Redshirted and Regretted It?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I do not understand why this topic causes so much fury and analysis. My child is in Middle School. He switched from public to private. There is a considerabe age spread because of redshirting that was done in earlier grades. But it is simply not an issue. I am not the least bit interested in getting specifics, numbers, percentages, exact spread, etc. I suspect it's at least 18 months. It doesn't matter! It never, and I mean never, comes up -- except when I see a thread like this and it reminds me of the age spread in my son's class.

I know several students (four come to mind, all in Middle School but none at my son's school) who were redshirted when they were younger and it's worked well for them. One mom did muse that she doesn't know if she'd do it again, and I mused that I sometimes wished I had. If your instincts are telling you to do it, then it's probably advisable. Good luck figuring it out. I know these decisions are tough but please remember that things tend to work out!

I love it when the voice of reason speaks. Too bad she's probably drowned out by the caterwauling.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I know moms who've held their sons back from starting for developmental reasons and it has really pained them. But they are doing the right thing for their sons, no question.

It sure seems, though, like a lot of these moms who support redshirting here are fairly angry and visceral. If you are comfortable with your decision, why so torqued and angry?

As with anything, you have people who do things for sincere reasons and people who do them because they have a natural predisposition toward entitlement. Lowering the bar is useful when it gives a kid time to catch up; lowering the bar so a kid can speed ahead is something else entirely.

I'm not personally one of these moms, but I don't think it's difficult to figure out. In fact, I think it's disingenuous to feign surprise "why ever are these moms irritated?" And when we're all offering our constructive opinions only to help? Oh me oh my! How could it possibly get irritating (much less old) to hear from a same group of people when you don't know if the agenda has changed.



Don't they understand that our criticism of their agonized personal parenting decisions is one hundred percent about the "greater good" - nevermind that it mows over the interest of their child? Don't they GET that? Or our "sincerity"? "Oh and please forget that we're all personally hysterical because we're overly concerned about our children's environment and the fact that it contains elements that we can't control.

[Anonymous]

Why is everyone jumping down everyone else's throat anyway? Shouldn't we place blame where it should be placed? On the schools who have made parents of boys even have to think about holding them back from starting K. In reality, public K is not a boy friendly place anymore. 15-20 yrs ago, the issue whether or not to hold back your 5 yr old was not even an issue b/c K was developmentally appropriate.

[Anonymous]

I don't agree with this. K hasn't changed THAT much, certainly not so much that so many of the kids are starting when they are 6 and turning 7 during the year.

We, as a society, have simply continued to lower the bar and standards, and allowing individual parents accelerate this by holding their kids back for some perceived advantage is simply ludicrous.

It used to be that there was a badge of honor towards achievement, towards acceleration. Now, as helicopter parents we want our kids to be accelerated when the acceleration is nothing more than being on par with peers, even if the peers are in a different grade.

[Anonymous]

K as changed, it's what first grade used to be. Schools seem to be encouraging holding back more than parents. Boys develop more slowly than girls, their fine motor skills, impulse control. Why should any child suffer, not get off on the right foot, because a subset of parents feels that redshirting gives them an unfair advantage? I find this position really unfortunate and parent-centric.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:K as changed, it's what first grade used to be. Schools seem to be encouraging holding back more than parents. Boys develop more slowly than girls, their fine motor skills, impulse control. Why should any child suffer, not get off on the right foot, because a subset of parents feels that redshirting gives them an unfair advantage? I find this position really unfortunate and parent-centric.

I hear this all the time "K is the new first grade" - especially from my friends in education circles. Part of it is, I think, the school's responses to the establishment of education standards and standardized testing. Another important factor though, is how much we now know about child development and early education. There's so much longitudinal data available now about the importance of educational early intervention.

