What’s the point of redshirting when it cancels out the pride factor?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Our local schools had a date of December 31 until around the year 2000. Parents with kids born in July or August would look ridiculous holding them back. The girls always went on time. Some boys were held back for not being ready.

NAEP graphs track test scores starting on the 70s for American schools.

The highest recorded score in math was 285 in 2012. The highest score recorded for reading was 263 in also in 2012..

The most recent math score was 271 in 2022. In reading, the most recent score is 256 in 2022.

With so many parents starting their kids later and later entering Kindergarten or First Grade you would think scores would increase. Instead they dropped from the peak in 2012 and have yet to make any major improvements

This is a well known trend and has been extensively studied by academics. It is most likely tied to the effects of the No Child Left Behind law and the swing toward standardized testing and « teaching to the test » that was first implemented in 2000. It has nothing to do with redshirting and the changes were seen across all states regardless of cutoffs. Of all the things that impact children’s outcomes, redshirting is not a statistically important one.

Ok but what was the point of creating new cutoff dates where children are entering school much later? It’s not redshirting I’m talking about, it’s the schools changing their cutoff dates where children are starting school up to a year later than they used to.

These test scores have been given for 55 years. I understand they might have peaked with No Child Left Behind but they went down after 2012. With children being older starting school you would think the 3rd grade testing grades would improve but they haven’t.

The age and test scores are not the issue, the curriculum is where they dumbed down things, got rid of homework, reading books, textbooks, etc. kids should be required to be enrolled in K at age 5. If they are not enrolled at age 5, they should go into the age appropriate grade when enrolled, so directly into 1st. It’s the parents holding back.

Kids' home environments changed substantially starting in 2012. . .lots more kids spending tons of time on Ipads and phones rather than reading and playing, which are essential to building literacy and math skills. Mental health for teenagers started tanking at the same time. The schools are just a part of the issue.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Our local schools had a date of December 31 until around the year 2000. Parents with kids born in July or August would look ridiculous holding them back. The girls always went on time. Some boys were held back for not being ready.

NAEP graphs track test scores starting on the 70s for American schools.

The highest recorded score in math was 285 in 2012. The highest score recorded for reading was 263 in also in 2012..

The most recent math score was 271 in 2022. In reading, the most recent score is 256 in 2022.

With so many parents starting their kids later and later entering Kindergarten or First Grade you would think scores would increase. Instead they dropped from the peak in 2012 and have yet to make any major improvements

This is a well known trend and has been extensively studied by academics. It is most likely tied to the effects of the No Child Left Behind law and the swing toward standardized testing and « teaching to the test » that was first implemented in 2000. It has nothing to do with redshirting and the changes were seen across all states regardless of cutoffs. Of all the things that impact children’s outcomes, redshirting is not a statistically important one.

Ok but what was the point of creating new cutoff dates where children are entering school much later? It’s not redshirting I’m talking about, it’s the schools changing their cutoff dates where children are starting school up to a year later than they used to.

These test scores have been given for 55 years. I understand they might have peaked with No Child Left Behind but they went down after 2012. With children being older starting school you would think the 3rd grade testing grades would improve but they haven’t.

The age and test scores are not the issue, the curriculum is where they dumbed down things, got rid of homework, reading books, textbooks, etc. kids should be required to be enrolled in K at age 5. If they are not enrolled at age 5, they should go into the age appropriate grade when enrolled, so directly into 1st. It’s the parents holding back.

Kids' home environments changed substantially starting in 2012. . .lots more kids spending tons of time on Ipads and phones rather than reading and playing, which are essential to building literacy and math skills. Mental health for teenagers started tanking at the same time. The schools are just a part of the issue.

Not really. Teens always had mental health issues. In the past it was ignored and little help. There is more recognition and more help as it’s a money making business now. And, kids had tv, video games and other distractions. It’s the curriculum, and teaching style, relaxed parenting, etc.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There is a real problem related to boys education they are just doing worse than girls across the board, from kindergarten to college.

https://www.brookings.edu/articles/boys-left-behind-education-gender-gaps-across-the-us/

Parents that get educated on this trend use redshirting to increase the level of maturity of boys when they enter school, which is why redshirting is more prevalent among summer birth boys of high socioeconomic status families.

Nothing wrong with this trend, we want our kids to succeed, it’s good for the entire society.

Why wouldn’t these high socioeconomic status boys succeed unless they were held back a year? The kids who are our future scientists, doctors, creators, the most intelligent kids do not need to be held back, in fact it would be detrimental to their growth as students.

