Summer babies do less well academically in part due to streaming.

[TwistTee]

www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-21699054

I read this article with great interest and much concern. My 4 yr old daughter, born at the end of August already shows some signs of a lack of confidence and poor concentration when compared to the older kids in her class. Not surprising as some of them are almost a whole year older.
It worries me that she could potentially always be behind and I often question if we made the right decision in starting her schooling at age 4.
I'd be interested in your thoughts and experiences of summer babies in this context. Any tips on confidence issues?

And does anyone have a view on the issue of streaming as mentioned in the article? Her school are about to sort the kids but have not yet decided how. Her teacher said they might do it by age, ability or random. I was keen on the former as it would mean she stays in a class of 20 as opposed to a class of 30.

Intersting.

I have summer born twins, who arrived at school unable to read or write etc

In R and Yrs 1 and 2 their classes were mixed ability, though they sat at different tables according to achievement levels within subject. Obviously neither of my two were on high achievement tables to begin with as they couldn't do anyhting!!!

What could have happened is that they were forever consigned to that level, however I for one would not allow that. I perpetually pointed out that their level refelcted achievement not ability. Fortuanately the school were with me on this and acted accordingly.

A few parents (of older DC)were a bit [hmmm]. They had it in their minds that they had the able child and I was a poor deluded mother. One even asked why I was so sure I had able children in the face of no supporting evidence. I pointed out I couldn't be sure, indeed I couldn't know yet, so I jolly well wouldn't assume their ability was low.

I can only say that this approach worked and would urge any summer born parents to do the same.

I suppose what I'm saying is that setting/streaming/different tables etc only work well if everyone understands they are a temporary reflection of achievement.

They are not a reflection of ability. They are not a reflection of potential.

All they do is seperate the DC into what they can do today.

In ds1's school, they are grouped. In reception, (circles (no sides = lowest 'set'), triangles(3 sides), squares(4 sides), hexagons etc. All the kids KNOW its related to how many sides. They know what group they are in. Teachers try and hide it, but all the children KNOW.
In Yr1 or Yr 2 (can't remember) they are put in 2 groups for numeracy and literacy.Higher and Lower group. It is not called this, by the teachers. But once again, the children KNOW.

Teachers have to teach according to ability. But how you stop this affecting a childs confidence, I have no idea.

reading boot-camp ?
I did not know such thing existed. How did you find out about this?

oblo I think you stop it impacting upon DC's confidence by making it clear that it is not a refelction of ability or potential.

In the same way that if you were to start a cycle club you would seperate those who have never sat on a saddle from those who ride every Sunday. That doesn't mean the new riders will never ride, or that the Sundat riders will forever be 'the best riders'. Everyone would accept that.

But somehow that goes to pot in school. Teachers start to assess ability for DC who are barely out of nappies. Parents feed into it. DC begin to accept the pecking order as fact.

This is how summer borns can be forever over looked. Their ability is seena s being in line with their achievement.

This is how Stevie Gerrard ended up never being picked for his school footie team! Summer born, small lad, not particularly co ordinated at 5/6/7...seen as less able than the Autumn babies ...

Well this Mum said No!

laqueen I think intense bursts of activity can help any DC in most things. Indeed it can help most adults no?

Agreed.
To the last few posts.

It is hard to fight the system though, when children's confidence is based on how good they think they are/what group they are in.
Ds1 announced last night that he wasn't very good at maths. Actually he is, very good. I have already thought about talking through the techniques to improve his confidence.
Was a shock to me how his confidence has dropped, very quickly!

I think schools have a hard time measuring ability though. It's so much easier to measure achievement, and it is often used as a proxy for ability/potential.

There is a boy in my DD's year whose mother I know well. He is a late December-born (equivalent to August-born in UK) child who was put on a "low/middling" track at school and there was lots of talk of him being less clever than his bright spark of an older sister.

This year, his class teacher suggested to the mother that she have him tested (WISC-IV). Turns out he has an IQ of over 150... His achievement isn't great because he has never needed to apply himself to anything at all to "get by" and the assumption was quickly made that, as a December-born, he should struggle. It is somewhat awful that it took over 5 years at school for anyone to think anything odd might be going on.

I agree bonsoir.
It is much easier for everyone to look at achievement and decide the student is clever or able or whatever.

And lots of people (teachers and parents included) buy into it.

I was very lucky that DC's teachers accepted that age may play a factor. My DC were certainly not written off as low ability. It was simply accepted that being so young and being prem babies would impact upon their initial achievement.

