Forum Index
»
Private & Independent Schools
Speak up (to your school) if you are worried about all the redshirting
![[Post New]](/jforum/templates/default/images/icon_minipost_new.gif){kind=icon}
Anonymous
How about you quote me and realize the nonsense you are speaking? I said that would be the ONLY possible situation in which it might be legitimate, yet I still doubt it. It must be nice to live in a world where confirmation bias is the name of the game and you surround yourself with self-affirming folks who dare not question your narrow mindset. Congrats on being narrowminded and celebrating your own privilege/naivete/ignorance. |
Anonymous
|
Our DS (summer birthday) was red shirted last year. We are very happy with the decision.
Two close relatives have been doctors specializing in childhood development for decades and are very much in favor of red shirting for this age range, particularly given the nature of K these days, and the issues facing teenagers at increasingly younger ages. Sadly, our experience, and their significant experience, with teachers has been that most of them don't really know what the heck they are talking about most of the time. They'll give you their assessments, but have generally failed to study development (outside of beginner teacher education type courses) of kids outside of their class range. Not to say that there aren't highly gifted teachers, but it's hard to find one with the breadth of knowledge of development to advise on this or other non-subject-specific matters. |
Anonymous
Yikes! I'm an elementary school teacher myself -- I was trying to have an informed discussion with you -- didn't mean to hit a nerve! Sorry! |
Anonymous
You're the type of poster that people are criticizing on this board. You claim to have "two close relatives" in the medical field who advocate pre-flunking all children with summer birthdays--regardless of whether they have a legitimate reason (i.e. developmental delay) or not. I think your "two close relatives" are quacks.
|
Anonymous
|
PP-
Teacher here... Sorry I overreacted. That was unfair. But, if you read my earlier posts, you'd see that I wasn't really justifying a certain case as okay, just indicating that it wasn't really the same as the "redshirting" being discussed here. FWIW, I never agreed that diagnosable learning issues were okay to hold a child back. Only that they were the instances in which you'd consider that. Still, I don't think it's the right course of action. As you said, yes, someone will always be on the bottom. But if your bottom is a few months below grade level... well, that's par for the course. If your bottom is a year below grade level... that's a whole other story. Now, if a child have below grade level in S/L, but otherwise on grade level, is holding him back really going to fix things? Absolutely not. Is getting him some SLP support in his own grade level going to help? Probably. Now, what if a child presents as significantly below grade level across the board? We're most likely looking at a PDD diagnosis and there is NO WAY holding him back will best support him. Again, my apologies for my overreaction. I do felt you misrepresented what I said, but you didn't deserve my response. That being said, I stand by my assertion that in only the very select cases red-shirting is detrimental to the individual child and the class he/she is in. |
Anonymous
PP here. Yes, I both "claim," and do actually, have these close relatives. And, no, they are not "quacks." In their view, both the expectations placed on children these days in pre-K through at least second grade, and the increase in the complexity of issues facing teens at younger and younger ages, make red shirting a good choice. Not in order to have your child be the oldest in the class, but rather simply to delay these experiences until the child has had an additional year to develop, mainly psychologically. Sure, it would be great if schools would start teaching in a more developmentally-appropriate way, but they aren't, and I cannot control that. What I can control (to at least a small degree) is when my child addresses these challenges and "mature" issues. FWIW, we are not "pre-flunking" our kids. We are fortunate in that my DH and I, and most of our respective families ("quacks" included), have done very well academically. While there are concerns that we have for our kids, and children may be very different from their parents and extended families, we don't have any reason to doubt that our kids will do very well in school. What I don't want is for our DS to face the issues facing teenagers any earlier than absolutely necessary (significant drug use, a majority of girls having admitted to giveing a blow job by seventh grade, etc.). We are acting like PARENTS and making choices about our children. We're still allowed to do that to some extent, I hear. I respect your choice and don't assume ill motives. I'd hope others would do the same. |
Anonymous
|
PP-
You're dead wrong. Your child will hit 16 when he hits 16, whether he's in 9th or 10th grade. You're not controlling when he or she addresses these. All your doing is turning your child into the "younger kid" (in terms of grade) seeking out "older kids" because they are encountering the same developmental issues, compounding the issue. |
Anonymous
|
I may be "dead wrong," or perhaps you may be. Maybe there's just no knowing for sure?