If your kid might benefit from staying back for a year because they will do better, just admit it. That’s a smart decision and is made all the time.

It makes it easier on parents and teachers. It’s not about the kids at all. Smart kids from wealthy homes should be able to go on time. What it means is the parents and preschools did not prepare these kids.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There is a real problem related to boys education they are just doing worse than girls across the board, from kindergarten to college.

https://www.brookings.edu/articles/boys-left-behind-education-gender-gaps-across-the-us/

Parents that get educated on this trend use redshirting to increase the level of maturity of boys when they enter school, which is why redshirting is more prevalent among summer birth boys of high socioeconomic status families.

Nothing wrong with this trend, we want our kids to succeed, it’s good for the entire society.

Why wouldn’t these high socioeconomic status boys succeed unless they were held back a year? The kids who are our future scientists, doctors, creators, the most intelligent kids do not need to be held back, in fact it would be detrimental to their growth as students.

If your kid might benefit from staying back for a year because they will do better, just admit it. That’s a smart decision and is made all the time.

You’re just speculating who needs to be held back, who will do better, who’s going to be doctor, scientist, creator, what’s detrimental when in reality you have no clue, and it’s not your call to make, it’s the parents responsibility.

No need to admit anything, obviously the parents that redshirt their kid, do it because they think he will do better from staying back one year.

I don’t understand why that bothers you. How is a child doing better in school impacting you? I’d think you want that in your kids classroom. More mature kids, less disturbance, a good learning environment.

Unless your kid is not doing well and you blame it on the fast pace of teaching because the material is too easy for redshirted kids.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Our kid had adhd and dyslexia. You’re da*n right we red-shirted. They had absolutely no advantage being older in the grade. Struggle, struggle, struggle. But thanks for the derision!

I don't think OP was thinking about your kid when they posted.

DCUMs anti-redshirters are anti-social and hyper-competitive. There is absolutely no question in my mind that OP is thinking about kids like PPs. I’ve watched the casual cruelty of DCUM anti-redshirters too many times over the years. They delight in bullying children.

Also, I didn’t redshirt, although that should not matter.

Literally nobody cares about some special needs child being held back a year.

Nobody.

My kid had no diagnosis when we made the decision to hold him back. He was diagnosed with autism several years later. So was the decision not ok at first and then it became acceptable? Is it only acceptable if I prove his diagnosis?

If you don’t see it before age 3 then it’s not autism. Get another opinion.

What used to be called Asperger’s is now diagnosed as Autism. These are high functioning kids who have lackluster social skills, but it’s not obvious until they’re older because they’re not really far behind socially when they’re little. The gap between their social skills and their peer’s gets wider as they get older. Girls, especially, get later diagnoses because they tend to have stronger social skills than boys when they’re very young.

That’s often times SCD, but misdiagnosed as ASD.

What is SCD?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There is a real problem related to boys education they are just doing worse than girls across the board, from kindergarten to college.

https://www.brookings.edu/articles/boys-left-behind-education-gender-gaps-across-the-us/

Parents that get educated on this trend use redshirting to increase the level of maturity of boys when they enter school, which is why redshirting is more prevalent among summer birth boys of high socioeconomic status families.

Nothing wrong with this trend, we want our kids to succeed, it’s good for the entire society.

Why wouldn’t these high socioeconomic status boys succeed unless they were held back a year? The kids who are our future scientists, doctors, creators, the most intelligent kids do not need to be held back, in fact it would be detrimental to their growth as students.

If your kid might benefit from staying back for a year because they will do better, just admit it. That’s a smart decision and is made all the time.

Do you understand how private schools work. Like the basics.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There is a real problem related to boys education they are just doing worse than girls across the board, from kindergarten to college.

https://www.brookings.edu/articles/boys-left-behind-education-gender-gaps-across-the-us/

Parents that get educated on this trend use redshirting to increase the level of maturity of boys when they enter school, which is why redshirting is more prevalent among summer birth boys of high socioeconomic status families.

Nothing wrong with this trend, we want our kids to succeed, it’s good for the entire society.

Why wouldn’t these high socioeconomic status boys succeed unless they were held back a year? The kids who are our future scientists, doctors, creators, the most intelligent kids do not need to be held back, in fact it would be detrimental to their growth as students.

If your kid might benefit from staying back for a year because they will do better, just admit it. That’s a smart decision and is made all the time.

