ERIC ED530082: When You Are Born Matters: The Impact of Date of Bir... | |
by ERIC | |
Thumbnail | |
Download | |
Web page | |
The impact of date of birth on cognitive test scores is | |
well documented across many countries, with the youngest | |
children in each academic year performing more poorly, on | |
average, than the older members of their cohort (see, for | |
example, Bedard and Dhuey (2006) or Puhani and Weber | |
(2005)1). However, relatively little is known about the | |
driving forces behind these differences, at least in | |
England; nor does there appear to have been a robust | |
discussion regarding what, if anything, should be done in | |
light of these disparities. The authors address both of | |
these issues in this report. In England, the academic | |
year runs from 1 September to 31 August, so that a child | |
born on 31 August will start school (and sit exams) up to | |
a year earlier than a child born only one day later, on 1 | |
September. Furthermore, as responsibility for determining | |
school admissions policies falls on local, rather than | |
central, authorities, there is considerable geographical | |
variation in terms of length of schooling (and the age at | |
which children start school) amongst the youngest members | |
of each cohort. In this report, the authors use this | |
framework to address four specific research questions: | |
(1) What is the extent of the August birth penalty across | |
different outcomes, and how does this vary by age (from | |
age 5 to age 18)?; (2) The authors then move on to | |
consider the impact of different school admissions | |
policies on the outcomes of August-born (as well as | |
January-, March- and May-born) children; (3) Observed | |
differences between the outcomes of August- and September- | |
born children could be due to a number of factors: (1) | |
Age of sitting the test (absolute age) effect; (2) Age of | |
starting school effect; (3) Length of schooling effect; | |
and (4) Age position (relative age) effect. Which of | |
these factors--absolute age, age of starting school, | |
length of schooling, age position--drive differences in | |
cognitive outcomes between August- and September-born | |
children?; and (4) Does the August birth penalty vary | |
across particular subgroups of interest? The authors use | |
administrative data on all children in state schools in | |
England to answer these questions. These data comprise | |
test results from the Foundation Stage (sat at age 5), | |
Key Stage 1 (age 7), Key Stage 2 (age 11), Key Stage 3 | |
(age 14), Key Stage 4 (age 16) and Key Stage 5 (age 18), | |
plus some basic background characteristics collected via | |
an annual schools' census. The main results indicate that | |
there is evidence of a significant August birth penalty | |
in all outcomes and at every age for children in English | |
state schools. Findings suggest that admissions policies | |
do matter, at least for early cognitive outcomes. In | |
general, August-born children are slightly better off | |
(and certainly no worse off) if they start school in the | |
September of the academic year in which they turn 5 | |
(rather than in the January or the April, as happens in | |
some local education authorities). Furthermore, this is | |
likely to be of greater benefit to girls than to boys. | |
The results suggest that the major reason why August-born | |
children perform significantly worse than September-born | |
children in the Key Stage tests is simply that they are | |
almost a year younger when they sit them. Whilst August- | |
born children do benefit from starting school earlier | |
rather than later (for example, in the September, rather | |
than the January or the April, of their reception year), | |
this makes only a modest positive contribution to test | |
scores and only at early Key Stages. Age position effects | |
are generally not important. Clearly, other policy | |
options are needed in order to eliminate the August birth | |
penalty. Whilst there are some significant differences in | |
terms of the magnitude of the August birth penalty for | |
children who are and are not eligible for free school | |
meals (discussed in Chapter 8), perhaps the most | |
important finding is the lack of significant differences | |
amongst the majority of subgroups considered. This | |
suggests that, in most cases, August-born children, | |
regardless of observable characteristics, face the same | |
disadvantage (in terms of cognitive outcomes) relative to | |
September-born children. This suggests that policy | |
options do not need to be tailored to the needs of | |
particular subgroups: in theory, all August-born children | |
should benefit from the suggestions that the authors | |
make. Additional tables and figure are appended. | |
(Contains 6 figures, 46 tables and 118 footnotes.) | |
Date Published: 2016-02-16 23:00:27 | |
Identifier: ERIC_ED530082 | |
Item Size: 71713927 | |
Language: english | |
Media Type: texts | |
# Topics | |
ERIC Archive; Foreign Countries; Chil... | |
# Collections | |
ericarchive | |
additional_collections | |
# Uploaded by | |
@chris85 | |
# Similar Items | |
View similar items | |
PHAROS | |