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

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

If kids have maturity or developmental issues, in order to hold a kid back, parents should be required to get those kids into services.

You have no clue.

There is no intervention that makes a child mature faster.

Schools don’t just offer services, even to children with developmental issues. Having an ASD diagnosis doesn’t automatically qualify a student for a IEP. Schools have limited budgets and staffing issues. They already can’t provide services to every child who would benefit from them. Parents whose children have a serious need for services often have to fight to get them. It’s cheaper and easier for school districts to let parents delay enrollment for a year and hope their child is ready for school then.

My kid was in interventions for years. If your kid is having struggles you get them help vs ignoring it. If a kid has asd they will get an iep.

LOL no they won’t, not necessarily. The medical diagnosis of autism is separate from the school’s diagnosis and the school won’t automatically give a full contingent of additional services just because a kid comes to school with a medical diagnosis and a pages long developmental report. Signed, parent of a kid with a medical diagnosis and pages and pages of developmental information.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Kids are less mature, because they are older in a grade below what they should be. How does it impact me? I have a young for the grade and it skews age appropiate expectations.

Ok Karen, that sounds like the lamest excuse to be harping about other kids birthdays.

Whose expectations, yours, your kids, the teachers?

Get a life.

Look, you can name call but if you have to behave that way it speaks volumes. The teachers expectations. I sent my fall kid when they were turning five. Any needs they had, we addressed them. It’s called parenting. Try it.

It’s clear you’re making stuff up from how vague you word that supposed impact on you or your child.

What specific teacher expectation was skewed, and how did it impact your child?

I bet you can’t articulate it without looking completely unhinged, Karen.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

If kids have maturity or developmental issues, in order to hold a kid back, parents should be required to get those kids into services.

You have no clue.

There is no intervention that makes a child mature faster.

Schools don’t just offer services, even to children with developmental issues. Having an ASD diagnosis doesn’t automatically qualify a student for a IEP. Schools have limited budgets and staffing issues. They already can’t provide services to every child who would benefit from them. Parents whose children have a serious need for services often have to fight to get them. It’s cheaper and easier for school districts to let parents delay enrollment for a year and hope their child is ready for school then.

My kid was in interventions for years. If your kid is having struggles you get them help vs ignoring it. If a kid has asd they will get an iep.

LOL no they won’t, not necessarily. The medical diagnosis of autism is separate from the school’s diagnosis and the school won’t automatically give a full contingent of additional services just because a kid comes to school with a medical diagnosis and a pages long developmental report. Signed, parent of a kid with a medical diagnosis and pages and pages of developmental information.

People who haven’t been through the process have no idea how it works. It’s laughable that pp thinks schools would or could go along with banning redshirting for kids who don’t receive services.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

If kids have maturity or developmental issues, in order to hold a kid back, parents should be required to get those kids into services.

You have no clue.

There is no intervention that makes a child mature faster.

Schools don’t just offer services, even to children with developmental issues. Having an ASD diagnosis doesn’t automatically qualify a student for a IEP. Schools have limited budgets and staffing issues. They already can’t provide services to every child who would benefit from them. Parents whose children have a serious need for services often have to fight to get them. It’s cheaper and easier for school districts to let parents delay enrollment for a year and hope their child is ready for school then.

My kid was in interventions for years. If your kid is having struggles you get them help vs ignoring it. If a kid has asd they will get an iep.

LOL no they won’t, not necessarily. The medical diagnosis of autism is separate from the school’s diagnosis and the school won’t automatically give a full contingent of additional services just because a kid comes to school with a medical diagnosis and a pages long developmental report. Signed, parent of a kid with a medical diagnosis and pages and pages of developmental information.

People who haven’t been through the process have no idea how it works. It’s laughable that pp thinks schools would or could go along with banning redshirting for kids who don’t receive services.

They don’t care about the needs of other kids, only that a held back child is outshining hers that was sent on time.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

If kids have maturity or developmental issues, in order to hold a kid back, parents should be required to get those kids into services.

You have no clue.

There is no intervention that makes a child mature faster.

Schools don’t just offer services, even to children with developmental issues. Having an ASD diagnosis doesn’t automatically qualify a student for a IEP. Schools have limited budgets and staffing issues. They already can’t provide services to every child who would benefit from them. Parents whose children have a serious need for services often have to fight to get them. It’s cheaper and easier for school districts to let parents delay enrollment for a year and hope their child is ready for school then.

My kid was in interventions for years. If your kid is having struggles you get them help vs ignoring it. If a kid has asd they will get an iep.

LOL no they won’t, not necessarily. The medical diagnosis of autism is separate from the school’s diagnosis and the school won’t automatically give a full contingent of additional services just because a kid comes to school with a medical diagnosis and a pages long developmental report. Signed, parent of a kid with a medical diagnosis and pages and pages of developmental information.

People who haven’t been through the process have no idea how it works. It’s laughable that pp thinks schools would or could go along with banning redshirting for kids who don’t receive services.

