Enough is enough with the redshirting!

[Anonymous]

Same elementary school as prek so they were aware of the age people send their kids

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-oldest-kids-in-the-class-may-get-an-edge-in-college-admissions-1503052268

That says oldest in class and doesn’t stratify by whether that’s natural or redshirting.

So no.

There is always going to be an older group in any K class and yes, that older group shows an advantage.

It doesn’t follow that those who redshirt have the same benefits or more as those naturally older kids.

https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3586772

What are you even talking about? Oldest is the oldest, no need to differentiate.

This link has the same issue.

The cohort of kids who are redshirted is not the same cohort of kids who are naturally the oldest in the grade but not redshirted. The redshirted kids are more likely to include factors like learning disabilities or ADHD that might make them less likely to succeed academically. That’s why you need a study to tease out the two (which these don’t).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-oldest-kids-in-the-class-may-get-an-edge-in-college-admissions-1503052268

That says oldest in class and doesn’t stratify by whether that’s natural or redshirting.

So no.

There is always going to be an older group in any K class and yes, that older group shows an advantage.

It doesn’t follow that those who redshirt have the same benefits or more as those naturally older kids.

So much weird gaslighting. Just say it’s an advantage. That’s the annoying part. The denying it’s an advantage in any way.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-oldest-kids-in-the-class-may-get-an-edge-in-college-admissions-1503052268

That says oldest in class and doesn’t stratify by whether that’s natural or redshirting.

So no.

There is always going to be an older group in any K class and yes, that older group shows an advantage.

It doesn’t follow that those who redshirt have the same benefits or more as those naturally older kids.

That is faulty logic. If older kids have an advantage then yes of course it follows that redshirt kids have an unfair advantage.

No it doesn’t. Read the article again - it says that.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-oldest-kids-in-the-class-may-get-an-edge-in-college-admissions-1503052268

That says oldest in class and doesn’t stratify by whether that’s natural or redshirting.

So no.

There is always going to be an older group in any K class and yes, that older group shows an advantage.

It doesn’t follow that those who redshirt have the same benefits or more as those naturally older kids.

https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3586772

What are you even talking about? Oldest is the oldest, no need to differentiate.

This link has the same issue.

The cohort of kids who are redshirted is not the same cohort of kids who are naturally the oldest in the grade but not redshirted. The redshirted kids are more likely to include factors like learning disabilities or ADHD that might make them less likely to succeed academically. That’s why you need a study to tease out the two (which these don’t).

It still gives them an advantage to the year they were supposed to attend.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-oldest-kids-in-the-class-may-get-an-edge-in-college-admissions-1503052268

That says oldest in class and doesn’t stratify by whether that’s natural or redshirting.

So no.

There is always going to be an older group in any K class and yes, that older group shows an advantage.

It doesn’t follow that those who redshirt have the same benefits or more as those naturally older kids.

That is faulty logic. If older kids have an advantage then yes of course it follows that redshirt kids have an unfair advantage.

Why didn’t op take advantage of redshirting? It was an option.

We just didn’t. We asked his prek director and teacher (same school) and she said she felt it was best to send him and he’s doing well. It’s just annoying.

Ok well our prek director told us she didn’t think it best to send my kid on time, and we agreed. Why do you think you should be able to override a decision made by educators and parents?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-oldest-kids-in-the-class-may-get-an-edge-in-college-admissions-1503052268

That says oldest in class and doesn’t stratify by whether that’s natural or redshirting.

So no.

There is always going to be an older group in any K class and yes, that older group shows an advantage.

It doesn’t follow that those who redshirt have the same benefits or more as those naturally older kids.

So much weird gaslighting. Just say it’s an advantage. That’s the annoying part. The denying it’s an advantage in any way.

Being the oldest in the grade is a natural advantage, that’s a fact. There will always be that benefit for a portion in the classroom even without redshirting. But you aren’t getting mad at the kids born in May and June.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-oldest-kids-in-the-class-may-get-an-edge-in-college-admissions-1503052268

That says oldest in class and doesn’t stratify by whether that’s natural or redshirting.

So no.

There is always going to be an older group in any K class and yes, that older group shows an advantage.

It doesn’t follow that those who redshirt have the same benefits or more as those naturally older kids.

That is faulty logic. If older kids have an advantage then yes of course it follows that redshirt kids have an unfair advantage.

Why didn’t op take advantage of redshirting? It was an option.

We just didn’t. We asked his prek director and teacher (same school) and she said she felt it was best to send him and he’s doing well. It’s just annoying.

So kids who were recommended to wait shouldn’t do that? Ok. You made your choice and they made theirs. Stop looking over your shoulder.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-oldest-kids-in-the-class-may-get-an-edge-in-college-admissions-1503052268

That says oldest in class and doesn’t stratify by whether that’s natural or redshirting.

So no.

There is always going to be an older group in any K class and yes, that older group shows an advantage.

It doesn’t follow that those who redshirt have the same benefits or more as those naturally older kids.

https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3586772

What are you even talking about? Oldest is the oldest, no need to differentiate.

This link has the same issue.

