Following Ed Balls webchat, thread for parents of summer born babies

[GeraldineMumsnet]

We said we'd start this thread, as so many of you expressed an opinion on the Ed Balls webchat thread about summer-born babies and starting school.

BTW, this is a recent thread in media requests on a linked topic.

Will nip over to webchat thread and link to this.

MNHQ

My September born son, very bright and quite mature, was devastated when all his pals started school the year before he did and was very frustrated. He would have coped fine with school a year early (i.e. in the same position as an August baby) HOWEVER when he did start, he was that much more mature and ready than the majority of his peers and it has stood him in very good stead ever since both academically and in things like sports - so it would probably be a very good idea to be able to defer. I was so glad not to have pushed for an earlier start.

Well I've posted my Jim Rose question. Lingle - your post was very good - then you've had plenty of practise on this subject. I think paranoid's prem baby point is well made. So we'll see.....

If the Scottish system allows some flexibility, so those with summer borns and/or kids with SN can choose for their kids to go into the reception equivalent at 5 rather than 4, why can't the UK system. I doubt most parents would have their child start at 5, the vast majority would be parents with valid concerns. And how can the inflexibility re:significantly prem babies be justified, where children whose adjusted age is under 48 months have to start reception?

am having probs with DS as he was born end april. Despite going to nursery for 2 yrs where he was very happy has failed to measure up to peers. unfortunately he is very tall for his age and they seem to expect a lot of him. Its not just a matter of academic work but also emotional security. Finally, after two years of not sending any readin books home on a regular basis they recognised that he needed additional support but confidence is quite often very low. im now looking into moving him to a tiny village school where he will be in a mixed age group (10 in the class) present school 200 kids. or to another larger school where they have more extra curricular activities. He says he would like to go to the smaller one if hes going to get more help, but im worried it might be too small (43 on roll) what do other mums think?

No stats to back this up, but I was a June baby, was high in my class for reading, writing, maths etc, and now have a PhD and my own successful business.

This idea of summer babies underperforming seems a bit of a red herring: there are lots of factors at play in determining how successful a child is at school (e.g., providing a 'learning environment' where school work is shown to have value is probably a more unfluential one), and being a summer baby is probably a minor one if a factor at all (remember correlation doesn't imply causation). Don't fret too much folks.

Al1968

" ...correlation doesn't imply causation)."

I would be interested to know what independent factor correlating with month of birth, you think might cause what is commonly known as the 'relative age effect' of being the youngest in the school year .

But, I do agree that success at school is effected by many factors, relative age being just one. Although when it's combined with others such as SEN, poor home background or lower intelligence, it can be pretty devastating for the individual child.

This report from the British Medical Journal finds a correlation between relative age in the school year and psychiatric risk.

It found "The younger children in a school year are at slightly greater psychiatric risk than older children. Increased awareness by teachers of the relative age of their pupils and a more flexible approach to children's progression through school might reduce the number of children with impairing psychiatric disorders in the general population."

Again, IMO this is not an issue for individual parents to worry about. But, it should be something that the Department of Education is aware of and accounting for. Maybe we'll get more out of Gove - than we did from Balls!

Al1968 - sorry

Nooo!! going mad. 9- Al1969.

clearly the PhD wasn't in statistics.

lingle .

Well, as this thread has come back to life again, I may as well send a further report from the summer-born trenches.....only it's all good news .

DS2 is now 4.10. He was one of about 7 summer-borns in his original year group. The other five or six summer-borns from his original year-group have gone into reception and done just fine. It's a good school, with sensitivity to the effect of age-differences. The staff have adjusted the curriculum and they aren't pushing the boys (especially) on the reading and writing front - just gently encouraging it. And they make allowances for the extra tiredness that children this young are likely to experience.

DS2 was the exception. His language and social communication were far too far behind for him to access the curriculum or have any meaningful peer relationships in his original year group. We therefore refused to send him to school at 4.0 and took advantage of Bradford LEA's then-policy of allowing him to start reception at 5.0 with his entire education to be offset by a year. This has transformed his life chances and I'm very, very proud of myself for fighting for this result.

Hindsight is a wonderful thing, and now it's quite easy even for the people who thought my decision was peculiar to see how important it was. DS2's language has caught up and he can now answer questions well enough to be able to access the curriculum. But what's even more important is that he has been able to practice his nascent social communication skills with the right peers. No teacher in the world could have made him a true peer of the other August-borns in the original class, none of whom were particularly immature for their birth year and month. He needed to practice social skills with children 6 months to a year younger. Having done that under the guidance of a skilful nursery manager, he has blossomed, and now he is "one of the gang" in his nursery community.

Perhaps 9 out of 10 summer-born children just need an extra bit of thought from parents and some good adjustments in the classroom for a few years in order to thrive (though lots of them don't get this....). But if your child is potentially the tenth - the one who won't reach his potential unless he gets a chance to change peer group, then it is absolutely crucial that exceptions be made. And even Jim Rose - once we pinned him down on this forum - admitted that he had never intended there to be no exceptions to the rule.

PS, note to David Cameron. You have spent perhaps £1000 on an extra year's nursery for DS2. You have probably saved about £10,000 in professionals' time, statementing processes, tribunals and 1-to-1 support staff: and that's just in one year.

lingle - it's good to hear how well your ds is doing. . And, I agree with your point that whilst not all summer born dc's need to be deferred, adjustments in the classroom would be beneficial. The report I linked to earlier recommends:

"Simple practical classroom interventions such as calling the register in birth order or groupingchildren in the classroom by relative age may help to sensitise teachers to the age position of individual children within the class, thereby reducing the likelihood of unrealistic expectations being placed on younger children. Streaming children according to their relative age within each year group may also be helpful,.."

