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

haven't got cat but am scared of being outed.

Can 't face namechanging!

Do you think we live in the same town? If so, is your partner a vet?

I think you've already guessed who I am

Shit! where are the threads where I mention my many secret lovers and how do I delete them?

I'd rather it was you than most other people in this town if it's any consolation.

lingle thanks for that but i have ABSOLUTELY NO idea

I feel a bit weird notanotter because it's as if I'd put all DS2's medical records on display outside the town hall.

email me at my name @ btinternet.com
or facebook..i need to know now and do not want to be outed!!!!

my life history is on here!!!

snorkie, I think you are overlooking the very important point that parents cannot and do not just decide en masse to defer. There is consultation with teachers. Many parents know when their child seems ready for school even if their child is a late birthday. Many parents don't give it a second thought and send their child regardless. Some parents are advised by a teacher to defer their child when it would not be the parent's favoured choice.

Education theories tell us over and over that it is stage that matters, not age, and yet the English system makes no leeway for this at all.

LINGLE

silly me!!

i do know a child who is also in bradford lea and parents moved into lea when he was already school age

they could not fit him in primary of choice in correct year group so put him in the year below

i think he was far to middling but not 'flying' academically at this stage

he is now a level year and shit hot academically and socially - worked brilliantly for him

dogonpoints, I thought that's what I was saying - that I'm not sure at all that the right set of children will defer. Even if they do, then the problem still shifts, but if not it's exacerbated even more. As you say even with teacher input, some parents will ignore advice and also, teachers will not always give the right advice (in some cases it will be blindingly obvious which way a child should go, but in others not at all and additionally some teachers will have personal opinions about whether it all 'evens out' or not etc). Of course not all children go to pre-schools and they will not have a teacher to advise at all. When the wrong decision is made (as it always will be in some cases - the question is how often), the ability spread in the year group will be increased rather than decreased and the problems for the younger children compounded.

The fact that Scottish parents don't angst could be for all sorts of reasons. Maybe because they have a choice & believe that fixes everything; maybe as a nation they're less angsty (not if the poll tax is anything to go by, but still a possibility); maybe the research showing if their system fails some groups of children isn't there or isn't well known, parents don't realise their child is in a 'at risk' group & so don't worry about it.

I've never seen studies of educational outcomes for Scottish children - many people just assume it's better, which it almost certainly is for a subset of children, but what about overall?

Glad you like the 6 month cohort idea lingle, I think it has quite a few merits, but is probably too radical to ever be adopted.

lingle have you had a reply from MNHQ about Rose on webchat?

You could draw attention to your post by hitting the 'report post' button and ask them direct?

Have just read the IFS report When you are born matters and I might have spotted a flaw!!

The report compared the exam results of summer born and autumn born children within individual classes. Summer born children who start school in September perform better, compared with their autumn born class mates, than summer borns who had a later start.

But you could look at it another way: Autumn born children, with a first term of school in a small class (say an average 15 children with a 6 month age spread) did better than autumn chidren who began reception in a class of 30 with a much wider age spread - no big surprise!!

So it could be that the Jim Rose policy of making all children start reception in September is just leveling things things out. Bringing down the older kids' results to close the gap - not really what I'd call a win!!

And, if I recall the September start was presented as the ultimate answer to the 'summer born' problem which removed the necessity for any other action!!!

Of course I could be wrong - would love a Jim Rose webchat.

I think the use of individual classes would be to prevent any bias being due to having different teachers.

I don't pretend a mastery of statistics (though do have an A-level in it). I think the IFS is an economic think-house so should stand up to a reasonable level of scrutiny.

My DD was 3years on the 31st August and started nursery 5 afternoons a week last week. She was more than ready to start! She is the youngest in the nursery and although she is tired today she is having a ball! She loves her little nursery jumper and book bag and settled well on the first day and I am more than confident that she will be the same when she starts school. BUT it is daunting knowing that there are children that are a year older than her starting in the same class. I know that her teacher and key worker know she is the youngest (although I don't want her to be labelled the baby - which happened to my sister who is also an Aug baby and she hated it.) so I try not to worry myself

JSB, your flaw seems a real issue, but it only applies if ALL children in the study start late if they are summer-borns. And they don't currently. It is optional in some areas, and not available at all in others.

