Paula Barnes, the wife of a psychologist named Roger, was taking in a junior league hockey match in Ontario in the mid-80s when she noticed something in the roster: a lot of first-quarter birthdays. Roger ran with it, researching first junior league hockey, then the national league, and discovered "an iron law of Canadian hockey: in any elite group of hockey players - the very best of the best - 40% of the players will have been born between January and March, 30% between April and June, 20% between July and September, and 10% between October and December."
So....are Capricorns, Aquarians, and Pisceans superior? As a Capricorn, I like to think so. I was fluffing my goat feathers with pride when Gladwell burst my bubble.
After Barnes' discovery, further research showed that any sport with a strict cut-off date shows a bias towards players born in the first three months after the cut-off date. Why? Back to Canadian hockey to illustrate the explanation: "in Canada, the eligibility cutoff for age-class hockey is Jan 1. A boy who turns 10 on Jan 2, then, could be playing alongside someone who doesn't turn 10 until the end of the year--and at that age, in preadolescence, a 12-month gap in age represents an enormous difference in physical maturity." So January Boy looks more talented than December Boy (because his coordination, response time, and endurance are better due to his advanced age), gets picked for the elite squad where he gets better coaching and more practice and play time, and these advantages make him better at hockey than December Boy. Guess who gets picked for the national league?
Now, can you think of another activity with potentially big impact on youngsters and a strict cut-off date? Yup. Education. I shudder with horror as I contemplate the import of my next post....
So....are Capricorns, Aquarians, and Pisceans superior? As a Capricorn, I like to think so. I was fluffing my goat feathers with pride when Gladwell burst my bubble.
After Barnes' discovery, further research showed that any sport with a strict cut-off date shows a bias towards players born in the first three months after the cut-off date. Why? Back to Canadian hockey to illustrate the explanation: "in Canada, the eligibility cutoff for age-class hockey is Jan 1. A boy who turns 10 on Jan 2, then, could be playing alongside someone who doesn't turn 10 until the end of the year--and at that age, in preadolescence, a 12-month gap in age represents an enormous difference in physical maturity." So January Boy looks more talented than December Boy (because his coordination, response time, and endurance are better due to his advanced age), gets picked for the elite squad where he gets better coaching and more practice and play time, and these advantages make him better at hockey than December Boy. Guess who gets picked for the national league?
Now, can you think of another activity with potentially big impact on youngsters and a strict cut-off date? Yup. Education. I shudder with horror as I contemplate the import of my next post....
OH, this is right from my husband's mouth! He's been substitute teaching for a kindergarten class for two weeks that every teacher in the school says is the worst class in the place! They told him they feel sorry for him when he arrived for the first day. So, he's been trying to figure out why this group of kindergartners is so troublesome. It turns out that most of them were born at the young side of the cut off date for kindergarten entrance. So, this group of kids is nearly a year younger than those in other kindergarten classes who were born on the old end of the entrance cut off. For kids that age, I can see how this age difference, even though just months, could make a real difference. My husband has sure been noticing it!
ReplyDeleteThanks for sharing that, Emily. I imagine this disparity is really noticeable at the kindergarten age, when physical, emotional, and cognitive development is so rapid and so dependent on a child's age as measured in weeks. I know from experience as a K-3 tutor how unruly a horde -- er, class -- of K's can be. Your husband is a saint!
ReplyDeleteI'm curious how this happened--in Emily H's husband's class, that is. Why were all these kids placed in the same class, when obviously there where several classes of kindergartners? I suppose a school might believe that it would be easier to teach them if they were all at about the same developmental level. But it would seem to me that a way to counter the biases Sandy is writing about in her post, perhaps these kids should all be mixed up, so that the younger ones can learn from the older ones and the older ones can help the younger ones. I'll be curious to hear what Gladwell has to say. . .
ReplyDeleteGladwell does posit a solution, Connie. He suggests that students born in Jan through April be put in one class, those born in May through Aug in another, and those born in Sept through Dec in yet another. This would allow them to compete against students at the same maturity level. What do you think?
ReplyDeleteWow--this is amazing--segregation at its worst. I cannot imagine any benefits to anyone by segregating these kindergartners in such a way. My birthday is on 4 Oct, but the cutoff at my school was 1 Oct. The only way that I got into the school at the time I did, was because my mother was an employee at the school and I got a waiver. As the evidence indicated, those individuals who are allowed to start school, sports, events, whatever the case may be, earlier get the skills and acquire the physical endurance way sooner than the other individual who has to wait until they reach the "magic" age. I understant the maturity element in the equation, but in my opinion, my almost 3-year old daughter is smart enough to attend school with most kindergartners, but she probably does not posess the maturity level that the education system is looking for, so therefore, the cutoff date.
ReplyDeleteAs Connie said, mix them up so they can learn from one another. If this can work for children, it should work for adults as well, but it should be started at the elementary level so once they reach adulthood, they already have it.