PPs: You are talking to DCUMs obsessed anti-redshirters. I have read their unhinged rants for years and come to the conclusion that in the end, these are not particularly sophisticated or knowledgeable people. They tend to see the world very simplistically, almost like a young child. Redshirting appeals to them as an issue because there is a single date they can perseverate on. They are just not going to understand what you are saying.

These are not people who understand the work of obtaining services and a diagnosis for kids, or the bureaucracies involved. They don’t understand that the process of diagnosis often takes years, and can include misdiagnosis. They don’t understand that “services” widely vary by district. They do not understand how getting a diagnosis prior to kindergarten is not possible for certain issues. I think some of them think that if you have a child with potential disabilities, you just walk up to the school district’s disability bar and order the services you want, which are then delivered.

Also, because they are simplistic, I need to state this although it should not matter: I did not redshirt and one of my kids is young for grade.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Kids are less mature, because they are older in a grade below what they should be. How does it impact me? I have a young for the grade and it skews age appropiate expectations.

Ok Karen, that sounds like the lamest excuse to be harping about other kids birthdays.

Whose expectations, yours, your kids, the teachers?

Get a life.

Look, you can name call but if you have to behave that way it speaks volumes. The teachers expectations. I sent my fall kid when they were turning five. Any needs they had, we addressed them. It’s called parenting. Try it.

My kids are now in college and I can say that in my experience there is a 1:1 correlation between people who say things like the bolded and their children being horrific little bullies. It’s really a remarkable blind spot but it has a 100% hit rate for me.

Mine are older and no bullies. They have been bullied by older kids as they were in lower grades than the kids and they were jealous. It’s a problem when you have 14-25 year olds with 18-19 year olds.

Of course your kids are bullies. They were raised by one.

[Anonymous]

Guys who cares. The fact is, parents who redshirt their kids do it because they believe it will give their child an advantage to go to school a year late. That is their choice. It doesn’t affect you. It says something about the sort of person the parent is, and I use that information to decide if it’s really a person I’m going to like and get along with or not (usually it’s a hard no). But that’s it. Move on.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Guys who cares. The fact is, parents who redshirt their kids do it because they believe it will give their child an advantage to go to school a year late. That is their choice. It doesn’t affect you. It says something about the sort of person the parent is, and I use that information to decide if it’s really a person I’m going to like and get along with or not (usually it’s a hard no). But that’s it. Move on.

You are asking the impossible of DCUM’s anti-redshirters.

But I do a variant of the bolded myself: after reading these insane threads, if anyone says anything about being anti-redshirt in person, I stay far away from them, and when my kids were younger, I kept my kids away from them and their kids. I’ve read too many horror stories from anti-redshirt posters over the years who confessed to stuff like becoming classroom volunteers so they could gossip about kids, who encouraged their kids to be bullies to the redshirted kids, who mocked kids with disabilities, etc.

The redshirting parents in contrast were usually great, as were their kids. My kids were friends with several over the years.

As you say, it’s a datapoint. Use it and move on.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Guys who cares. The fact is, parents who redshirt their kids do it because they believe it will give their child an advantage to go to school a year late. That is their choice. It doesn’t affect you. It says something about the sort of person the parent is, and I use that information to decide if it’s really a person I’m going to like and get along with or not (usually it’s a hard no). But that’s it. Move on.

You are asking the impossible of DCUM’s anti-redshirters.

But I do a variant of the bolded myself: after reading these insane threads, if anyone says anything about being anti-redshirt in person, I stay far away from them, and when my kids were younger, I kept my kids away from them and their kids. I’ve read too many horror stories from anti-redshirt posters over the years who confessed to stuff like becoming classroom volunteers so they could gossip about kids, who encouraged their kids to be bullies to the redshirted kids, who mocked kids with disabilities, etc.

The redshirting parents in contrast were usually great, as were their kids. My kids were friends with several over the years.

As you say, it’s a datapoint. Use it and move on.

If I hear a parent badmouthing another parent or child, it’s a hard no for me. If another child is a problem, like bullying or calling names, I deal directly with the school and don’t discuss with parents.

The anti redshirting stuff peddled here would quickly isolate that parent socially, and my child went on time.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Guys who cares. The fact is, parents who redshirt their kids do it because they believe it will give their child an advantage to go to school a year late. That is their choice. It doesn’t affect you. It says something about the sort of person the parent is, and I use that information to decide if it’s really a person I’m going to like and get along with or not (usually it’s a hard no). But that’s it. Move on.

Assuming we’re talking about academic (not athletic) redshirting…

You take this very personally, like they’re taking your kid into account and hoping to give their kid an advantage over your kid. They’re not thinking about your kid at all. They’re thinking about whether their own child will fare worse than average if they start on time. That’s it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

If kids have maturity or developmental issues, in order to hold a kid back, parents should be required to get those kids into services.

You have no clue.

There is no intervention that makes a child mature faster.

Schools don’t just offer services, even to children with developmental issues. Having an ASD diagnosis doesn’t automatically qualify a student for a IEP. Schools have limited budgets and staffing issues. They already can’t provide services to every child who would benefit from them. Parents whose children have a serious need for services often have to fight to get them. It’s cheaper and easier for school districts to let parents delay enrollment for a year and hope their child is ready for school then.