I think school districts have responded by trying to make a real impact at the early years. In the aggregate this does make sense, but it takes a lot of skill and knowledge to teach to young children (at a level where the children effectively learn). I have daughters myself, but I have a lot of sympathy for my friends with sons who feel like the classroom environment doesn't meet all of their developing needs. I'm not a child psychologist, but I find myself somewhat persuaded by their arguments of a "war on boys" culture in a lot of elementary situations.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:There is PLENTY of research which either shows no statistical significance between redshirted and non-redshirted children (ie: no benefit to redshirting) or studies which have shown disadvantages to doing so. See the literature review "Opportunity Deferred or Opportunity Taken: An Updated Look at Delaying Kindergarten Entry" by Hermine Marshall. Also, see work by researchers Graue and Diperna. Also a recent Univ. of Rochester Medical School study which reported that children who started school later had significantly more behavioral problems as adolescents.

To be fair, there have been studies that have shown disparaties in ability between the oldest and youngest students, but that these differences disappear by 3rd grade. Also, it seems that the only study (article) that people reference beyond those showing these early differences in ability prior to 3rd grade is that New York Times artice.

My son is at a big 3 too. There are definitely young boys with summer bdays there. Its just not honest to say that the AD's at these schools tell everyone with summer birthdays to wait a year. Redshirted boys at our school at least, either had an issue that was cause for concern, or the parents wanted to give their son an imagined advantage over others, and couldn't handle the thought of their boy being the youngest.

And one last point- redshirting is redshirting. Its holding someone back a year in school who otherwise makes the age cut-off. I don't buy the argument that the June-August bdays somehow need to be excused from this. Following the logic of that argument, the school cut-off really becomes May 31st. And if that is so, what is the difference between redshirting the March-May kids if the oldest kids are now those with bdays of June 1st and beyond. At some point this has got to end. Parents should be looking for other ways to intervene if there is a behavioral, social, or academic problem than just waiting a year and hoping the problem fixes itself. Parents should also rememeber that they may, as Hermine Marshall points out, "be depriving the child of important opportunities for learning."

So let me get this straight... you are saying that PLENTY of research shows that redshirting does not provide any real benefit past 3rd grade. SO, WHY THE HECK ARE YOU PEOPLE AGAINST IT? If the benefit to a summer birthday child is making sure they do not have a disadvantage in those crucial confidence building K-3 years, and any advantage is wiped out by 3rd grade... THEN WHAT IS THE PROBLEM HERE PEOPLE????

As has been already discussed in this thread, these top independent schools we are paying $30k per year for are very good a doing differential learning in an elementary classroom (ie. breaking kids into small groups based on reading and math level, etc)... so there is no disadvantage to a January birthday kid having a July birthday in the same class.

My guess is that the anti-redshirting crowd here on DCUM are either (a) parents of a summer birthday kid who did not get redshirting and the parents are trying to justify their decisions, or (b) parents of normal kids who love to call out redshirting parents as obsessive and hyper-competitive... but who really are just as obsessive and hyper-competitive themselves to the point where they don't want the small advantage that their kid has over being a little older than some to be wiped out.

PLUS - as a PP mentioned, I have not seen ONE POST on this thread of 13 pages that specifically names a school and class where there are a bunch of 7 years olds in K. My guess is that the claims of posters on this board to that effect are just a bunch of hot air baloney. I'm not going to believe it for a second until I here some actual data that can be verified.

I'm sorry, but the arguments against redshirting on this board are starting to look like swiss-cheese.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I don't agree with this. K hasn't changed THAT much, certainly not so much that so many of the kids are starting when they are 6 and turning 7 during the year.

We, as a society, have simply continued to lower the bar and standards, and allowing individual parents accelerate this by holding their kids back for some perceived advantage is simply ludicrous.

It used to be that there was a badge of honor towards achievement, towards acceleration. Now, as helicopter parents we want our kids to be accelerated when the acceleration is nothing more than being on par with peers, even if the peers are in a different grade.

