Since people are now redshirting spring bday kids

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The people I take issue with are those who redshirt in order to give their kid the "advantage" of being the oldest/biggest/most mature/etc kid in class. Those are the people in a race to the bottom, in my opinion.

That's different from the argument that all kids should start K at, say, 6, instead of 5. Assuming you're working within an annual grade framework, you're still always going to have an oldest kid and a youngest kid in class, and all of the challenges associated with having kids nearly a full year apart operating under the same curriculum. But at least you could argue here that even the youngest kid was "ready" to start K at the start of the school year.

One is wanting to redshirt because you want your kid to rule over all of the others; the other is in favor of redshirting everyone for the sake of community.

There are very, very few people who do that. People redshirt because their child is developmentally delayed; lags in social skills; and their teachers or therapists recommend it. Kids repeat K because they're behind on reading and need an extra year. The idea that there's some kind of rampaging sector redshirting in public schools to give their child a leg up is a myth, and it belies that the anti-redshirters are the ones obsessed with the relative status of their own child.

Not a myth! I am living this now. There are almost 7 yo in my DS K class reading at 3rd grade level. Surely they were not held back for any kind of delay. My summer birthday child is at the bottom of the class despite being bright. He has to work extra hard to keep up with kids almost 2 years older, how is this fair?

They are almost 7, but your child is almost 6. So he is one year younger, not two. If he’s behind, and he has a summer birthday, then you should push to have him repeat kindergarten. Frankly, I think this is more beneficial to kids than three years of preschool anyway.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:What’s interesting to me is I live in “flyover” now. No one redshirts. Your kid goes to school at age. Ther is no “rowdiness”, any more then there is a rigorous preschool curriculum and education. So anyone saying it’s not competitive (save for certain circumstances) to redshirt is talking our of their behind.

They mean it’s only not competitive when they hold back their kids for a leg up. If someone else wants them to have equal footing they are being competitive

[Anonymous]

Maturity wise I considered holding ds back. I didn’t and he was a bit lively in K and 1st (though far from the most troublesome of kids). His behavior may have been more mature staying a year but academically it would have been a disaster because he is somehow grades ahead in that regard. I cannot imagine if I had held him back that might have spurred more behavior issues and not enjoying school.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The people I take issue with are those who redshirt in order to give their kid the "advantage" of being the oldest/biggest/most mature/etc kid in class. Those are the people in a race to the bottom, in my opinion.

That's different from the argument that all kids should start K at, say, 6, instead of 5. Assuming you're working within an annual grade framework, you're still always going to have an oldest kid and a youngest kid in class, and all of the challenges associated with having kids nearly a full year apart operating under the same curriculum. But at least you could argue here that even the youngest kid was "ready" to start K at the start of the school year.

One is wanting to redshirt because you want your kid to rule over all of the others; the other is in favor of redshirting everyone for the sake of community.

What is your issue with the first family? They want their kid to be the most mature in the class. So? What does it have to do with you or your kid?

My issue is that it's an arms race that ultimately widens the developmental range within the classroom. I'm not arguing that there's no benefit to being the most mature in the class, but you realize that when everyone skirts the "rules" (recognizing that it sounds like most of the schools in question are soft on the rules) you're just left with a bunch of older kids -- only one of whom will still be the "most" mature in class -- and a bunch of kids who are much much younger. The system starts to break down. Certainly other factors influence the classroom dynamics, including teaching styles, curriculum, and different family values (some prioritizing sports prowess, or wanting school to be a platform for excellence rather than a place where one can learn about failure and resilience, and excellence), but I strongly believe that redshirting contributes to an environment that I think is ultimately destructive to the community.

I'm the PP from several pages ago with a kid in the NYC public school system, where red shirting is not an option. I will not hold the NYC public school system up as the gold standard, but I will defend its prohibition on red shirting. FWIW, DD has a November birthday; grade cutoffs are Dec 31, so she's certainly among the youngest in her class. But there are kids ranging from Jan 1 to Dec 31 in her grade.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What’s interesting to me is I live in “flyover” now. No one redshirts. Your kid goes to school at age. Ther is no “rowdiness”, any more then there is a rigorous preschool curriculum and education. So anyone saying it’s not competitive (save for certain circumstances) to redshirt is talking our of their behind.

They mean it’s only not competitive when they hold back their kids for a leg up. If someone else wants them to have equal footing they are being competitive

Where do you live? I have lived in Omaha, Cincinnati, St Louis, and Cleveland. There is plenty of redshirting. And there are plenty of rigorous preschool curriculums.
These things are more about being at a certain income level than about living in a particular location.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The people I take issue with are those who redshirt in order to give their kid the "advantage" of being the oldest/biggest/most mature/etc kid in class. Those are the people in a race to the bottom, in my opinion.