My kid was in interventions for years. If your kid is having struggles you get them help vs ignoring it. If a kid has asd they will get an iep.

LOL no they won’t, not necessarily. The medical diagnosis of autism is separate from the school’s diagnosis and the school won’t automatically give a full contingent of additional services just because a kid comes to school with a medical diagnosis and a pages long developmental report. Signed, parent of a kid with a medical diagnosis and pages and pages of developmental information.

People who haven’t been through the process have no idea how it works. It’s laughable that pp thinks schools would or could go along with banning redshirting for kids who don’t receive services.

They don’t care about the needs of other kids, only that a held back child is outshining hers that was sent on time.

Repeating preschool for another year doesn’t make an average kid a genius. The kids who are helped the most and make up the largest portion of kids held back are learning disabled kids. They need that extra time to get on the same page as the majority.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I understand that kids who are older generally do better in school and end up with better jobs. But the whole point of getting good grades and having a good job is to have something to be proud of, and outperforming kids a year younger than you is nothing to be proud of.

I don't think that is the whole point or even much of the point. But ok.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Guys who cares. The fact is, parents who redshirt their kids do it because they believe it will give their child an advantage to go to school a year late. That is their choice. It doesn’t affect you. It says something about the sort of person the parent is, and I use that information to decide if it’s really a person I’m going to like and get along with or not (usually it’s a hard no). But that’s it. Move on.

You are asking the impossible of DCUM’s anti-redshirters.

But I do a variant of the bolded myself: after reading these insane threads, if anyone says anything about being anti-redshirt in person, I stay far away from them, and when my kids were younger, I kept my kids away from them and their kids. I’ve read too many horror stories from anti-redshirt posters over the years who confessed to stuff like becoming classroom volunteers so they could gossip about kids, who encouraged their kids to be bullies to the redshirted kids, who mocked kids with disabilities, etc.

The redshirting parents in contrast were usually great, as were their kids. My kids were friends with several over the years.

As you say, it’s a datapoint. Use it and move on.

If I hear a parent badmouthing another parent or child, it’s a hard no for me. If another child is a problem, like bullying or calling names, I deal directly with the school and don’t discuss with parents.

The anti redshirting stuff peddled here would quickly isolate that parent socially, and my child went on time.

Agree. That sort of behavior does isolate parents. The person I can think of who was the loudest about anti-redshirting when my kids were in elementary was widely disliked. Nobody likes a parent who gossips about children.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

If kids have maturity or developmental issues, in order to hold a kid back, parents should be required to get those kids into services.

You have no clue.

There is no intervention that makes a child mature faster.

Schools don’t just offer services, even to children with developmental issues. Having an ASD diagnosis doesn’t automatically qualify a student for a IEP. Schools have limited budgets and staffing issues. They already can’t provide services to every child who would benefit from them. Parents whose children have a serious need for services often have to fight to get them. It’s cheaper and easier for school districts to let parents delay enrollment for a year and hope their child is ready for school then.

My kid was in interventions for years. If your kid is having struggles you get them help vs ignoring it. If a kid has asd they will get an iep.

LOL no they won’t, not necessarily. The medical diagnosis of autism is separate from the school’s diagnosis and the school won’t automatically give a full contingent of additional services just because a kid comes to school with a medical diagnosis and a pages long developmental report. Signed, parent of a kid with a medical diagnosis and pages and pages of developmental information.

If your child has autism, like you and what we did was get a medical diagnosis and private help. Most of these kids are just held back to make it easier on the parents and school. Most schools will give an iep. Ours would not but they sucked.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Guys who cares. The fact is, parents who redshirt their kids do it because they believe it will give their child an advantage to go to school a year late. That is their choice. It doesn’t affect you. It says something about the sort of person the parent is, and I use that information to decide if it’s really a person I’m going to like and get along with or not (usually it’s a hard no). But that’s it. Move on.

You are asking the impossible of DCUM’s anti-redshirters.

But I do a variant of the bolded myself: after reading these insane threads, if anyone says anything about being anti-redshirt in person, I stay far away from them, and when my kids were younger, I kept my kids away from them and their kids. I’ve read too many horror stories from anti-redshirt posters over the years who confessed to stuff like becoming classroom volunteers so they could gossip about kids, who encouraged their kids to be bullies to the redshirted kids, who mocked kids with disabilities, etc.

The redshirting parents in contrast were usually great, as were their kids. My kids were friends with several over the years.

As you say, it’s a datapoint. Use it and move on.

If I hear a parent badmouthing another parent or child, it’s a hard no for me. If another child is a problem, like bullying or calling names, I deal directly with the school and don’t discuss with parents.

The anti redshirting stuff peddled here would quickly isolate that parent socially, and my child went on time.

Agree. That sort of behavior does isolate parents. The person I can think of who was the loudest about anti-redshirting when my kids were in elementary was widely disliked. Nobody likes a parent who gossips about children.

There is no good reason to hold kids back except severe sn. Usually it is the older kids who bully.