"babies born in summer 20% less likely to attend university". Higher Ed Funding Council for England

[miljee]

I cannot remember whether it was here on 'education' or on 'primary' that I made the remark that I'd read somewhere months ago that something like 80% of Oxbridge Entrants are Sept-Dec born, thus supporting the idea that place in a school year DOES influence outcome. Someone (who didn't believe me!) asked for the long gone link but this is something I saw in the paper today. I admit it was The Sun but it goes on to say "The council says students who are very young for their school year tend not to catch up". The email is [email protected] if you want to verify this!

I'm not really banging a drum, here, just pointing out that my Oxbridge remark was probably quite accurate!

lol

dros

I do believe this research- its just logical that it would make a difference in some way, as the age gaps in reception year can be stunning- DS3 would be 4 and 4 weeks, oldest will be a day of 5. That's [retty huge really, almost 1/5 of their developmental time.

BUT I do agree as well that there are lots of other factors involved.

I know that I was the first in my class to read, I could read a year before I started school and read well, but I was still emotionally behind the rest and I was written off. Years later I did Access, got offered every place I applied to (including Bristol) and whilt I think I could do better, I am getting all B's which as those of you who know my life will kniow is pretty good (well I think so LOL). Almost everyone on my Access course was a summer birthday- we just thought it was coincidence- but it does make you wonder, or it does me at least.

And of course if this research is genuine, it does have implications for those like ds3 whoa re summer babies with a severe delay anyway and expected to go into mainstream- an 18 month delay plus a years separation from the eldest in the year is huge!

Which shows the Government rather than working on saying we'll make it harder for you to get to univesrity if your parents went and silly things like that could just as easily say - we will have a campaign to encourage more sex over Christmas so babies are born in September I suppose.

I have 4 born September to November and it is an advantage. The one born end of July has not done as well.

COmpulsort electrivity cuts over the festive season then Xenia? (seeing as they apparently result in a high birth rate)

I think if all schoold offered a january / April start it owuld be a good palce to begin, we are having our case taken to governors today to see if school will keep DS3's place for an Easter start (he's probably going to SN unit but nobody wants to decide yet). DS1's school offered late starts, DS1 is December born so we did not avail oursel;ves of it, but it was there fo those who needed it.

Late starts just mean fewer days in that school year though, Peachy. An April starter would only get one term in Reception and then go straight into Y1.

What they do need is more flexibility in which school year a child starts in. If children born in Spring/Summer whose parents felt they were not ready for school at 4 could be allowed to wait 12 months and start aged 5, that would make a huge difference.

Why do they all have to go through school on rails? Why can't they skip a year or repeat a year to suit the child, not the organisation? Eh? EH?

(Start in Reception aged 5 I mean)

That's exactly what ds3 is doing Wensy- April start.

Why?

because it gives the LEA more time to work out where he should be 9as opposed to well wecant do it by September but start him there and we'll miove hima few weeks after probably)

because we have an extensive therapy paln we can follow but have only just obtained (and we are still awaiting SALT) which might just by him the ability to access MS

because placing a child with a functional age of 2 in a playground with 11 year old kids and no support is an act of cruelty when he cant even ask for help

And yes I know not every child is Sn etc but the rules apply to everyone, at least they seem to here.

The rules are wrong, that's what I'm saying - what school year will he be in in Sept, Peachy?

Oh I agree about the school year flexibility - but have spent 6 months fighting the LEA for this with absolutely no result and to be told that its policy not to allow years to be redone for any reason whatsover.

Of xourse a child doesn't have to start school until the term after they become 5 but equally most LEA's (or all maybe? not sure) won't offer any bursery education in that time either so kids are just closed out altogether. Fine f you are in an area where private nursery provision is the norm (as where we were before)- here (SE Wales) a pre-school class on the school campus is the norm.

Wendy he should be in Reception

I wasn't trying to be aggressive- sorry if it came over like that - have a rote speech I now role out to everyone we meet lol

Oh if he'll be able to stay in Reception next year that's a lot better for him

(Where would you like him to go? Are there any special schools (sorry if wrong name ) left round your way?)

