holding boys back?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:A good kindergarten should be able to accommodate any five-year-old whose development is within the range of normal. What I'm seeing a lot of parents who will do anything to see that their child is at the top of the heap, and not because that's what's best for the child or the class as a whole.

How big is your subset? And have all these parents consulted you, had you take part in the intricate details of their decision such that you know what "a lot of parents" are doing?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I think most people agree with this. The question is: what is a reasonable exception? It's one thing for children with significant developmental delays or deficits to be held back. I think it's quite another for parents to hold back children primarily because they don't want them to be the youngest or smallest in the class or because they are not as outgoing as some of their peers.

The question is, is it any of your business? Isn't it enough to be concerned with deciding what's best for your child? You must have an awful lot of time on your hands to be thinking of what the Jones are doing.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think most people agree with this. The question is: what is a reasonable exception? It's one thing for children with significant developmental delays or deficits to be held back. I think it's quite another for parents to hold back children primarily because they don't want them to be the youngest or smallest in the class or because they are not as outgoing as some of their peers.

The question is, is it any of your business? Isn't it enough to be concerned with deciding what's best for your child? You must have an awful lot of time on your hands to be thinking of what the Jones are doing.

I wasn't the previous poster, but I assert that it absolutely is my business (and everybody else's too). When my son starts kindgergarten at age 4 yrs, 11 mos, and is used as a punching bag by a group of 6.5 year olds, that absolutlely does concern me.

If we had one or two kids with legitimate reasons for being held back, that's a different story. But when fully half of the boys in the entering kindergarten class have been redshirted, it DOES create problems for the "rest of us".

[Anonymous]

Agree with pp. It is our business. I am not leaving my dd in aftercare for K b/c I don't want her with the bigger kids after school. I guess that would be out of my control if she is in K at 5 with 7 yr old boys.

[Anonymous]

I haven't posted previously, but you are kidding yourself if you think these decisions don't impact everyone else. It changes the classroom dynamic -- which makes it eveyone's business. And it is also my business because I have a very small, but very precocious daughter who might benefit from being pushed ahead. But we are scared to consider it when there are already boys far bigger and nearly two years older than her that will be in her classes. And these boys are "normal," but their parents are holding them back in hopes that they will somehow become exceptional.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I haven't posted previously, but you are kidding yourself if you think these decisions don't impact everyone else. It changes the classroom dynamic -- which makes it eveyone's business. And it is also my business because I have a very small, but very precocious daughter who might benefit from being pushed ahead. But we are scared to consider it when there are already boys far bigger and nearly two years older than her that will be in her classes. And these boys are "normal," but their parents are holding them back in hopes that they will somehow become exceptional.

Agree. I also have a teeny dd.
Many of these boys are badly behaved on top of their size. One hit my dd in the face with a shovel at day care. He is supposed to be in K, he is twice her weight.

[Anonymous]

I'm sympathetic, but honestly, I think that some of the PPs are overdramatizing the problem here. I have no doubt that redshirting is problematic, like all the parents in high-pressure schools who (reportedly) arrange 'diagnoses' of learning disabilities so that their kids get extra time on tests. But I still have trouble believing that redshirting is as insidious as some of you suggest. Like it or not, someone will always be bigger or older than your kid, and someone will always be at a vastly different stage of the developmental curve. My son will not be redshirted, but he has always towered over his classmates, especially some (but not all) of the teeny girls, even though he's on the young side of the calendar.

I'm really surprised at all the mothers of girls who seem so threatened by this phenomenon. Are your daughters really in need of so much protection? And to the PP who is worried about her 4 years, 11 mos old child interacting with the behemoth redshirts - presumably you are also gaming the system, since K starts at age 5?

I have no dog in this fight, was only interested because I have heard about this trend, but the hysterical tone just amazes me.

[Anonymous]

Two things strike me from reading this thread. One is that a number of posters don't allow for exceptions - period. That leave those of us with children who were developmentally delayed, but able to catch up with an extra year of services out in the cold. Some of our kids could never have survived kindergarten when they hit kindergarten age. The alternative to holding them back is a lifetime of special education and/or services that would not otherwise be necessary, which puts these kids at risk of a negative school experience and not fulfilling their potential.

The second thing that strikes me is that so many people blame bad behavior on holding boys back. Once kids hit elementary school, they are on the playground with kids of all different ages. Even if your kid had only kids who started in the window set by the school, they would not be immune from bullying because there is still the before school, recess, lunch time and after school contact with kids of all ages.

[Anonymous]

The NYT had an interesting article about this last year:
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/06/03/magazine/03kindergarten-t.html?_r=2&ref=magazine&pagewanted=all

It points out that the percentage of redshirted children in private schools and affluent public school districts can be as high as 25%, suggesting that we are not just talking about a few exceptions.

[Anonymous]

Also worth reading because it cites recent research on the effects of redshirting; discusses the possible factors behind its rise in certain areas, including changing curricula in the wake of NCLB and parental attitudes; and highlights the difficulty of coming up with an equitable solution (although I thought the author seemed to lean toward a return toward a less academic focus in kindergarten).

[Anonymous]

There is much less to be proud of when you stack the deck, ladies. Developmental delays are one thing; perceived "immaturity" is another.

Get a grip.

[Anonymous]

there is still the before school, recess, lunch time and after school contact with kids of all ages

Actually, our public elementary school separates kids by grade.

Also, someone whose daughter is 4 years and 11 months when she starts kindergarten is not gaming the system, at least in Virginia, where the cutoff date is September 30.

[Anonymous]

And the gaming is done by the parents at the kids expense. I actually see plenty of people here suggesting delays for kids who need it. It is the ones who are buying some perceived "advantage" where the issue lies.

What responsibility does a school have in these cases?

Of course the school likes the kids older, it makes it easier to teach ABCs. Of course, these kids are already working on trigonometry, so what difference?

[Anonymous]

Of course the school likes the kids older, it makes it easier to teach ABCs.

Not all schools want their jobs to be easier, and I don't think all schools view their job as stuffing a certain quantity of academic knowledge into children's heads so it can be tipped back out on a standardized exam. In any case, having to deal with kids who should (according to their abilities, not their parents' ambitions) have started school a year earlier doesn't make the school's job easier.

In Arlington, at least, the message is that it is not parents' job to prepare their children for school; it is the schools' job to work with the students they have. Granted, some principals are more inclined to push (the ATS principal, for example, says all her students will be reading by the end of K, which is *not* a developmentally appropriate goal), but in general, kindergarten teachers are there to work with kids with the abilities of a five-year-olds. If schools are pushing kids to work beyond what's appropriate for their age, it's our job as parents to push back.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

there is still the before school, recess, lunch time and after school contact with kids of all ages

Actually, our public elementary school separates kids by grade.

Also, someone whose daughter is 4 years and 11 months when she starts kindergarten is not gaming the system, at least in Virginia, where the cutoff date is September 30.

Yes. I'm the PP who posted about my 4 yr/11 month old child (son actually). We are in Fairfax, and he turns 5 in mid-September... so no, I'm not gaming the system. I have particular concerns about him being in a class with kids who are almost 7, in part because he is somewhat small. I recognize that he would probably be one of the smallest even if no one was red-shirting (and I'd accept that)... but its harder to stomach when you have kids who outweigh him by 20 pounds, and are almost a full 2 years ahead of him developmental wise.