Some anecdotal evidence about summer borns

[duchesse]

My daughter (27th July) will be starting senior school in September aged just 11yr 1 month. She went for her induction day at the pretty selective school she will be attending, during which one of the activities involved the girls sorting themselves out into age order.

My daughter was the youngest of the 34, by nearly 6 weeks (the next youngest was June 15th, with one other earlier in June). The point is that there are hardly any girls born in the summer term. Anecodotal evidence that summer borns tend not to do as well academically even by the end of primary school, or mere statistical blip?

DS is mid August birthday and doing extremely well at his Grammar school

Statistically autumn-born children, as a group, tend to perform better than summer-born children. But there are lots of exceptions in both groups, of course.

I agree with roquefort's point - other countries manage to let children move up or down at different ages as indicated by their abilities - why can't we?

Those whos children are a year ahead through prematurity, did any of you think about holding them back a year. DD was 3 months early and at the moment is very much on a par ith others of her corrected age. I worry that though shes doing fantastically she will be behind those her actual age especially as she will be one of the youngest in the year anyway.

Bronze, that is an interesting point you have raised. What is 3 months i wonder? as i guess it does even itself out after a while. But she will have been "here" for as long as another child her age so recieving outside stimuli etc, but of course would be developmentally younger. I have heard, and i dont know if this is an old wives tale that my mother told me (honestly cant remember) that premature babies tend to do better. You might be able to correct me on that one. What you say about holding the children back a year is also interesting as i would consider this for DD if her speech doesn't resolve itself in time (i belive it is a delay rather than a specific problem iyswim). I have heard that they don't legally have to go til they are five, but if you hold them back you have to then enter them at the same level as if they started at just four - again i could be wrong. Interested if anyone has any info on this.

No, you are correct, lem - if a child's 5th birthday is in July or August & they don't start school until the Sept after that, they would go straight into Y1.

I do think the whole 'starting at just four' thing is crazy. Why can't all local authorities stagger the intake so that younger ones can (if their parents so wish) start them when they're nearer to five? It seems grossly unjust that, where I live, I can start my children when I think they're going to be ready (rather than because the calendar says so) because they're going to an independent school - but if they'd gone to the local state school, they would have been forced to start when they were only just four (the school is so over-subscribed that the only way to guarantee a place is by starting your child in the September after they turn four - so in effect, there is no choice). It seems so wrong that you only get a choice if you can afford to buy one!

thanks ww ohhhhh, she will only just be four its too young waaaaay to young, she is still my baby pfb moment here even though she my second

dottoresa, dont even get me started on that one

I have an August baby and coped just fine at primary and secondary school - was top of the class and had no problems. I came unstuck when it came to taking my A levels and failed 2 out of 3. Tbh I was worried about going to university then and I think with hindsight that I wasn't ready. A year later, I had done my retakes and couldn't wait to get to university and I did pretty well after that.

I do think it can catch up with you at any age. When I think back, most of my friends were autumn born. Maybe a coincidence but who knows.

DH is September born and so was very nearly 19 when he took his A levels whilst I wasn't even 18. It has to make a difference, particularly for boys.

DS1 has a late July birthday and is doing well at school but his year is made up of 50% summer born children and I think this may work in his favour.

DS2 is September born and is 5 the day before he goes full time at school this September so it will be interesting to see if he makes more progress in Yr R than DS1 did, who took a good year to get into the swing of things.

Nadal - born in June
Federer - born in August

I guess the education systems in ESP and CH are different from ours in England but hey, who said summer babies are poor at sport?!

Did anybody?

Yes, a couple of posters!

lingle and WendyWeber are right - on average summer-borns do less well at school than autumn-borns, just because they are up to a year younger, and the effect lasts at least through to GCSEs. It doesn't matter how many individual cases of successful summer-borns are raised, it remains true that overall summer-borns do worse. That also doesn't mean that any particular summer-born is 'condemned' to do badly - many will do fine.

Unfortunately for parents who would like to start their summer-borns at school later, the research done recently also showed that the best thing within the current system for a summer-born child is to start school with the autumn-borns in September, even though they are still very very young to be doing full days, as they are otherwise disadvantaged by receiving less schooling. The other option would be to let less mature or less able summer borns move down a year so they start reception with younger children, though this does have the disadvantage that it widens the age distribution in that year. Jim Rose is looking at this issue partly because it's possible that a new primary curriculum could let summer-borns learn in a way more suited to them because they are younger - perhaps helping parents of summer-borns feel more comfortable sending them to school earlier.

I am August birthday, have 5 A Levels (3 As, B, C) and a 2:i degree.

Dd is August birthday, and although she is only in reception, is in the top group for everything - literacy and numeracy and doing really well.