No they won't let him in rception next year- LEA say no chance

Loads of Sn schools here, hope he will be able to attend SALT unit (which aims to place back within MS by year 5), hopwever an AD unit might be right (Aped umming and ahing about DX) or general Sn unit

which as you can see is a good reason to wait until we know wher he is LOL!

(plus school or even LSA wont change a nappy and we'd be called in- wouldn't work I'd be at Uni or after september08 on my PGCE, DH works nights and needs sleep)

I realise our example is extreme btw

ASD unit- PAed umming and ahing

at my typing today

And I was a year young and did well as did my brother but in general that's not the case. So yes, conceive babies at Christmas and all is well.

In Scotland if your child is born in Jan/Feb you can choose if they start school at 4.5 or 5.5. My mum who is a Primary teacher says she would always advise the upper start date.

That sounds a sensible system

Perhaps I need to move to Scotland then (that's the second time I've said that today- although the fiorst was involvinga remote Island with no schools, TV or night shifts for DH LOL)

I agree too despite my flippant comment. In Ireland you can hold off sending your child to school as long as they are there when legally they are required to (5 I THINK). When you do start you start at the first year (reception equivalent) regardless. Now I have often wondered why my mother didn't hold off sending me as I was 4 in March. She could have waited until I was 5 and sent me the following Sept (a whole extra year at home). Obviously some Mums are keen to send you even when the state allows you that flexibility.

Agree about the baby timing. If I knew then what I know now. Bit difficult if they're prem though (which mine were slightly). A friend of mine had twins in August a couple of months prem so they were doubly disadvantaged when they started school.

Agree schools should be more flexible too. Don't much see the point in delaying your child's entry if they're going to start straight at the deep end of Year 1. Parents should be allowed to start their just 5 year olds in reception.

But they don't stagger the highers - they'll still be in the summer so I don't think that really helps. I think September start for all children is the only way.

My ds and dd both have August birthdays. They are both bright, but I think how much cleverer they would seem if they were two weeks younger and in the year below. I must start a campaign to award all August-born exam candidates 25% extra marks. Ha! Then see all the smug September children mothers clamouring to alter their children's birth certificates.

I would have loved DS1 (he of the mid-July birthday) to go into the year below.

Not sure he would, he was v attached to the big clever September boys; but they were not nearly as keen on him

Life's a bitch...

In France they are far more flexible and really do go by ability, regardless of age. It seems like a much more sensible way of doing things. Going by the calendar sucks.

And I was only quoting a statistic I read in that highly regarded, peer review professional journal, The Sun!

However- and here I'm getting 'political', I realise, but I am a bit disturbed by the number of posters, esp in the first half of this dicussion who tell us about their own university successes DESPITE late birthdays believing this nullifies and negates any silly old statistical nonsense! Surely that's the point of the statistics? IF 80% of Oxbridge entrants ARE 1st term birthdays, for instance, OBVIOUSLY that allows for 20% who AREN'T! Can people not see that they MIGHT be in that 20% as August Oxbridge successes?

The reasons this is the case are obviously not cut and dried. Discussing ways we might help our late born DSs (those that DON'T buck the statistical trend!) is a useful exercise. Denying the validity of the statistics because- it doesn't apply to us/our in-laws/our children isn't.

Fircone - not all September born children's parents are smug. Many have just had to support their child not understanding why their friends at nursery with summer birthdays have started 'big school' whilst they have to wait another year. Others find they have to pay out for child care a whole year longer. Some find that their September born is not as bright as the summer children and feel their child has not met the teacher's expectations. And some of us have a September -born simply because they were born 3 months early.Everyone has different problems.

From what's on here it looks like the problem is worse for boys? Makes me glad I have a Winter boy despite aiming for August at the time!!
Agree parents should be able to choose when their children start (within reason)I'm sure kids were down a year when I was at school. Nowadays if the school is private can parents have more say? Does anyone know?