Are summer born babies at a disadvantage?
Posted: Mon Nov 05, 2012 4:09 pm
I noticed that the forum is a little quiet these days and thought maybe I'd start a discussion if anyone else is willing to participate and share their experience.
Apologies in advance for my long post.
I was wondering :
Do you think that even with the standardised system , that summer born babies are disadvantaged in any way in grammar school exams that are based purely in english and maths?
I think that they are and that adding a score of 3 marks for being born between May and August is not enough.
I feel that the maturity that is needed to express themselves or understand the language used clearly is not fully developed.
I can only speak from my own experience and am noticing that things that ds friends were interested in especially reading and comprehension, he is just beginning and I stress just beginning to master.
Previously he was careless in his work ( no matter how much I explained the importance) and is only now beginning to be more interested in the things that I'm offering him in preperation for the Sutton part 2 paper.
His exposure to reading is much less than say someone born in Sept or Oct who is in his academic year, and is only picking up those books now and having a better understanding of the plot.
I'd be really curious to know what the statistics would be for the months children were born in that passed the exams at these schools.
Is it a myth in my mind that I would believe there to be a higher proportion of children born in the autumn or winter?....
And yes some kids are especially bright and born in the summer , but why does a summer child have to be the bright prodigy to win a place , when an average autumn baby would just cruise straight in.
On saying all of this , I'm happy to contradict myself and accept that the 3 marks given in verbal and nonverbal exams is sufficient..as I believe these subjects actually test the childs abilty to parrot fashion memorise with logic and reason .
I think the american education system is alittle fairer to all the children in the same class.
I think (not 100% sure) that all the children born in the same year, ie 2001, are placed in the same academic year.. so that the average eduation level taught is aimed at the summer babies, so that a January born child in 2001 for eg, is 5-6 months ahead of its peers and a December born child in 2001, is only 5-6 month behind its peers..
In England ,we find that an August born child is always 10-11 months behind the academic level taught in class and autumn born babies tend to do better, settle in better and cope better with any new concept offered to them.
Am I right? I'm not sure , can anyone else offer any other opinion.. I am not in the teaching field so I may be wrong.
Just interested!!
Apologies in advance for my long post.
I was wondering :
Do you think that even with the standardised system , that summer born babies are disadvantaged in any way in grammar school exams that are based purely in english and maths?
I think that they are and that adding a score of 3 marks for being born between May and August is not enough.
I feel that the maturity that is needed to express themselves or understand the language used clearly is not fully developed.
I can only speak from my own experience and am noticing that things that ds friends were interested in especially reading and comprehension, he is just beginning and I stress just beginning to master.
Previously he was careless in his work ( no matter how much I explained the importance) and is only now beginning to be more interested in the things that I'm offering him in preperation for the Sutton part 2 paper.
His exposure to reading is much less than say someone born in Sept or Oct who is in his academic year, and is only picking up those books now and having a better understanding of the plot.
I'd be really curious to know what the statistics would be for the months children were born in that passed the exams at these schools.
Is it a myth in my mind that I would believe there to be a higher proportion of children born in the autumn or winter?....
And yes some kids are especially bright and born in the summer , but why does a summer child have to be the bright prodigy to win a place , when an average autumn baby would just cruise straight in.
On saying all of this , I'm happy to contradict myself and accept that the 3 marks given in verbal and nonverbal exams is sufficient..as I believe these subjects actually test the childs abilty to parrot fashion memorise with logic and reason .
I think the american education system is alittle fairer to all the children in the same class.
I think (not 100% sure) that all the children born in the same year, ie 2001, are placed in the same academic year.. so that the average eduation level taught is aimed at the summer babies, so that a January born child in 2001 for eg, is 5-6 months ahead of its peers and a December born child in 2001, is only 5-6 month behind its peers..
In England ,we find that an August born child is always 10-11 months behind the academic level taught in class and autumn born babies tend to do better, settle in better and cope better with any new concept offered to them.
Am I right? I'm not sure , can anyone else offer any other opinion.. I am not in the teaching field so I may be wrong.
Just interested!!