That's different from the argument that all kids should start K at, say, 6, instead of 5. Assuming you're working within an annual grade framework, you're still always going to have an oldest kid and a youngest kid in class, and all of the challenges associated with having kids nearly a full year apart operating under the same curriculum. But at least you could argue here that even the youngest kid was "ready" to start K at the start of the school year.

One is wanting to redshirt because you want your kid to rule over all of the others; the other is in favor of redshirting everyone for the sake of community.

What is your issue with the first family? They want their kid to be the most mature in the class. So? What does it have to do with you or your kid?

My issue is that it's an arms race that ultimately widens the developmental range within the classroom. I'm not arguing that there's no benefit to being the most mature in the class, but you realize that when everyone skirts the "rules" (recognizing that it sounds like most of the schools in question are soft on the rules) you're just left with a bunch of older kids -- only one of whom will still be the "most" mature in class -- and a bunch of kids who are much much younger. The system starts to break down. Certainly other factors influence the classroom dynamics, including teaching styles, curriculum, and different family values (some prioritizing sports prowess, or wanting school to be a platform for excellence rather than a place where one can learn about failure and resilience, and excellence), but I strongly believe that redshirting contributes to an environment that I think is ultimately destructive to the community.

I'm the PP from several pages ago with a kid in the NYC public school system, where red shirting is not an option. I will not hold the NYC public school system up as the gold standard, but I will defend its prohibition on red shirting. FWIW, DD has a November birthday; grade cutoffs are Dec 31, so she's certainly among the youngest in her class. But there are kids ranging from Jan 1 to Dec 31 in her grade.

Once again: people redshirt TO EVEN THE DEVELOPMENTAL LEVEL. they redshirt BECAUSE their kid is delayed in some way. Stop your hyperventilating.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The people I take issue with are those who redshirt in order to give their kid the "advantage" of being the oldest/biggest/most mature/etc kid in class. Those are the people in a race to the bottom, in my opinion.

That's different from the argument that all kids should start K at, say, 6, instead of 5. Assuming you're working within an annual grade framework, you're still always going to have an oldest kid and a youngest kid in class, and all of the challenges associated with having kids nearly a full year apart operating under the same curriculum. But at least you could argue here that even the youngest kid was "ready" to start K at the start of the school year.

One is wanting to redshirt because you want your kid to rule over all of the others; the other is in favor of redshirting everyone for the sake of community.

There are very, very few people who do that. People redshirt because their child is developmentally delayed; lags in social skills; and their teachers or therapists recommend it. Kids repeat K because they're behind on reading and need an extra year. The idea that there's some kind of rampaging sector redshirting in public schools to give their child a leg up is a myth, and it belies that the anti-redshirters are the ones obsessed with the relative status of their own child.

That's definitely not the impression I'm getting from reading this thread or the thread this is a spinoff of. Of course hold your kid back if s/he is developmentally delayed or a therapist recommends it. But most of the people who have redshirted their kids on these threads seem to have come to their own conclusion about the readiness of their child. Which, fine, is within their rights, but it sounds more like they are concerned with their kid's relative status rather than actual ability to follow the classroom curriculum and learn from (and teach!) peers.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The people I take issue with are those who redshirt in order to give their kid the "advantage" of being the oldest/biggest/most mature/etc kid in class. Those are the people in a race to the bottom, in my opinion.

That's different from the argument that all kids should start K at, say, 6, instead of 5. Assuming you're working within an annual grade framework, you're still always going to have an oldest kid and a youngest kid in class, and all of the challenges associated with having kids nearly a full year apart operating under the same curriculum. But at least you could argue here that even the youngest kid was "ready" to start K at the start of the school year.

One is wanting to redshirt because you want your kid to rule over all of the others; the other is in favor of redshirting everyone for the sake of community.

What is your issue with the first family? They want their kid to be the most mature in the class. So? What does it have to do with you or your kid?

My issue is that it's an arms race that ultimately widens the developmental range within the classroom. I'm not arguing that there's no benefit to being the most mature in the class, but you realize that when everyone skirts the "rules" (recognizing that it sounds like most of the schools in question are soft on the rules) you're just left with a bunch of older kids -- only one of whom will still be the "most" mature in class -- and a bunch of kids who are much much younger. The system starts to break down. Certainly other factors influence the classroom dynamics, including teaching styles, curriculum, and different family values (some prioritizing sports prowess, or wanting school to be a platform for excellence rather than a place where one can learn about failure and resilience, and excellence), but I strongly believe that redshirting contributes to an environment that I think is ultimately destructive to the community.

I'm the PP from several pages ago with a kid in the NYC public school system, where red shirting is not an option. I will not hold the NYC public school system up as the gold standard, but I will defend its prohibition on red shirting. FWIW, DD has a November birthday; grade cutoffs are Dec 31, so she's certainly among the youngest in her class. But there are kids ranging from Jan 1 to Dec 31 in her grade.

