Enough is enough with the redshirting!

[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.

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.

I don’t know any winter redshirted kids.

[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.

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.

Being older naturally is a proven advantage but sorry, we don’t have research to show redshirted kids have the same. Maybe they do, maybe they don’t, but we don’t have the research to back it up.

[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.

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.

The issue isn’t this. It’s kids who are born in the early part of the year red shirting to have an outrageous advantage.

[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.

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.

I don’t know any winter redshirted kids.

That’s what the discussion is about, 10 year olds in Third in December.

[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.

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.

The issue isn’t this. It’s kids who are born in the early part of the year red shirting to have an outrageous advantage.

Ah so some redshirting is ok aka if you agree with it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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.

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.

I don’t know any winter redshirted kids.

That’s what the discussion is about, 10 year olds in Third in December.

its not even winter yet. So the kids are actually 9?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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.

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.

I don’t know any winter redshirted kids.

That’s what the discussion is about, 10 year olds in Third in December.

No, a redshirted kid is 9 in third not 10. OP is talking about an odd situation of double held back kids.

[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.

Fair enough but be mindful with your words and don’t say annoying things like the other kids are immature or your child is so gifted and the curriculum is boring and not challenging for them. Just be aware of yourself.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

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.

I don’t know any winter redshirted kids.

That’s what the discussion is about, 10 year olds in Third in December.

its not even winter yet. So the kids are actually 9?

2 kids are ten in my child’s 3rd grade class already

[Anonymous]

I have a September birthday. We’re redshirting. Because I think it’s irresponsible and totally unsupported by science to put a 4 y/o at a desk all day— and no European school does so. The best schools in the world start kids at six.

So here’s my hottake: *not* redshirting your kid is bad parenting. Stop being cheap and send your kids when it’s developmentally appropriate not when a district arbitrarily tells you is the earliest possible moment.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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.

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.

I don’t know any winter redshirted kids.

That’s what the discussion is about, 10 year olds in Third in December.

I just don’t think this is happening in large enough numbers to make a big stink about it. Redshirting of winter birthdays (so they turn 7 in K, 10 in 3rd grade, 19 senior year of HS, etc.) is very rare. Even with COVID closures messing everything up. The vast majority of redshirted kids have summer birthdays close to the cutoff and are thus 6 all of K, 18 all of senior year of HS, etc.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

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.

I don’t know any winter redshirted kids.

That’s what the discussion is about, 10 year olds in Third in December.

I just don’t think this is happening in large enough numbers to make a big stink about it. Redshirting of winter birthdays (so they turn 7 in K, 10 in 3rd grade, 19 senior year of HS, etc.) is very rare. Even with COVID closures messing everything up. The vast majority of redshirted kids have summer birthdays close to the cutoff and are thus 6 all of K, 18 all of senior year of HS, etc.

I think in certain private schools and areas it’s getting pushed back further and further. That’s the point of the discussion. There needs to be some sort of understanding from parents that their kids might just go and not be the best at everything. This seems like anxiety over kids succeeding more than anything. It’s not rational to want to hold back a kid who is already older for the year even if they do have adhd. They can benefit from services.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I have a September birthday. We’re redshirting. Because I think it’s irresponsible and totally unsupported by science to put a 4 y/o at a desk all day— and no European school does so. The best schools in the world start kids at six.

So here’s my hottake: *not* redshirting your kid is bad parenting. Stop being cheap and send your kids when it’s developmentally appropriate not when a district arbitrarily tells you is the earliest possible moment.

See yourself out of the discussion. This isn’t about that.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There are two ten year olds in my child’s third grade class. When will a school draw a line with this?

So they'd have Oct-Dec birthday in 2014? That's 11-9 months older than the oldest regular 3rd grader. My son had one in his class, the kid was fine except a little better at sports/leadership esp during recess, which was the daily social life of DS. But I think if they misbehave, they'd misbehave even without being redshirted.

Yes. This is OP. We expected summer redshirts but we did not expect this. It’s gotten so out of hand.

Why is it “getting” out of hand? It’s 3rd grade now. Haven’t the peers stayed the same since kindergarten? Either change schools or make the best of it. Are you also the poster constantly agitating about the basketball team that is by grade and is a constant source of frustration for you?

We have room for everyone on our schools sports team because it’s no cut but it is by grade so the oldest kids tend to be best. Which is fine, just annoying. They definitely let everyone know they are better too. It’s all fine, I would just describe it as annoying since many people use it as a tool to have an advantage in team sports and don’t really have a reason.

Here’s a hot take on the sports advantage issue: if having a few older kids on the team makes a big difference to whether or not your kid plays, your kid isn’t that good anyway, so who cares?

It’s not a few, it’s half. I said that in an earliest post. Half are a year older so the younger kid has to be better than kids older to play. Your comment is rude and it’s actually just wrong.

This whole thread is rude and reeks of sour grapes. Bunch of bored moms acting like their kids’ elementary schools are some sort of Battle Royale.

Some kids are naturally smarter, is that fair to the dumber kids? Some kids are more athletic, is that fair to the awkward kids? Some kids are really good looking, is that fair to the non-looker kids?

Life isn’t fair. Other families decisions about when to send their kid to school doesn’t *actually* affect your kid. You’re just ridiculously competitive.

(And no, none of my kids were redshirted or otherwise held back.)

We aren’t talking about a natural advantage. We are talking about an intentional manipulation. How can you pretend that class rankings are not affected by this? Many of us have personal experience. You can’t gaslight us that easily.

This is why I said you’re just competitive but trying to gaslight the rest of us that you have a real concern. Class rankings don’t affect your kid’s education. And I know your follow-up will be something along the lines of college admissions, but again, you’re just after prestige and bragging rights.

Yes it certainly does affect education because as was described above, GT programs are heavily weighted in favor of red shirted kids. Eff that.


I wasn’t competitive which is why we didn’t redshirt. But now that I see what is going on I’ll be damned if I just accept it with a smile. If everyone else is going to be this way then I will have to adjust and that is nit a good thing.

This just indicates that the GT programs aren’t actually able to identify truly gifted children.

[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.

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.

Being older naturally is a proven advantage but sorry, we don’t have research to show redshirted kids have the same. Maybe they do, maybe they don’t, but we don’t have the research to back it up.

Maybe if some of these posters had themselves been redshirted they would have had enough time in school to learn about confounding variables…