How to “redshirt” in DC?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I agree with having a standard and not making exceptions. But I wish dcps would gradually scoot these cutoffs back, maybe even just a few weeks a year. Half the kids in dcps are not emotionally ready for what’s asked of them in prek4 and K.

And now the gap between what private can offer in terms of developmental appropriateness is getting even bigger. In my neighborhood the private school kids will be several months older on average — and enjoy a gentle acceleration without the pressure of testing.

Agreed, though our experience with PK4 was that it was very age appropriate and a great fit for our kid with a summer birthday. I think DCPS needs to look critically at both the K curriculum and the way K teachers are trained and apply some of the lessons from the PK program to turn it into a true transitional program that focuses on shifting kids from ECE to elementary and helping them build socio-emotional maturity, patience, and interpersonal skills.

PK teachers in DCPS almost all have masters in early childhood education. K teachers generally do not, and many K teachers float between K, 1st, and 2nd grade to help schools accommodate fluctuating IB enrollment into the K cohort. This can exacerbate the issue of K teachers who have unrealistic expectations, developmentally, because they may be accustomed to a classroom of 7 or 8 year olds and then have to come in and teach a cohort of 5 year olds, even some 4 year olds.

I have also never understood the point of making the cutoff September 30th. It's hard for the kids, even just psychologically. Kids with late August and September birthdays are always hyper-aware of the fact that they start school a different age than peers. Even for kids who are perfectly on target developmentally, I think this can become a source of anxiety. Why not make the cut off August 1st or August 15th, so all kids are the same age on the first day of school? I don't get why this wouldn't be the obvious choice.

Anyway, put me in the camp of people who thinks we need to fix kindergarten so that it's age appropriate and serves the interests of more kids, rather than accepting that kindergarten is often too academic with unrealistic expectations and then just leaving it up to parents to realize this in advance and redshirt accordingly.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I agree with having a standard and not making exceptions. But I wish dcps would gradually scoot these cutoffs back, maybe even just a few weeks a year. Half the kids in dcps are not emotionally ready for what’s asked of them in prek4 and K.

And now the gap between what private can offer in terms of developmental appropriateness is getting even bigger. In my neighborhood the private school kids will be several months older on average — and enjoy a gentle acceleration without the pressure of testing.

Agreed, though our experience with PK4 was that it was very age appropriate and a great fit for our kid with a summer birthday. I think DCPS needs to look critically at both the K curriculum and the way K teachers are trained and apply some of the lessons from the PK program to turn it into a true transitional program that focuses on shifting kids from ECE to elementary and helping them build socio-emotional maturity, patience, and interpersonal skills.

PK teachers in DCPS almost all have masters in early childhood education. K teachers generally do not, and many K teachers float between K, 1st, and 2nd grade to help schools accommodate fluctuating IB enrollment into the K cohort. This can exacerbate the issue of K teachers who have unrealistic expectations, developmentally, because they may be accustomed to a classroom of 7 or 8 year olds and then have to come in and teach a cohort of 5 year olds, even some 4 year olds.

I have also never understood the point of making the cutoff September 30th. It's hard for the kids, even just psychologically. Kids with late August and September birthdays are always hyper-aware of the fact that they start school a different age than peers. Even for kids who are perfectly on target developmentally, I think this can become a source of anxiety. Why not make the cut off August 1st or August 15th, so all kids are the same age on the first day of school? I don't get why this wouldn't be the obvious choice.

Anyway, put me in the camp of people who thinks we need to fix kindergarten so that it's age appropriate and serves the interests of more kids, rather than accepting that kindergarten is often too academic with unrealistic expectations and then just leaving it up to parents to realize this in advance and redshirt accordingly.