So actually, the effect still applies (though perhaps marginally lessened by the additional smaller class effect) when looking at children on aggregate across the country.

I agree with snorkie, and we should do away with the long holidays as well. School should be open more than it is with no long summer holidays etc, this would help both working parents, children of all ages and give extra time in the curriculum for lessons that are currently shoved aside.
Incidentally I have a ds born in October, doing well and a ds born in July, doing well but more immature in his behaviour than his older peers (although that might just be him). Overall some choice should be offered, but not too much because as has been pointed out, some-one will always have to be the youngest and therefore at a possible disadvantage.

I feel children in general are expected to start school too early in this country.

DD1 (end of April birthday) is now in year 3 and is coping fine, but she struggled with the first couple of years socially. I felt as she started in Reception she would have benefitted from another year at pre-school. She has the added problem that she's always been one of the tallest in the class, so people assume she's one of the oldest.

I guess someone has to be the youngest in the class, but I do think there should be more flexibility - deferring till Christmas would help some (we don't seem to be able to here), but there's no point being allowed to start a year late if you then have to go straight into year 1.

This is a massive issue for me and my son, now in Year 2. He was forced to start school well before he was ready. He was 4 weeks premature, born on 31st August, but the council refused to take this into account and refused to defer his entry, saying that he was not obligated to attend Reception but if we started him a year later he would have gone straight into Year 1 - missing a whole year of Reception and opportunities to form friendships. In fact he was only THREE when he started as school began a few days before his 4th birthday. Being small for his age, this has had a huge effect on his confidence. He left pre-school a confident little boy with lots of friends who would talk to anybody but school has wrecked his confidence and now he is very shy. Boys are very competitive and constantly put him down as he is the smallest - he is quite skinny as well. He does not tell me much of what goes on at school, sometimes he tells me that the boys wouldn't let him play on their team, for a good part of Year 1 he cried every morning and didn't want to go to school, there were times when the teachers had to drag him through the door. He has just started Year 2 and has settled much better although he is still very quiet - we are srtiving to get him involved in after-school activties to try and build up his confidence. His school report at the end of Year 1 stated that although he was up to speed in some areas he was behind on others. I feel that because of his size, his prematurity and his character it would have made a huge difference to him to have started a year later. I don't understand why the government won't let parents of summer-born children choose as this could well cause him to underachieve and what good is that to anyone. We have seriously considered emigrating because of this issue.

Conversely, I know parents of autumn-born children who felt their child would have been ready to start earlier. Parents should be given the choice.

I think that I'm in quite a good position, my son's was born on 2nd Sept, and was 4 this year, we had a discussion about him at his end of term nursery review, and we all came to the decision that he was not ready for school this autumn term, and luckily he will be 5 when he starts, and will be the oldest. My daughter was born in June, and will not start school until 2011, but she will be one of he youngest.

I think that she will be fine in school, as she is already at the stage where she undertands and wants to go to nursery in December. I think I am one of the lucky ones, and my son was born in the 'right' month. A couple of days earlier, and we would have been in trouble!

I'm August born and think I struggled with writing but otherwise did fine in reception and very well academically later on. For me, being August born was a bonus and gave me an extra year to play with so I was relaxed about taking a gap year and doing a four year degree. But I think girls find it much easier than boys.

DS1 is late August born and has just started reception this week. He seems very young and is ready in some ways but not others, but on balance, I think it's the right thing for him. He has been at nursery since he was ten months and would be bored stiff with another year in the pre-school room. He is big for his age so is one of the tallest in the class despite being the youngest, which is helpful. He is quite bright - has already taught himself to read by watching Fun with Phonics on CBeebies and asking us what words on signs etc are. But he is not good at gross or fine motor skills so struggles with writing and will be even further behind the curve on running, jumping etc that he would normally have been. He is also not great at looking after himself so I think it is touch and go whether he will stay dry at school. Unlike nursery, we're not allowed to leave a bag of spare clothes for him which seems a bit harsh for a boy who has only just turned four. Thankfully, no PE till the summer term so don't need to worry about dressing himself just yet. I also worry about his social skills and whether he will be able to form friendships easily. He had some good friendships at nursery but they were with people he had known since they were babies or with younger children.