Ds1 is June birthday (y2) - he is doing really well, reading fantastically - the only area he has really struggled was in writing - found the fine motor skills took a little later to master than some of the September-December girls.

Ohhhh, I missed those, sorry, MMAJ

Anyway there is a birthdate divide in football too I believe...IIRC the cut-off date for junior football is 1st August, so the August kids are the oldest in a team, playing with the older ones from the academic year below; July are the youngest.

DS1 ia a mid-Jul birthday, was the joint youngest in his year at primary school and the absolute youngest in his football team. He was always trying desperately to keep up with the big ones but mostly failed, twas a bit sad

Beckham - born in May!!

My DS1 (8) is a mid-June baby and he is doing great! At his parent's evening we were told that at the end of yr3 he is at the level for maths and reading that they expect from children at the end of yr4! He is not so great with his literacy as he does not enjoy writing (his teachers say that is a boy thing).

It is, however, always mentioned at his parent's evenings that he is a bit more emotionally immature than some of the other children, particularly when it comes to his speach but given that he is nearly a year younger than some of them I think that is to be expected to a degree.

DH and I, and my sister for that matter, all August, all have good degrees and futher professional qualifications but looking back all came in to our own in the later part of education.

DS will be 5 end of July. DD will be 7 end of August.

DS has 3 girls in his class who will be 6 in the first week of Sept and another 4 boys who will also be 5 in July. At this age the difference is noticeable, the girls are noticeably taller, more mature, and have better pencil control and thus better writing/colouring abilities. Generally the girls reading is better too because they can concentrate more. However he is academically bright, loves numbers and has a good memory so seems to be coping well - with that kind of mix its the teachers I feel sorry for!

DD also youngest in year, the year is a little more balanced but again there are alot of Sept - Nov birthdays (maybe there was more planning with those parents! we were just greatful to have the children!!)

Having said that she has just got her SATS back (pauses for a proud parent moment and got 4 3s and a 2a ) so is coping well. She seemed to make up ground second half of yr1 snd yr2.

I think I have always been aware that there may be an issue with younger children and have had regular converstions, when appropriate, with the teachers but if you want to support your children you do that whenever their birthday is don't you!

dsis's birthday is 28th August. She's been top of her class ever since she started school, and is a musical prodigy to boot! She's also the baby of the family.

someone alerted me to this problem for summer-borns: post GCSE all the 16-year-olds dash out and nab the plum holiday/Saturday jobs, eg Waitrose, which they are then able to hang on to until, or continue during, university.

July and August children are still 15, so they get left with nowt.

That happened to DS1 (mid-Jul) fircone, but he did get a job with Sainsburys in Sept/Oct when some of the 18-year-olds went off to uni - it was just the summer part he missed out on.

all of the "top" readers in dd1's class (she's now in yr 3) were June/July/August babies, regardless of sex

I am July born and never struggled at school. Was much more concerned about not being legally able to buy alcohol until after the end of term in the upper sixth!

DS turns 4 on 21st August. He loves doing Jolly Phonics at nursery, and I'm not too worried about his academic ability.
However, socially I am worried.
He likes to play with the older boys in his nursery class, but they seem to have a better ability to direct play, while he follows. a few weeks ago, one boy took his toy, to keep, and told him to buy another one for himself if he wanted one the same! He wasn't being mean really, he just knew he was in charge and DS would agree to anything to be friends...

At a talk at his new school the teacher said they expect all children to be able to get dressed, button up coats, go to the loo, wipe their bums, eat their lunch, etc. all on their own and that children should not expect assistance from her.
While I understand this, I am peeved I've got to hothouse teach him to be completely independent by September while other children have had almost a full year more to learn it all.

My DS is June-born. He's big for his age and pretty bright, but I still think age just four is far too early to start full-time education.

Another poster said that legally, in England and Wales, children don't have to go to school at all, and particularly not full-time, until they are five. We tried to arrange this with our lovely, open-minded village school and were told that DS would have to attend to some degree when he's four, otherwise we'd likely not get a place a year later.

However, if you are genuinely concerned about this early start, you can legally treat Reception year as an extension of pre-school, and have your child attend part-time (to secure their place) until the term after their fifth birthday - irrespective of the school's "policy".

I don't wish to single my son out in this way, but because eight out of the 15 children starting school with my DS are summer-born boys, three mums (including me) are considering extending the part-time phase for up to a year, so DS wouldn't be an oddity.

There is considerable evidence to suggest that age four in and of itself, let alone a young four, is too young a school starting age for most children. Where our government needs to be taking on board this research and looking to better-performing countries whose children start full-time school between ages five and seven, instead it's moving towards getting pre-schoolers to learn all their phonetic sounds and write their names pre-Reception. Barmy, IMHO.

I realise the OP's situation concerns secondary entry level, so this isn't much help. Sorry. Not altogether irrelevant to other posters though.