You’re just speculating who needs to be held back, who will do better, who’s going to be doctor, scientist, creator, what’s detrimental when in reality you have no clue, and it’s not your call to make, it’s the parents responsibility.

No need to admit anything, obviously the parents that redshirt their kid, do it because they think he will do better from staying back one year.

I don’t understand why that bothers you. How is a child doing better in school impacting you? I’d think you want that in your kids classroom. More mature kids, less disturbance, a good learning environment.

Unless your kid is not doing well and you blame it on the fast pace of teaching because the material is too easy for redshirted kids.

Of course there are many children who benefit from waiting a year because of immaturity or having difficulty with skills. I just can’t believe how many parents think it’s an advantage to hold a child back a year when there are no learning issues, no maturity issues. I would think a kid who is without issues, a smart kid, would be bored out of his mind going through pre-k one more time. I know my kids were ready to move on halfway through pre-k, especially after preschool and pre-k.

It doesn’t bother me I just wonder why anyone would think starting school late would benefit later in life. The study is ridiculous.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There is a real problem related to boys education they are just doing worse than girls across the board, from kindergarten to college.

https://www.brookings.edu/articles/boys-left-behind-education-gender-gaps-across-the-us/

Parents that get educated on this trend use redshirting to increase the level of maturity of boys when they enter school, which is why redshirting is more prevalent among summer birth boys of high socioeconomic status families.

Nothing wrong with this trend, we want our kids to succeed, it’s good for the entire society.

Why wouldn’t these high socioeconomic status boys succeed unless they were held back a year? The kids who are our future scientists, doctors, creators, the most intelligent kids do not need to be held back, in fact it would be detrimental to their growth as students.

If your kid might benefit from staying back for a year because they will do better, just admit it. That’s a smart decision and is made all the time.

You’re just speculating who needs to be held back, who will do better, who’s going to be doctor, scientist, creator, what’s detrimental when in reality you have no clue, and it’s not your call to make, it’s the parents responsibility.

No need to admit anything, obviously the parents that redshirt their kid, do it because they think he will do better from staying back one year.

I don’t understand why that bothers you. How is a child doing better in school impacting you? I’d think you want that in your kids classroom. More mature kids, less disturbance, a good learning environment.

Unless your kid is not doing well and you blame it on the fast pace of teaching because the material is too easy for redshirted kids.

Of course there are many children who benefit from waiting a year because of immaturity or having difficulty with skills. I just can’t believe how many parents think it’s an advantage to hold a child back a year when there are no learning issues, no maturity issues. I would think a kid who is without issues, a smart kid, would be bored out of his mind going through pre-k one more time. I know my kids were ready to move on halfway through pre-k, especially after preschool and pre-k.

It doesn’t bother me I just wonder why anyone would think starting school late would benefit later in life. The study is ridiculous.

It’s not up to you. You may disagree with holding kids back, or feeding them McDonalds. Redshirting may provide no benefit, my personal view is maybe a very limited benefit in certain situations etc. parents are in the best position to figure it out, usually they don’t hold back unless they have a good reason, like sports academics or maturity, all valid in my book.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There is a real problem related to boys education they are just doing worse than girls across the board, from kindergarten to college.

https://www.brookings.edu/articles/boys-left-behind-education-gender-gaps-across-the-us/

Parents that get educated on this trend use redshirting to increase the level of maturity of boys when they enter school, which is why redshirting is more prevalent among summer birth boys of high socioeconomic status families.

Nothing wrong with this trend, we want our kids to succeed, it’s good for the entire society.

Why wouldn’t these high socioeconomic status boys succeed unless they were held back a year? The kids who are our future scientists, doctors, creators, the most intelligent kids do not need to be held back, in fact it would be detrimental to their growth as students.

If your kid might benefit from staying back for a year because they will do better, just admit it. That’s a smart decision and is made all the time.

You’re just speculating who needs to be held back, who will do better, who’s going to be doctor, scientist, creator, what’s detrimental when in reality you have no clue, and it’s not your call to make, it’s the parents responsibility.

No need to admit anything, obviously the parents that redshirt their kid, do it because they think he will do better from staying back one year.

I don’t understand why that bothers you. How is a child doing better in school impacting you? I’d think you want that in your kids classroom. More mature kids, less disturbance, a good learning environment.

Unless your kid is not doing well and you blame it on the fast pace of teaching because the material is too easy for redshirted kids.