Unless you have the cutoff be the actual first day of school every year, there will always be kids at multiple ages. DC school starts weeks after the 1st of August and usually 1-2 weeks post-August 15th. The magic we're all the same age thing is really just not feasible and, given that, making it all but 3 kids vs all but 11 kids just seems like a weird thing to focus on. (And then Southern schools are going to have earlier cut offs and Northern schools later ones even though everyone eventually mixed together for college and even for, e.g., sports and summer camps.) I actually think NYC's calendar age approach makes more sense because then everyone is born in the same year, which is a very easy thing to hang one's hat on.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I agree with having a standard and not making exceptions. But I wish dcps would gradually scoot these cutoffs back, maybe even just a few weeks a year. Half the kids in dcps are not emotionally ready for what’s asked of them in prek4 and K.

And now the gap between what private can offer in terms of developmental appropriateness is getting even bigger. In my neighborhood the private school kids will be several months older on average — and enjoy a gentle acceleration without the pressure of testing.

Agreed, though our experience with PK4 was that it was very age appropriate and a great fit for our kid with a summer birthday. I think DCPS needs to look critically at both the K curriculum and the way K teachers are trained and apply some of the lessons from the PK program to turn it into a true transitional program that focuses on shifting kids from ECE to elementary and helping them build socio-emotional maturity, patience, and interpersonal skills.

PK teachers in DCPS almost all have masters in early childhood education. K teachers generally do not, and many K teachers float between K, 1st, and 2nd grade to help schools accommodate fluctuating IB enrollment into the K cohort. This can exacerbate the issue of K teachers who have unrealistic expectations, developmentally, because they may be accustomed to a classroom of 7 or 8 year olds and then have to come in and teach a cohort of 5 year olds, even some 4 year olds.

I have also never understood the point of making the cutoff September 30th. It's hard for the kids, even just psychologically. Kids with late August and September birthdays are always hyper-aware of the fact that they start school a different age than peers. Even for kids who are perfectly on target developmentally, I think this can become a source of anxiety. Why not make the cut off August 1st or August 15th, so all kids are the same age on the first day of school? I don't get why this wouldn't be the obvious choice.

Anyway, put me in the camp of people who thinks we need to fix kindergarten so that it's age appropriate and serves the interests of more kids, rather than accepting that kindergarten is often too academic with unrealistic expectations and then just leaving it up to parents to realize this in advance and redshirt accordingly.

Unless you have the cutoff be the actual first day of school every year, there will always be kids at multiple ages. DC school starts weeks after the 1st of August and usually 1-2 weeks post-August 15th. The magic we're all the same age thing is really just not feasible and, given that, making it all but 3 kids vs all but 11 kids just seems like a weird thing to focus on. (And then Southern schools are going to have earlier cut offs and Northern schools later ones even though everyone eventually mixed together for college and even for, e.g., sports and summer camps.) I actually think NYC's calendar age approach makes more sense because then everyone is born in the same year, which is a very easy thing to hang one's hat on.

PP here and that's a good point about it being hard to time the cut off to the first day. I think I agree that having a December 31 cut off probably makes the most sense, since then every K class would start with kids who were a mix of ages, instead of a large group of 5 year olds and a small handful of 4 year olds.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I agree with having a standard and not making exceptions. But I wish dcps would gradually scoot these cutoffs back, maybe even just a few weeks a year. Half the kids in dcps are not emotionally ready for what’s asked of them in prek4 and K.

And now the gap between what private can offer in terms of developmental appropriateness is getting even bigger. In my neighborhood the private school kids will be several months older on average — and enjoy a gentle acceleration without the pressure of testing.

Agreed, though our experience with PK4 was that it was very age appropriate and a great fit for our kid with a summer birthday. I think DCPS needs to look critically at both the K curriculum and the way K teachers are trained and apply some of the lessons from the PK program to turn it into a true transitional program that focuses on shifting kids from ECE to elementary and helping them build socio-emotional maturity, patience, and interpersonal skills.

PK teachers in DCPS almost all have masters in early childhood education. K teachers generally do not, and many K teachers float between K, 1st, and 2nd grade to help schools accommodate fluctuating IB enrollment into the K cohort. This can exacerbate the issue of K teachers who have unrealistic expectations, developmentally, because they may be accustomed to a classroom of 7 or 8 year olds and then have to come in and teach a cohort of 5 year olds, even some 4 year olds.