But I think that kids tend to hang out and form their closest peer groups based on grade rather than based on age (of course, with some variation). One of the reasons that we chose our DS's elementary school is that it does not go all of the way through high school. We like that there will be the physical and psychological separation between the younger and older grades as I think this can help to keep kids younger a bit longer. Like you I'd assume, I am making the best parenting choices that I can with the information I have available. I'm just offering another view as this string seems to imply that those who red shirt are doing do to gain an "edge" for their kids, rather than as a thoughtful response (even if you may disagree with it) to unreasonable expectations placed on young children and teens. |
Anonymous
| This discussion makes me curious -- Are there any proponents among academics, educational experts, etc who advocate for officially adjusting the age cut-off/age requirements for everyone? |
Anonymous
|
"Now, what if a child presents as significantly below grade level across the board? We're most likely looking at a PDD diagnosis and there is NO WAY holding him back will best support him. "
to the "teacher" who said this -- my daughter presents as below grade level across the board. she has s/l delays, she has pragmatic language issues, she has fine motor delays, she has general motor planning issues. SHE IS NOT PDD. this is from a dev ped with whom we have worked since she was a toddler. she is now kindergarten age, with a spring birthday. we are holding her back, at the recommendation of her teachers at her current school. it is a private school. her older sister is at a moco school, with her age group. in addition to the pressures of k's academic pace, taught like they're sending those kids thru a factory, with class sizes going through the roof, you think for a minute i want my delayed kid in one of those classes, even with the "supports"? are you kidding? because "experts" like you think you know what's best for everyone? the quote above shows your ignorance. i can give you examples of kids like my daughter -- kids with more than one area of delay who do not have pdd. and for whom an extra year in an over pressured environment is like a gift from the lord above. it's fine to have opinions -- to think that redshirting might be overused. but i don't think most parents WANT to keep their kids back. they make that choice for a reason. just like most parents don't want to medicate their kids. lots of people like you like to cite anecdotal evidence about parents who want to maximize their A- kids grades to an A+ with focalin. the reality is that it kills parents to drug their kids. get off your high horse. |
Anonymous
I spent some time looking into different states' age cutoffs. It appears that for most states, the age 5 is not necessarily a required start date for K, but rather merely the earliest age at which kids are allowed to start K. Most states pretty freely allow kids to delay the start of K. In other words, state laws are more concerned about parents trying to start their children in school too soon, rather than too late. I have not looked for research on the pure question of whether some academics think delaying K is best. It seems like the answer might depend on what the child who is held out of K is doing instead -- is she sitting at home watching TV, or is she in some sort of PK or JK program? |
Anonymous
|
Thought this interesting for the discussion:
Swiss psychologist Jean Piaget, well known for his pedagogical studies, formulated three stages of educational development- preoperational (ages 2-7), concrete operational (ages 7-12), and formal operational (age 12 and up). Piaget based this breakdown of thinking stages upon much research and personal observation. During the stage Piaget dubbed, 'preoperational' children are preoccupied with magical thinking. During this time they are acquiring motor skills. They cannot conserve or utilize logical thinking. Therefore during this time much of what would be taught them during a regular school setting would be pointless. During the 'concrete operational stage' is when school really should begin. This is when children begin to think logically. Children who have not begun kindergarten until age 7 have suffered no damage other than being a little older than their classmates. But when a child first comes to school at the age of 7 his faculties are ready to learn. He has the hand eye coordination that he didn't have at age 5 so he learns much quicker. He doesn't develop a lifetime resentment toward learning by being pushed before he is ready. Children who start school at age 7 can not only catch up with their peers who started at 5, but can surpass them as well. |
Anonymous
Those HS kids are not hanging out with the middle schoolers. Peer groups are formed based on common interests. The RS type discussed on these boards is the VARIATION. You are more likely to find the redshirts at parties with cool kids in another grade. Add the cools together for a jaw dropping social scene. Are you the one who posted about the bj's by 7th grade? That isn't true. Sophomores in high school with drivers licenses when most get them for or during junior year. |
Anonymous
| Maybe we should revert to what I understand to be the old British system, in which kids don't advance to the next grade until they've mastered the material of the current one. Then it wouldn't matter when you started, but it might be a little embarrasseing for some when they finished! I'm sure this would never go over in today's "self esteem" culture. But it would certainly reduce the need for "differentiation" that arises because we insist on grouping kids arbitrarily by age when they all mature at different rates. |
Anonymous
|
This discussion reminds me of the line from "The Incredibles", 'When everyone is special, no one is".
This is such a race to the bottom for our society, it is sad. |