I thik it's been a bit of a revelation to a few parents though .

I think that it DOES show during Early years, right up until around Y4-Y5 ish, when it mostly levels off.

Though having said that, my DD's friends, who have the same SN's as her, who have had exactly the same amount of support as DD, through Primary (very little support there mind you) and Secondary (far more support), are NOT achieving the same sort of grades as my DD - DD is getting D-G's, they are getting F-U's.

The only real difference? Their birthday is August 29th, DD's is early March.

So it probably DOES make a difference, even in Y10, even with all other variables being the same.

Does it still show when you're 45?

Re setting/streaming, we have both! So the class is streamed according to ability, social and emotional development at the beginning of the year, but there are still different settings within the class for numeracy and literacy.

So they are being taught by a mishmash of people.

I really value the point made about ability/potential vs current achievement. I am hoping that everything comes to he who waits.

If every child in the class has exactly the same brainpower, then I don't doubt that the summer dcs would probably be on the bottom table, especially in Yr R/1.

But they don't have the same brainpower. Some pupils are bottom table people, whether they are born on 1st September or 31st August. And although sitting on the Circle table (or Red table, Elephants etc etc) might dent their confidence, whaddayado? Mix up the tables randomly? They'll sink and the abler ones will get frustrated. Whole class teaching? Then it's back to the 70s and before and the less able ones will be daydreaming and fidgeting at the back.

Also I can't imagine any school limits movement between tables. Dd started school at 4 years 2 days and couldn't read a word. In fact wouldn't read a word for an entire year. Refused point blank to try. Was she condemned to a career on the bottom table? Of course not.

I don't like the mishmash of teachers business. This is what we end up with at DD's school: there are 5 French classes of (average) 25 pupils (and they are streamed) and 6 English sets (English is 1/4 of the day). That means that there are 30 possible teacher combinations for 125 pupils (that is not counting specialist music or sport teachers or, from next year, Spanish which is also setted but not everyone does it). Each year, all the pupils in the French classes are mixed up and "restreamed" and there is some movement in English, too, as the classes vary wildly in size for no better reason than classroom size. And that means that, as the DC move up the school, no two DC ever have exactly the same teacher combinations. My DD has one friend who has had the same teacher combinations as her for the past four years. That is typical. And so basically the number of teacher combinations means that they don't know one another, never meet to discuss pupils current status let alone progress... It's a managerial nightmare. I completely understand the reasons behind it and all sounds very fair but actually the reality is that pupils' progress is barely monitored and, unless you get a really good teacher (as DD has for French this year), it's very hard to get any decent feedback.

5 classes (125 children) per year group

lainie you talk as if "brainpower" is some kind of fixed static unchangeable state, like having red hair. Intelligence is rather more complicated that that. The idea that some people are "bottom table people" is as ludicrous as it is wrongheaded.

I suspect there might be fixed IQ - perhaps within bands? But much of a pupils academic career owes as much to application as raw intelligence. For example DDs triple science set has bumped anyone lazy because although it is not particularly difficult it is incredbily fast paced. The girls have to be prepared to graft.

But also the idea that the "bottom table people" are all wronged souls who are just bursting to demonstrate their latent ability but are condemned to the lowest table by malicious or indifferent teachers is no less ludicrous.

Yes, I agree, wordfactory. Like all facets of human nature, there is a certain potential fixed at birth and we will achieve our own personal maximum potential if we apply ourselves and practice (if given the opportunity to do so) but we cannot work miracles. I could have trained with the world's best trainers for hours a week but I would never, ever have got anywhere as an athlete!

When I was a child in Sweden, the parents of any child who was near the dividing line between different year groups were allowed to choose whether their child should start school at the earliest opportunity or defer to the next year.

My parents felt that I was quite precocious mature so let me start when I was 6.5 and the youngest in my year: their neighbours felt their son was a bit young for his age, so he started at 7.5 as the oldest in his year. Neither of us stood out or were perceived as different- we were only a few weeks older/younger than the next oldest/youngest in our year, after all.

The debate about "redoublement" (repeating a year at school) as well "le saut de classe" (jumping a year) rages as always in France, the world champion of the practice. Parents are very attached to the idea that their own DC will do better a year ahead or a year below his/her calendar intake, and teachers love the system as it removes responsibility from teachers for a child's progress in a particular yeargroup.

But all the research points to the fact that DC do best when in their own calendar year group at school.