I have also never understood the point of making the cutoff September 30th. It's hard for the kids, even just psychologically. Kids with late August and September birthdays are always hyper-aware of the fact that they start school a different age than peers. Even for kids who are perfectly on target developmentally, I think this can become a source of anxiety. Why not make the cut off August 1st or August 15th, so all kids are the same age on the first day of school? I don't get why this wouldn't be the obvious choice.

Anyway, put me in the camp of people who thinks we need to fix kindergarten so that it's age appropriate and serves the interests of more kids, rather than accepting that kindergarten is often too academic with unrealistic expectations and then just leaving it up to parents to realize this in advance and redshirt accordingly.

Completely agree with you PP on making K appropriate for kids' developmental level and including more physical activity, free time, centers, play-based, all of that.

But IMO a fraction of these parents just want to maximize advantages for their kids and will still redshirt to have the biggest and most "advanced" kids. Hence you have SO much private school redshirting when obviously those schools have flexibility to design classrooms and routines appropriately and don't have state-mandated testing in the early years, etc.

Basically I think making K better is a laudable goal but will not "solve" redshirting.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I agree with having a standard and not making exceptions. But I wish dcps would gradually scoot these cutoffs back, maybe even just a few weeks a year. Half the kids in dcps are not emotionally ready for what’s asked of them in prek4 and K.

And now the gap between what private can offer in terms of developmental appropriateness is getting even bigger. In my neighborhood the private school kids will be several months older on average — and enjoy a gentle acceleration without the pressure of testing.

Agreed, though our experience with PK4 was that it was very age appropriate and a great fit for our kid with a summer birthday. I think DCPS needs to look critically at both the K curriculum and the way K teachers are trained and apply some of the lessons from the PK program to turn it into a true transitional program that focuses on shifting kids from ECE to elementary and helping them build socio-emotional maturity, patience, and interpersonal skills.

PK teachers in DCPS almost all have masters in early childhood education. K teachers generally do not, and many K teachers float between K, 1st, and 2nd grade to help schools accommodate fluctuating IB enrollment into the K cohort. This can exacerbate the issue of K teachers who have unrealistic expectations, developmentally, because they may be accustomed to a classroom of 7 or 8 year olds and then have to come in and teach a cohort of 5 year olds, even some 4 year olds.

I have also never understood the point of making the cutoff September 30th. It's hard for the kids, even just psychologically. Kids with late August and September birthdays are always hyper-aware of the fact that they start school a different age than peers. Even for kids who are perfectly on target developmentally, I think this can become a source of anxiety. Why not make the cut off August 1st or August 15th, so all kids are the same age on the first day of school? I don't get why this wouldn't be the obvious choice.

Anyway, put me in the camp of people who thinks we need to fix kindergarten so that it's age appropriate and serves the interests of more kids, rather than accepting that kindergarten is often too academic with unrealistic expectations and then just leaving it up to parents to realize this in advance and redshirt accordingly.

Completely agree with you PP on making K appropriate for kids' developmental level and including more physical activity, free time, centers, play-based, all of that.

But IMO a fraction of these parents just want to maximize advantages for their kids and will still redshirt to have the biggest and most "advanced" kids. Hence you have SO much private school redshirting when obviously those schools have flexibility to design classrooms and routines appropriately and don't have state-mandated testing in the early years, etc.

Basically I think making K better is a laudable goal but will not "solve" redshirting.

Right -- the stated rationale of these people is that they do not want their kid to be the youngest.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The comments on the WaPo article seem pretty overwhelmingly to oppose DCPS’s stance, whereas here on this thread it has seemed a majority support DCPS. Interesting.

They keep saying that the youngest kids benefit from starting later, but of course red shirting just makes another cohort — e.g., the April and May birthdays — the youngest kids, who themselves would then benefit if they started later. I have yet to see a convincing response to that.