Of course there are many children who benefit from waiting a year because of immaturity or having difficulty with skills. I just can’t believe how many parents think it’s an advantage to hold a child back a year when there are no learning issues, no maturity issues. I would think a kid who is without issues, a smart kid, would be bored out of his mind going through pre-k one more time. I know my kids were ready to move on halfway through pre-k, especially after preschool and pre-k.

It doesn’t bother me I just wonder why anyone would think starting school late would benefit later in life. The study is ridiculous.

They only benefit if you get them intensive help. Most aren’t doing that.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There is a real problem related to boys education they are just doing worse than girls across the board, from kindergarten to college.

https://www.brookings.edu/articles/boys-left-behind-education-gender-gaps-across-the-us/

Parents that get educated on this trend use redshirting to increase the level of maturity of boys when they enter school, which is why redshirting is more prevalent among summer birth boys of high socioeconomic status families.

Nothing wrong with this trend, we want our kids to succeed, it’s good for the entire society.

Why wouldn’t these high socioeconomic status boys succeed unless they were held back a year? The kids who are our future scientists, doctors, creators, the most intelligent kids do not need to be held back, in fact it would be detrimental to their growth as students.

If your kid might benefit from staying back for a year because they will do better, just admit it. That’s a smart decision and is made all the time.

You’re just speculating who needs to be held back, who will do better, who’s going to be doctor, scientist, creator, what’s detrimental when in reality you have no clue, and it’s not your call to make, it’s the parents responsibility.

No need to admit anything, obviously the parents that redshirt their kid, do it because they think he will do better from staying back one year.

I don’t understand why that bothers you. How is a child doing better in school impacting you? I’d think you want that in your kids classroom. More mature kids, less disturbance, a good learning environment.

Unless your kid is not doing well and you blame it on the fast pace of teaching because the material is too easy for redshirted kids.

Of course there are many children who benefit from waiting a year because of immaturity or having difficulty with skills. I just can’t believe how many parents think it’s an advantage to hold a child back a year when there are no learning issues, no maturity issues. I would think a kid who is without issues, a smart kid, would be bored out of his mind going through pre-k one more time. I know my kids were ready to move on halfway through pre-k, especially after preschool and pre-k.

It doesn’t bother me I just wonder why anyone would think starting school late would benefit later in life. The study is ridiculous.

It’s not up to you. You may disagree with holding kids back, or feeding them McDonalds. Redshirting may provide no benefit, my personal view is maybe a very limited benefit in certain situations etc. parents are in the best position to figure it out, usually they don’t hold back unless they have a good reason, like sports academics or maturity, all valid in my book.

Sports is not a good reason. If it’s maturity the child should have been in services and should be required to go to a specialized preschool and therapies to help. School systems should not allow it.

[Anonymous]

Somehow (I don’t know how), kindergartens should have a staggered start. Start a required age-appropriate cohort every 5 months or so.

The early starters, older, can have a break before 1st grade.

The younger would go right into 1st (a month break for summer)

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Somehow (I don’t know how), kindergartens should have a staggered start. Start a required age-appropriate cohort every 5 months or so.

The early starters, older, can have a break before 1st grade.

The younger would go right into 1st (a month break for summer)

Why would that help? I have a younger kid. I want more than a month break.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Somehow (I don’t know how), kindergartens should have a staggered start. Start a required age-appropriate cohort every 5 months or so.

The early starters, older, can have a break before 1st grade.

The younger would go right into 1st (a month break for summer)

I say this is as a mom with a kid who has a May bday. He was the least mature in his preschool (youngest) so we did another preschool year. But, he didn’t need a *whole year.* By December of that PreK year I could see he was ready. He was so cute at kindergarten orientation. He confidently jumped and said “I’m ready!” Without my asking. He *could not* have said it a year before.

He’s doing great in school and I didn’t mean to make him the oldest. Youngest or oldest? It would have been either. And especially if others are redshirting, he could have been almost 2 years younger.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Somehow (I don’t know how), kindergartens should have a staggered start. Start a required age-appropriate cohort every 5 months or so.

The early starters, older, can have a break before 1st grade.

The younger would go right into 1st (a month break for summer)

Why would that help? I have a younger kid. I want more than a month break.

Well, how else would you do a staggered start? I’m saying, see if you could spread out 3 groups across the year before 1st grade. My summer suggestion is to help expand the stagger.

[Anonymous]

Good grades and money open doors for you. Pride doesn’t.