Once again: people redshirt TO EVEN THE DEVELOPMENTAL LEVEL. they redshirt BECAUSE their kid is delayed in some way. Stop your hyperventilating.

I'd be worried about environmental toxins or some other contributor if there are truly this many "developmentally delayed" kids in your area.

[Anonymous]

So more and more people are red-shirting for reasons other than an actual delay, seemingly in hopes of their child having some advantage. But if everyone does it, then all of the children will be....average. And we all know DCUMers hate to think their children might be average.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The people I take issue with are those who redshirt in order to give their kid the "advantage" of being the oldest/biggest/most mature/etc kid in class. Those are the people in a race to the bottom, in my opinion.

That's different from the argument that all kids should start K at, say, 6, instead of 5. Assuming you're working within an annual grade framework, you're still always going to have an oldest kid and a youngest kid in class, and all of the challenges associated with having kids nearly a full year apart operating under the same curriculum. But at least you could argue here that even the youngest kid was "ready" to start K at the start of the school year.

One is wanting to redshirt because you want your kid to rule over all of the others; the other is in favor of redshirting everyone for the sake of community.

There are very, very few people who do that. People redshirt because their child is developmentally delayed; lags in social skills; and their teachers or therapists recommend it. Kids repeat K because they're behind on reading and need an extra year. The idea that there's some kind of rampaging sector redshirting in public schools to give their child a leg up is a myth, and it belies that the anti-redshirters are the ones obsessed with the relative status of their own child.

That's definitely not the impression I'm getting from reading this thread or the thread this is a spinoff of. Of course hold your kid back if s/he is developmentally delayed or a therapist recommends it. But most of the people who have redshirted their kids on these threads seem to have come to their own conclusion about the readiness of their child. Which, fine, is within their rights, but it sounds more like they are concerned with their kid's relative status rather than actual ability to follow the classroom curriculum and learn from (and teach!) peers.

Why on Earth would any good parent discuss with you or on DCUM what their doctors or therapists say? The anti-redshirt posters on DCUM are so judgmental and nasty that I'd never say anything about a child's private medical history, even anonymously.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The people I take issue with are those who redshirt in order to give their kid the "advantage" of being the oldest/biggest/most mature/etc kid in class. Those are the people in a race to the bottom, in my opinion.

That's different from the argument that all kids should start K at, say, 6, instead of 5. Assuming you're working within an annual grade framework, you're still always going to have an oldest kid and a youngest kid in class, and all of the challenges associated with having kids nearly a full year apart operating under the same curriculum. But at least you could argue here that even the youngest kid was "ready" to start K at the start of the school year.

One is wanting to redshirt because you want your kid to rule over all of the others; the other is in favor of redshirting everyone for the sake of community.

There are very, very few people who do that. People redshirt because their child is developmentally delayed; lags in social skills; and their teachers or therapists recommend it. Kids repeat K because they're behind on reading and need an extra year. The idea that there's some kind of rampaging sector redshirting in public schools to give their child a leg up is a myth, and it belies that the anti-redshirters are the ones obsessed with the relative status of their own child.

That's definitely not the impression I'm getting from reading this thread or the thread this is a spinoff of. Of course hold your kid back if s/he is developmentally delayed or a therapist recommends it. But most of the people who have redshirted their kids on these threads seem to have come to their own conclusion about the readiness of their child. Which, fine, is within their rights, but it sounds more like they are concerned with their kid's relative status rather than actual ability to follow the classroom curriculum and learn from (and teach!) peers.

I recommend you don't get your "impression" about how people make these complex decisions based on rants on DCUM. There are very few people (even on DCUM) who redshirt for no reason other than to make their kid older.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:So more and more people are red-shirting for reasons other than an actual delay, seemingly in hopes of their child having some advantage. But if everyone does it, then all of the children will be....average. And we all know DCUMers hate to think their children might be average.

what basis do you have for saying that?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:OMG you guys are the worst. You say you are not jealous or bitter, but why all the anger against parents that chose to redshirt? Admit it! Your kids have June birthdays and now they are the youngest and you are upset with that... ah the.
hypocrisy

+1 million

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:OMG you guys are the worst. You say you are not jealous or bitter, but why all the anger against parents that chose to redshirt? Admit it! Your kids have June birthdays and now they are the youngest and you are upset with that... ah the.
hypocrisy

NP. My kid has a June birthday, and I don’t care what other people do. My daughter is doing really well and loves reading. Hope other kids are doing well, too.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OMG you guys are the worst. You say you are not jealous or bitter, but why all the anger against parents that chose to redshirt? Admit it! Your kids have June birthdays and now they are the youngest and you are upset with that... ah the.
hypocrisy

+1 million

Yes, this is obviously what is happening. They are such hypocrites.