and he did really well. Though he started in the September I just wasn't very bright.

I do love the way that any discussion on this topic always has summer borns showing remarkable lack of knowledge whilst insisting that the study is rubbish because they/their children did fine. Just because summer borns are statistically less likely to score as highly as Autumn borns does not mean that they definitely will score less, it is not that tricky to understand is it?

I don't think adjusting scores is necessary, I'd like to see a later start date and more support to those who need it. I think the one size fits all model is hugely damaging.

The labelling issue is a massive one though, I'm August born and internalised very early that I was thick. One particularly lovely primary school teacher even called me stupid in front of the whole class, 30 years on and that still hurts, I can feel the humiliation I felt as fresh as anything. I carried that with me my whole life and am now about to graduate from an elite Uni with a top science degree, but I still keep thinking I've been lucky in assignments and am finally going to get caught out for the thicko that I really am. That is the most damaging thing, even when I have my degree certificate I will doubt I deserve it as the message is so ingrained.

lilymaid That is a study I'd love to see. Purely anecdotally I have noticed a heavy skew toward summer borns out of the mature students. I've still got a chance to do something but there are a few that could have had their lives transformed if they had not been convinced of their lack of brains earlier.

DH had to do some research for work about sports personalities and discovered that the vast majority of them are autumn born. They are chosen for teams at a young age as they are taller, stronger and have better skills. Their ability, experience and confidence grows from there.

We took out summer borns to anew sports set up where there were almost no other children their age so they had to get picked and they have come on incredibly. At school they are still on the sports scrap heap, but at their club one is captain and the other was player of the week last week. You have to find ways round the school bias towards autumn born children.

It's sad, but as other posters have said, there are so many unfairnesses - better a summer born in a loving home with high hopes for their DC than a September child in a home where everyone expects them to end up on the dole.

I'm autumn born and quite dense. Ds is also an autumn baby and a bit of a late bloomer (at least that's my theory and I'm sticking to it).

Ergo, these studies are rubbish

What is surprising is that it is a surprise... Has long been noted that professional sportsmen significantly more likely to be Sept/Oct. And that academically makes more difference in the early years than at GSCE, when the advantage has evened out.
Surely in primary school where there is two or more form entry, would not be difficult to have a class of winter babies and a class of summer babies, and then mix them up later - if necessary. the current school year groupings are only arbitrary anyway - see how the German system etc does it now.

apatch Stevie Gerrard has often spoken about how he didn't make the school first team because he was a little 'un!

At a management team building week where we had to do one of those stupid things where we all organised ourselves into when in the year we were born, we discovered that 90% of our management team were born in the Autumn term! I was shocked.

As a parent of an end of July daughter, I would be more than happy for her GCSE results to be adjusted upwards , as she'll only be 15 when she takes them. She noticed her age the most in yr 7, when the rest of the class were allowed to watch a 12 film and she wasn't because she was too young!

Just to reassure you most of our management team are April,May,June,July and August although it is the type of company where you are more successful through the ability to sell and work hard rather than through academic qualifications apart from the two FDs both April born. Therefore the sensitive summer borns may have learnt to understand people better.

Richard Branson is a July born and Alan Sugar late March. Maybe not relying on qualifications makes you more entrepreneurial so we could be encouraging our summer borns to use their nonces. Obviously grossly stereotyping.

How do you get round those schools (usually independent) who allow summer born children to join the year below so will be the oldest in the year but will have the July and August adjustment.
Also some of the older children in primary school have to tread water for much of the earlier years to allow the rest of the class to catch up. I had this with DC who was 5 on the first day in reception class and ready for reading and writing but had to sit through all the foundation stuff and go through the letters. They are taught the same stuff as summer born children.

James Dyson May. Mick Jagger and Noel Gallagher both summer born.

My poor little boy - born 2 months prem mid July should have started Reception sept 2012. Instead he is Yr1 -one of the tallest in the class.

In somethings he does OK, but the whole concentration, not interested is so obvious. His teachers are lovely, just say he will do it when he is ready and they are so right.

Having said that he would like the monster child if he was in Reception now. Due date 29th Sept and he is currently 1m32 and size 1 shoes - so he looks like a Yr 1 boy but developmentally is not.

It cuts both ways..... as Summer-born parents of Autumn-born children we speak from experience....

I do think summer born is a mixed thing, I have an August born (prem) ds in Y9 and while I expect him to do his best and he seems to be doing well I do feel like he has a year 'in hand' over the Autumn children in that if he has to re-take either now or at A Level he will only end up finishing the time he would have if he hadn't been born early.

I do think the issue is with the idea that exams make the end of a road not just a step along it.

How many parents of September-borns wonder if their child would have been better off with the challenge of being in the year above? And, conversely, parents of August-borns wondering if their child would have been better as a high-flier in the year below?

The thing is, most of us under-play the fact that there are so many other variables that play a part, not least of which is ability. If your child is able, they will do well wherever. If not, they're more likely to struggle. Don't forget that the average attainment/ability spread in Year 6 is seven years. Seven years!

And, whilst we're in to bragging anecdotal evidence: ds was an August-born (serves us right, as teachers, practising for a September baby a month ahead of time!) and was in the lower groups in Reception. He moved "up" a group in Year One, and by the end of Year 2 was in the top group. Fast forward 10 years and he's got 13 GCSEs, 11 at A/A* and is House Captain and currently short-listed for Head Boy.

Summer-born parents, please don't despair.