Remember WaPo attracts a national audience so a range of experiences and regulations. This board is hyperlocal, understands DCPS and has an interest in everyone playing by the same rules.

That said, it’s really because these three moms are intentionally making a mess of the messaging because it benefits them. There are absolutely important reasons to redshirt, as have been raised here already — trauma, ESL, developmental delays, neurodivergence, etc. And those can all be properly evaluated, approved and set up with a plan for success. Especially at a school like Lafayette. “I don’t want my kid to be the youngest” is not that.

They say “I want my kid to have an advantage” but they intentionally drop the second part of the sentence. Guess what? It’s “I want my kid to have an advantage OVER YOUR KID.” Doesn’t exactly garner as much support when they actually have to admit that’s what they mean. But by virtue of shoving their kid who is over a year too old for a class in with yours, that’s exactly what it means.

Also I’m not sure what messaging it sends to their kids / what kind of example it is for the rest of their lives… 1) I didn’t have enough faith in you to even try putting you in the appropriate grade 2) I was given notice of a rule, but instead of correcting course I decided to bully others to get my way. Neither is great. And these kids aren’t going to shake that reputation.

The tea coming out of the parent groups about these three is piping hot. They’ve used up all their goodwill by dragging a great school and community through the mud. Folks are listening to them with a sympathetic ear and then sending all the drama out like an old school phone tree. I am so close to dropping all their nonsense here so it’s a little more clear what these people are truly like.

I am dying for a cup of this tea

Same.

I live in Ward 5 and have been just so stunned at how oblivious these parents are, to be willing to put their name on "I want my kid to have an advantage over other kids."

Same in Ward 4

+1 Same in Ward 1. There has been lots of discussion among all the parents in my neighborhood about what entitled jack*sses these Lafayette parents are.

I am sympathetic to a significantly below average in maturity kid with an August or September birthday. I am - that's tough luck for anyone, and I could see how you'd struggle in PK3. But guess what rich white people WOTP - sometimes your kid draws the short straw! And since yours hasn't drawn literally a single other even moderately short straw in any other facet of life... I think they'll be just fine being (gasp! outrage! sigh!) the least mature kid in PK. Someone has to be! Life's tough all over!

Right, plus the fact that at least one of these parents redshirted an older child means that this is less likely to be about the individual child and just about wanting an advantage.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I agree with having a standard and not making exceptions. But I wish dcps would gradually scoot these cutoffs back, maybe even just a few weeks a year. Half the kids in dcps are not emotionally ready for what’s asked of them in prek4 and K.

And now the gap between what private can offer in terms of developmental appropriateness is getting even bigger. In my neighborhood the private school kids will be several months older on average — and enjoy a gentle acceleration without the pressure of testing.

Agreed, though our experience with PK4 was that it was very age appropriate and a great fit for our kid with a summer birthday. I think DCPS needs to look critically at both the K curriculum and the way K teachers are trained and apply some of the lessons from the PK program to turn it into a true transitional program that focuses on shifting kids from ECE to elementary and helping them build socio-emotional maturity, patience, and interpersonal skills.

PK teachers in DCPS almost all have masters in early childhood education. K teachers generally do not, and many K teachers float between K, 1st, and 2nd grade to help schools accommodate fluctuating IB enrollment into the K cohort. This can exacerbate the issue of K teachers who have unrealistic expectations, developmentally, because they may be accustomed to a classroom of 7 or 8 year olds and then have to come in and teach a cohort of 5 year olds, even some 4 year olds.

I have also never understood the point of making the cutoff September 30th. It's hard for the kids, even just psychologically. Kids with late August and September birthdays are always hyper-aware of the fact that they start school a different age than peers. Even for kids who are perfectly on target developmentally, I think this can become a source of anxiety. Why not make the cut off August 1st or August 15th, so all kids are the same age on the first day of school? I don't get why this wouldn't be the obvious choice.