We had the option to defer to December but I thought that would make it even tougher because friendships would already be formed and everyone else would know what was going on. I think I would have liked the option to wait another year, although I would probably not have taken it up, given his size and his progress on things like reading.

I think parents of borderline age children should be able to choose their child's school year. Not just choose to delay entry, but choose the year group.

My youngest is an end of August born - a week later and she would have been a whole school year below. To add to that she is tiny for her age, and young emotionally. She just does not fit with her year group. She is now Year 6, and every single one of her friends is year 5 or 4. The thought of her going to secondary school next September is just appalling - she's still sat at home playing with her My Little Ponys and we are looking at choosing secondaries!

When she started in reception she would have been nowhere near ready in the September. At only a week over 4, she was still having an afternoon nap. We delayed her entry until January, but I still had to take the pushchair up to school to collect her and I still couln't find school clothes small enough to fit. Her starting school so young was a ridiculous idea for her, quite frankly.

She is a bright child, but at only 4 there was no way she could compete with children in her class who were a whole year older, all bar a week or two. She kept saying "Mummy, I'm not as clever as the other children, I can't do any of the things they do." I had to keep on and on saying "You are just as clever, you are just much, much younger." Unfortunately schools don't make this clear to the summer borns. They are just all lumped together. My eldest was 7 and a half when she did her Y2 SATS, my youngest was still 6. How is that a fair comparison?

She has easily caught up academically now, but lots of children don't. And I still look at her and think she will leave Primary at 10, sit GCSEs at 15, sit A levels at 17 - it still seems massively unfair. If I had had the choice I would have kept her back to the year below where she would be a much better fit. Yet the ironic thing is I have friends with September born children who would be better in the year above.

We need choice. Choice to keep your child out of school a year and then have to plunge them straight into year 1 is no choice at all.

My stepdaughter is 17 now, and has exited school after a childhood-long struggle.

She was born on August 28, which is very late in itself, but add in the fact she was almost three months premature and you have a real problem.

I believe that not only should one be able to choose the year, but that prem children should have their school year based on their due date, not their actual birth date.

My stepdaughter didn't stand an earthly of doing well at school - she hasn't got academic parents who could have helped her catch up, and she was being judged - if you look at her due date - against children 15 months older than her.

She needed those three months to help her lungs stabilise... they weren't learning months.

My DS has a late-May birthday and started school in London at 4. He has a cousin 15 hours younger, who started school a year later in the Scottish Borders. The comparisons of their experiences and the expectations of what they could/should do at that age, were fascinating.

DS got glandular fever in his second term. I could not believe it when his teacher turned up at the door with a mound of homework for him to catch up on. We started the first page and gave up. A normally bright and interested boy was being put off school. We moved to Scotland that Easter, where I put him into a local nursery. His relief at getting back to play was palpable. Because he had been in full-time education for 2 terms, the LEA had suggested he go in to P1, with peers a year older than him. Having seen him already lose interest in school and then with a house move and imminent arrival of another sibling to deal with, I was delighted when they agreed the nursery option with me.

The result? A much happier boy who loved going to school the following term at 5, when he was more ready for it and who (now 15) is doing really well. The push in the competitive SW11 state sector was counter-productive. A boy in my son's class in London had his 4th birthday on 31st August. He had the attention span of a flea and was simply not ready to start school. His mother had endless battles with the school, as she quickly realised what a mistake it had been for him to start so young. By October, the school said that if she took him out, he would have to start Year 1 the following year, but they would not guarantee him a place. So wrong! Surely the child should be at the centre of these educational decisions? Lost touch when we moved, so no idea how this poor lad has got on, but if this is happening round the country, no wonder so many kids are failing to achieve their potential.

Just remembered a story my sister told me about a friend who moved from London to the US. Her 6 year old D had been at school for 2 years and was clearly a good learner. In the States, they were so suspicious of her achievements, the social services were pulled in to check out the mother for abusing her child to get these results - despite her protestations it was due to the English education system and nothing else! There, of course, they don't start school until 6 ...