You must be kidding yourself. Let's think about what most of us did in K. I went for a half-day and during that time, we had "centers" where we rotated from the "housekeeping area" to the blocks to the arts and crafts area to the dress up area and maybe one or two more. Then, we had a snack and maybe listened to a story and talked about the calendar during circle time. Then we went out for recess. Then I remember having rest time (even though we were there from 9-12 or so). We learned one letter per week and did a craft project on it (I still have my K alphabet book). We also learned the numbers and how to write our names. I think we went to PE once a week as well as music. That's it. Then I went home and took a nap (my mom said I needed one after a busy day at school). Now if kids are not reading by mid-year and definitely by the end of the year, they are often help back (or at least recommended to be). They go all day w/ 2-3 hr blocks of language arts in the am and an hour or so of math in the pm. They have one special per day and maybe they get 20 mins of recess (or maybe not at all). They are expected to write in sentences by the end of the year. They are expected to do ridiculous things like critique, infer, deduce and make predictions using knowledge gained from the text. How can you say that that K hasn't changed that much?

[Anonymous]

I have a question for the parents who don't like redshirting. Do you also object to grade skipping for kids who are academically advanced? Is your problem with allowing a more than 14-month spread in a classroom under any circumstances?

[Anonymous]

By dissing redshirting, people are disagreeing with educators at some of the top day schools in the country. Interesting that these people know better.

[Anonymous]

To 16:33, right, there is no long term benefit to redshirting, however the detrimental aspect that I have seen in the broader classroom and social settings are detrimental. So what you have are a bunch of helicopter parents gaming the system for no long term benefit only to have long term negative ramifications for everybody else.

To 21:03, I don't know where you went to Kindergarten, but the one I went to was an all day, sit at your desk, learn to read, learn arithmetic (adding, subtracting) and play based learning. It is not too different than what my kids are getting in the 2000's.

To 21:51, I have no problem with acceleration and a broader range to the younger side. It is not about every circumstance. It is where there is a collective dilution of our society where I see the problem.

My grandfather started college at the age of 16 in the 1930's. Today we have kids are are 19 as Freshman. Obviously our society has changed, but...

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:To 16:33, right, there is no long term benefit to redshirting, however the detrimental aspect that I have seen in the broader classroom and social settings are detrimental. So what you have are a bunch of helicopter parents gaming the system for no long term benefit only to have long term negative ramifications for everybody else.

To 21:03, I don't know where you went to Kindergarten, but the one I went to was an all day, sit at your desk, learn to read, learn arithmetic (adding, subtracting) and play based learning. It is not too different than what my kids are getting in the 2000's.

To 21:51, I have no problem with acceleration and a broader range to the younger side. It is not about every circumstance. It is where there is a collective dilution of our society where I see the problem.

My grandfather started college at the age of 16 in the 1930's. Today we have kids are are 19 as Freshman. Obviously our society has changed, but...

Sitting in your desk all day is antithetical to play-based learning. Which leads me to believe you have no idea what you're talking about, you just want to grind your point but you're doing it badly. Incidentally, it kind of leads me doubt the "wisdom" of the rest of your post, as well.

[Anonymous]

22:26 here. No, it was a combination. Part of the day was at the desk and learning, other parts were spent in pod areas or outside learning about how leaves and roots work or that sort of thing. There wasn't an educational concept of "play based" learning then. It was called learning by experience interacting with the teacher and peers.

[Anonymous]

PP- Just curious as to when you were in K and what kind of school? I think many posters who are in their mid 30s or so had a K experience that was more like what many kids have in preschool today. Half-day, arts and crafts, recess, learning the alphabet, playing dress up and with blocks. The current K in public schools couldn't be more different.

[Anonymous]

22:26 I am in my early 40's, and it was a local (DC) Kindergarten taught by an older French woman. It was in a private setting, but not part of any of the schools mentioned on these boards. I am pretty sure it isn't in existence anymore.