Anyway, put me in the camp of people who thinks we need to fix kindergarten so that it's age appropriate and serves the interests of more kids, rather than accepting that kindergarten is often too academic with unrealistic expectations and then just leaving it up to parents to realize this in advance and redshirt accordingly.

Completely agree with you PP on making K appropriate for kids' developmental level and including more physical activity, free time, centers, play-based, all of that.

But IMO a fraction of these parents just want to maximize advantages for their kids and will still redshirt to have the biggest and most "advanced" kids. Hence you have SO much private school redshirting when obviously those schools have flexibility to design classrooms and routines appropriately and don't have state-mandated testing in the early years, etc.

Basically I think making K better is a laudable goal but will not "solve" redshirting.

Right -- the stated rationale of these people is that they do not want their kid to be the youngest.

Yup. They keep throwing out redshirting research but where's the data on the kids that are then the youngest? The May and June birthdays is every July, August, September birthday gets held back.

Also, the research doesn't really stratify for socioeconomic status and circumstance. If your parents have means to pay an extra year of preschool, your chances of improved academic performance were already higher than those whose parents couldn't.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The comments on the WaPo article seem pretty overwhelmingly to oppose DCPS’s stance, whereas here on this thread it has seemed a majority support DCPS. Interesting.

They keep saying that the youngest kids benefit from starting later, but of course red shirting just makes another cohort — e.g., the April and May birthdays — the youngest kids, who themselves would then benefit if they started later. I have yet to see a convincing response to that.

Remember WaPo attracts a national audience so a range of experiences and regulations. This board is hyperlocal, understands DCPS and has an interest in everyone playing by the same rules.

That said, it’s really because these three moms are intentionally making a mess of the messaging because it benefits them. There are absolutely important reasons to redshirt, as have been raised here already — trauma, ESL, developmental delays, neurodivergence, etc. And those can all be properly evaluated, approved and set up with a plan for success. Especially at a school like Lafayette. “I don’t want my kid to be the youngest” is not that.

They say “I want my kid to have an advantage” but they intentionally drop the second part of the sentence. Guess what? It’s “I want my kid to have an advantage OVER YOUR KID.” Doesn’t exactly garner as much support when they actually have to admit that’s what they mean. But by virtue of shoving their kid who is over a year too old for a class in with yours, that’s exactly what it means.

Also I’m not sure what messaging it sends to their kids / what kind of example it is for the rest of their lives… 1) I didn’t have enough faith in you to even try putting you in the appropriate grade 2) I was given notice of a rule, but instead of correcting course I decided to bully others to get my way. Neither is great. And these kids aren’t going to shake that reputation.

The tea coming out of the parent groups about these three is piping hot. They’ve used up all their goodwill by dragging a great school and community through the mud. Folks are listening to them with a sympathetic ear and then sending all the drama out like an old school phone tree. I am so close to dropping all their nonsense here so it’s a little more clear what these people are truly like.

I am dying for a cup of this tea

Same.

I live in Ward 5 and have been just so stunned at how oblivious these parents are, to be willing to put their name on "I want my kid to have an advantage over other kids."

Same in Ward 4

+1 Same in Ward 1. There has been lots of discussion among all the parents in my neighborhood about what entitled jack*sses these Lafayette parents are.

I am sympathetic to a significantly below average in maturity kid with an August or September birthday. I am - that's tough luck for anyone, and I could see how you'd struggle in PK3. But guess what rich white people WOTP - sometimes your kid draws the short straw! And since yours hasn't drawn literally a single other even moderately short straw in any other facet of life... I think they'll be just fine being (gasp! outrage! sigh!) the least mature kid in PK. Someone has to be! Life's tough all over!

Right, plus the fact that at least one of these parents redshirted an older child means that this is less likely to be about the individual child and just about wanting an advantage.

Agreed. What are the chances that both kids needed an exception to the rule?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The comments on the WaPo article seem pretty overwhelmingly to oppose DCPS’s stance, whereas here on this thread it has seemed a majority support DCPS. Interesting.

