Season of birth and school success in the early years of primary education
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Several studies have reported significant relationships between children's season of birth and measures of their academic success (i.e., the 'season of birth effect'). Whereas most of these studies were cross-sectional, the current study uses growth curve modelling to analyse longitudinal data on 3,187 children in Flemish primary education. The results indicate season of birth effects on both grade retention and mathematics achievement during the first two years of primary school. Because the Flemish cut-off date is 31 December, children born in the fourth quarter (October-November-December) invariably are among the youngest in their grade age group. Almost 20% of these children were found to have been retained or referred to special education by the end of Grade 2, whereas for children born in the first quarter (January-February-March), this was only 6.34%. First quarter-born children also showed moderately higher mathematics achievement at the start of first grade. During the next two school years, this achievement gap between children born in the first and the fourth quarter narrowed significantly. Finally, differentiated instruction was not found to be related to the decrease of the season of birth effect.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".