But, I fear, we must now wait for the results of the Jim Rose recommendation that all children start school in the September after they turn 4, before these common sense recommendations will be considered.

Meanwhile, your experience should inspire others who are seriously worried about their summer born dc's.

"But, I fear, we must now wait for the results of the Jim Rose recommendation that all children start school in the September after they turn 4, before these common sense recommendations will be considered."

Yes, I suppose that getting rid of the January and April intakes will make the problem for the immature (in absolute terms) even more extreme..... which may finally lead to change... but not till more children have suffered

I wonder whether the financial argument might win the government round. Even if they started with just those children whose paediatrician recommend deferment, that would be a huge saving on statementing costs and tribunals and one-to-one. It's such a cheap intervention - working with nature not against it. Maybe I ought to visit my MP?

I wondered if the new 'academy' primary schools or even primary 'free schools' might begin to look at this from the financial angle and see the value in putting pupils in the class most appropriate to their needs and maturity. Private schools are often more open to it, for this reason.

Let's hope so.

Very interesting point JSB

Our school got an outstanding and governors have said they'll be doing a feedback exercise soon.

I have my doubts about the academy thing (what happens when the outstanding leader leaves?) but will definitely make a submission on this as something where academy status would give us more flexibility.

Do you know whether school action plus/statemented support would still be provided by the LEA under academy status?

Lingle, thank you for the update on your DS2 - I'm so pleased that it's going so well for him now. And how lucky he is to have a mother who has done everything you have to make sure that he's in the right educational environment.

Just thought I'd let you know that Bliss, the premature and sick baby charity, are doing a survey on entering your premature-born child into primary school. They want anyone whose had a premature baby who is now 4 years old or over to take part, whether they agree with the current School Admissions Code or not and whether they wanted to delay their child's entry to school or not. You can get more info and take part here.

They campaign for more flexibility around premature born children starting school and will be using the survey as evidence in their campaigning work.

I hope that Bliss are successful in getting some flexibility- my DS is an end of August baby who should have been born at the end of November. Early days for us but I would like to have the option of sending him to school a year late if he's not ready.

lingle - I found this education blog which seems to suggest that it's up to the academy where they get the SEN services from - LEA or elswhere.

Warning over SEN provision states that the risk is not to the academy but potentially to the provision of SEN services to non academy schools, if the academy chooses to not get it's SEN support from the local council.

"If a significant number of schools convert to academies, there?s a real risk that it makes some services that local authorities provide unviable. That?s the big risk."

IMO - if primary schools adopted the policies of streaming by relative age and had children starting KS1 when they were ready and able, then the requirements
for SEN services should be be reduced anyway.

I live in Catalonia (NE Spain). My daughter is born in October but is one of the youngest in her year group because in Spain, year groups are not academic but calendar years (the oldest are born in January). She was just 2 and a half when she started school and it was difficult for her to cope (2 languages too!). My son starts in September and as a February baby, is one of the oldest in his year group. He is far more outgoing and physically streets ahead of his peers and I think he will fare much better at school. Not sure if it is to do with the fact that he is older or simply due to his character!

I have just posted a message in the talk-education-primary school section titled 'parental choice in starting school'?. I am looking to see whether it would be possible to start a campaign to allow more parental flexibility in when our children start school as currently happens in Scotland? Any views and ideas welcomed on this.

Cheers...

Both of my DCs are summer babies (end of June and July). My DS now just 10 is a good average but still suffers from the confidence set back at being so behing when he started school. He achieved average and above in KS1 but a bit of a perfectionist and wanted to do better. He has asked for maths tutoring to get him into the top group but that is part of his personality. Also one of the smallest and best friends with all the younger ones at first but this has now changed.

My DD is behind (just going into Year 2) but it does not seem to bother her at all. She does what she wants and is not interested in what other people are doing. I hope she carries on like this. She is probably above average in numeracy and below in literacy.

I was October and definitely saw all of the advantages of being older. Having said that Mick Jagger, Paul McCartney, Michael Jackson (all summer-born, perhaps summer-born children have greater creativity! Both of mine are quite creative children.

I was born end August & remember vividly feeling far too young to be at school on my first day. However, I did catch up, but I do not see this as the case for some children.
I somehow passed the 11+ & went to the local grammar school. However at the time I never quite twigged how out of 120 girls in my year, there were only 3 August birthdays!! I thought it was just a strange special rarity, but of course there were other reasons!
Also worth noting that there was obviously a high amount of Sep / Oct birthdays - but as children progressed up the school some seemed to lose their initial capability that got them into the grammar school & started to struggle - seems it works both ways.
I have heard that grammars sometimes give extra points for Summer birthdays these days & take off for Autumn ones.
One of my dds is August,just like me, I just hope she catches up too!

I'd definitely support a campaign for the Scottish flexibility and asked for this in my comments to the Rose consultation. We greatly envied our friends north of the border when our daughter had to start in September in the first cohort from our county with all September starters. Age just 4, she had been very small for dates at birth (though not premature) and had that glorious label "failure to thrive" as a little tot. We had no doubt that we would have opted to defer if only we could have done - but at that time not only would we have lost the place at the school butt she would have started eventually in Year 1. For a decade (sadly I do not exaggerate) it was more a question of operating beyond her physical and emotional strength than academic issues - she was physically so exhausted that she succumbed to any and all the germs doing the rounds. Moving to juniors and secondary were the low points. I have no doubt deferring would have helped.

my youngests dob is 21 august. he would have gone into y1 but i took him out to home school due to the affect it had on him. his older brother is in the same year as him(th oldest). this really shows the problem up.SATs at 6? no way. we are heing now anyway.