They keep saying that the youngest kids benefit from starting later, but of course red shirting just makes another cohort — e.g., the April and May birthdays — the youngest kids, who themselves would then benefit if they started later. I have yet to see a convincing response to that.

Remember WaPo attracts a national audience so a range of experiences and regulations. This board is hyperlocal, understands DCPS and has an interest in everyone playing by the same rules.

That said, it’s really because these three moms are intentionally making a mess of the messaging because it benefits them. There are absolutely important reasons to redshirt, as have been raised here already — trauma, ESL, developmental delays, neurodivergence, etc. And those can all be properly evaluated, approved and set up with a plan for success. Especially at a school like Lafayette. “I don’t want my kid to be the youngest” is not that.

They say “I want my kid to have an advantage” but they intentionally drop the second part of the sentence. Guess what? It’s “I want my kid to have an advantage OVER YOUR KID.” Doesn’t exactly garner as much support when they actually have to admit that’s what they mean. But by virtue of shoving their kid who is over a year too old for a class in with yours, that’s exactly what it means.

Also I’m not sure what messaging it sends to their kids / what kind of example it is for the rest of their lives… 1) I didn’t have enough faith in you to even try putting you in the appropriate grade 2) I was given notice of a rule, but instead of correcting course I decided to bully others to get my way. Neither is great. And these kids aren’t going to shake that reputation.

The tea coming out of the parent groups about these three is piping hot. They’ve used up all their goodwill by dragging a great school and community through the mud. Folks are listening to them with a sympathetic ear and then sending all the drama out like an old school phone tree. I am so close to dropping all their nonsense here so it’s a little more clear what these people are truly like.

I am dying for a cup of this tea

Same.

I live in Ward 5 and have been just so stunned at how oblivious these parents are, to be willing to put their name on "I want my kid to have an advantage over other kids."

Same in Ward 4

+1 Same in Ward 1. There has been lots of discussion among all the parents in my neighborhood about what entitled jack*sses these Lafayette parents are.

I am sympathetic to a significantly below average in maturity kid with an August or September birthday. I am - that's tough luck for anyone, and I could see how you'd struggle in PK3. But guess what rich white people WOTP - sometimes your kid draws the short straw! And since yours hasn't drawn literally a single other even moderately short straw in any other facet of life... I think they'll be just fine being (gasp! outrage! sigh!) the least mature kid in PK. Someone has to be! Life's tough all over!

Right, plus the fact that at least one of these parents redshirted an older child means that this is less likely to be about the individual child and just about wanting an advantage.

Agreed. What are the chances that both kids needed an exception to the rule?

If these kids had SN it would have been easily documented.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The comments on the WaPo article seem pretty overwhelmingly to oppose DCPS’s stance, whereas here on this thread it has seemed a majority support DCPS. Interesting.

They keep saying that the youngest kids benefit from starting later, but of course red shirting just makes another cohort — e.g., the April and May birthdays — the youngest kids, who themselves would then benefit if they started later. I have yet to see a convincing response to that.

Remember WaPo attracts a national audience so a range of experiences and regulations. This board is hyperlocal, understands DCPS and has an interest in everyone playing by the same rules.

That said, it’s really because these three moms are intentionally making a mess of the messaging because it benefits them. There are absolutely important reasons to redshirt, as have been raised here already — trauma, ESL, developmental delays, neurodivergence, etc. And those can all be properly evaluated, approved and set up with a plan for success. Especially at a school like Lafayette. “I don’t want my kid to be the youngest” is not that.

They say “I want my kid to have an advantage” but they intentionally drop the second part of the sentence. Guess what? It’s “I want my kid to have an advantage OVER YOUR KID.” Doesn’t exactly garner as much support when they actually have to admit that’s what they mean. But by virtue of shoving their kid who is over a year too old for a class in with yours, that’s exactly what it means.