The cohort of kids who are redshirted is not the same cohort of kids who are naturally the oldest in the grade but not redshirted. The redshirted kids are more likely to include factors like learning disabilities or ADHD that might make them less likely to succeed academically. That’s why you need a study to tease out the two (which these don’t).

It still gives them an advantage to the year they were supposed to attend.

For some kids that will help. For others, for example if they have learning disabilities (diagnosed or not discovered until older), it won’t provide an advantage - it will even out a disadvantage.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-oldest-kids-in-the-class-may-get-an-edge-in-college-admissions-1503052268

That says oldest in class and doesn’t stratify by whether that’s natural or redshirting.

So no.

There is always going to be an older group in any K class and yes, that older group shows an advantage.

It doesn’t follow that those who redshirt have the same benefits or more as those naturally older kids.

So much weird gaslighting. Just say it’s an advantage. That’s the annoying part. The denying it’s an advantage in any way.

Being the oldest in the grade is a natural advantage, that’s a fact. There will always be that benefit for a portion in the classroom even without redshirting. But you aren’t getting mad at the kids born in May and June.

Kids born in May, June are the youngest…unless they are redshirted.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-oldest-kids-in-the-class-may-get-an-edge-in-college-admissions-1503052268

That says oldest in class and doesn’t stratify by whether that’s natural or redshirting.

So no.

There is always going to be an older group in any K class and yes, that older group shows an advantage.

It doesn’t follow that those who redshirt have the same benefits or more as those naturally older kids.

https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3586772

What are you even talking about? Oldest is the oldest, no need to differentiate.

This link has the same issue.

The cohort of kids who are redshirted is not the same cohort of kids who are naturally the oldest in the grade but not redshirted. The redshirted kids are more likely to include factors like learning disabilities or ADHD that might make them less likely to succeed academically. That’s why you need a study to tease out the two (which these don’t).

It still gives them an advantage to the year they were supposed to attend.

For some kids that will help. For others, for example if they have learning disabilities (diagnosed or not discovered until older), it won’t provide an advantage - it will even out a disadvantage.

Most kids redshirted in K do not have any such reason.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-oldest-kids-in-the-class-may-get-an-edge-in-college-admissions-1503052268

That says oldest in class and doesn’t stratify by whether that’s natural or redshirting.

So no.

There is always going to be an older group in any K class and yes, that older group shows an advantage.

It doesn’t follow that those who redshirt have the same benefits or more as those naturally older kids.

So much weird gaslighting. Just say it’s an advantage. That’s the annoying part. The denying it’s an advantage in any way.

It may be an advantage to be the oldest but it is a huge disadvantage to send a not ready very young kid to kindergarten. Shouldn’t be surprising which side parents err on.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-oldest-kids-in-the-class-may-get-an-edge-in-college-admissions-1503052268

That says oldest in class and doesn’t stratify by whether that’s natural or redshirting.

So no.

There is always going to be an older group in any K class and yes, that older group shows an advantage.

It doesn’t follow that those who redshirt have the same benefits or more as those naturally older kids.

So much weird gaslighting. Just say it’s an advantage. That’s the annoying part. The denying it’s an advantage in any way.

Being the oldest in the grade is a natural advantage, that’s a fact. There will always be that benefit for a portion in the classroom even without redshirting. But you aren’t getting mad at the kids born in May and June.

Chill, no one is mad at anyone but just admit it’s an advantage and it puts younger kids at a disadvantage as a result.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-oldest-kids-in-the-class-may-get-an-edge-in-college-admissions-1503052268

That says oldest in class and doesn’t stratify by whether that’s natural or redshirting.

So no.

There is always going to be an older group in any K class and yes, that older group shows an advantage.

It doesn’t follow that those who redshirt have the same benefits or more as those naturally older kids.

So much weird gaslighting. Just say it’s an advantage. That’s the annoying part. The denying it’s an advantage in any way.

It may be an advantage to be the oldest but it is a huge disadvantage to send a not ready very young kid to kindergarten. Shouldn’t be surprising which side parents err on.

Let’s say my kid starts K at age 4, turning five in late September. He is the youngest in his class. He will absolutely have a natural disadvantage against the kids who are already five some of whom will turn six end of year. Parents and pre K teacher think it’s best for him to wait. Why should I have to deal with this lottery of a birthday and suck up my “disadvantage” rather than make the choice to send my child next year when he is five? Because it would upset OP? Too bad.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-oldest-kids-in-the-class-may-get-an-edge-in-college-admissions-1503052268

That says oldest in class and doesn’t stratify by whether that’s natural or redshirting.

So no.

There is always going to be an older group in any K class and yes, that older group shows an advantage.

It doesn’t follow that those who redshirt have the same benefits or more as those naturally older kids.

So much weird gaslighting. Just say it’s an advantage. That’s the annoying part. The denying it’s an advantage in any way.

It may be an advantage to be the oldest but it is a huge disadvantage to send a not ready very young kid to kindergarten. Shouldn’t be surprising which side parents err on.

That’s fine for a summer kid but a winter? It’s scary for most kids to go to K. No one is totally ready.