Also I’m not sure what messaging it sends to their kids / what kind of example it is for the rest of their lives… 1) I didn’t have enough faith in you to even try putting you in the appropriate grade 2) I was given notice of a rule, but instead of correcting course I decided to bully others to get my way. Neither is great. And these kids aren’t going to shake that reputation.

The tea coming out of the parent groups about these three is piping hot. They’ve used up all their goodwill by dragging a great school and community through the mud. Folks are listening to them with a sympathetic ear and then sending all the drama out like an old school phone tree. I am so close to dropping all their nonsense here so it’s a little more clear what these people are truly like.

I am dying for a cup of this tea

Same.

I live in Ward 5 and have been just so stunned at how oblivious these parents are, to be willing to put their name on "I want my kid to have an advantage over other kids."

Same in Ward 4

+1 Same in Ward 1. There has been lots of discussion among all the parents in my neighborhood about what entitled jack*sses these Lafayette parents are.

I am sympathetic to a significantly below average in maturity kid with an August or September birthday. I am - that's tough luck for anyone, and I could see how you'd struggle in PK3. But guess what rich white people WOTP - sometimes your kid draws the short straw! And since yours hasn't drawn literally a single other even moderately short straw in any other facet of life... I think they'll be just fine being (gasp! outrage! sigh!) the least mature kid in PK. Someone has to be! Life's tough all over!

Right, plus the fact that at least one of these parents redshirted an older child means that this is less likely to be about the individual child and just about wanting an advantage.

Agreed. What are the chances that both kids needed an exception to the rule?

Or in at least one case, three kids... (eye roll)

[Anonymous]

My child with a mid September birthday started kindergarten at 4 last year. She had a wonderful experience both socially and academically. I'm so glad I did not redshirt her. Have some confidence in your kids, people.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:My child with a mid September birthday started kindergarten at 4 last year. She had a wonderful experience both socially and academically. I'm so glad I did not redshirt her. Have some confidence in your kids, people.

My kid with an August birthday honestly struggled a bit in kindergarten due to maturity. But you know what, it was okay. We supported her, the teacher supported her, the school worked with her. A few years on, she's doing great.

Someone has to be the youngest. For my kid, it's helped her learn that she could do hard things, that it's okay to struggle with something new. She learned to be diligent and not get too down if something takes a bit longer to master. It can be hard to watch your kid go through something hard, but it's actually essential to their development as people. Why would you deprive a developmentally normal and otherwise perfectly healthy child the opportunity for that growth just to spare them the difficulty of "being the youngest"?

[Anonymous]

My late August baby is now is middle school so there’s been enough time to see the bigger picture, but still recent enough that I remember ALL these thoughts.

We sent her on time - she celebrated her 5th birthday on the first day of kindergarten. There were definite maturity issues in prek, K, and even 1st but she wasn’t the only one. I noticed that the kids who were 10-11 months older than her could sit still longer and were less rambunctious, but they were also the outliers. She was more the norm of her cohort than the older kids. Covid happened in 1st grade and by the time everything returned to normal, she was in 3rd grade and all the kids were weird and different in their own way after a year of distant learning. Since then, I haven’t really noticed any difference between her and the “older” kids. She’s doing really well in middle school. She’s doing advanced math and has made Honor Roll. She’s not very athletic, but she comes by that naturally with two non-athletic parents. She has good friends and is doing well socially. I can’t imagine that she could be doing much better at life if we had started school later.

A hard lesson I’ve learned as a parent is that we can’t micromanage our kids lives and experiences. We make decisions for them with the information we have and we don’t always get it right. And then life happens anyway and decisions are taken away from us. Kids get hurt or injured. They get a bad teacher. They get cut from a sports team. It’s all part of learning to adapt, develop stronger character and persevere.

[Anonymous]

Get the free pre-k 3 and 4, then move to Maryland for K like everyone else.

[Anonymous]

You cannot know that your kid will need to be redshirted at AGE 1, unless she already has sure signs of special needs. This whole thread is absolutely ridiculous