Red shirting, again.

[Anonymous]

Phi Beta Kappa distinction suggests that you are not a flunkie...no matter what your grades in elementary school were, or how you choose to characterize yourself. Your pro bono work doesn't put food on the table. And food on the table allows you to work for the homeless.

Your stellar credentials and performance in college got you where you are in life today. Not your poor grades in algebra. There are kids with poor grades in algebra and poor performance in college...if they get there. What's your motivational speech for these kids, the kids scurring to put food on the table with no discretionary time or energy for pro bono work or to help the homeless?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Phi Beta Kappa distinction suggests that you are not a flunkie...no matter what your grades in elementary school were, or how you choose to characterize yourself. Your pro bono work doesn't put food on the table. And food on the table allows you to work for the homeless.

Your stellar credentials and performance in college got you where you are in life today. Not your poor grades in algebra. There are kids with poor grades in algebra and poor performance in college...if they get there. What's your motivational speech for these kids, the kids scurring to put food on the table with no discretionary time or energy for pro bono work or to help the homeless?

NP here, but I liked the post by the Phi Beta Kappa. I feel similarly. I'm a lawyer and "successful." I think there is too much emphasis on career and those sorts of trappings of success in this area. I want my children to be happy and productive, but not necessarily to follow my path. I don't want to condemn them to a life of 80 hour work weeks and billable hours. I think one can be perfectly happy and not be "successful" in the way people on DCUM perceive success. Most people in America do not measure up to the standards here on DCUM.

My kids are not in the gifted and talented program -- and that's fine. They need to work as hard as they can and find work that makes them happy and productive.

[Anonymous]

Do your children attend public school or do they attend one of the elite private schools in the area?

[Anonymous]

I don't do pro bono work for the homeless. Rather, my FT job is doing policy-related work and advocacy on behalf of the homeless (to be clear: I'm a public interest lawyer working at a nonprofit --- I'm not a big shot firm attorney...not that there's anything wrong with that). My kids go to public school in Montgomery County (regular public school --- not magnet or immersion). We do not live in Potomac or Chevy Chase or Bethesda or Kensington. I'm flattered that you think I have stellar credentials, but the reality is that I'm just a regular person who was an average student in some areas, above average in others (and ridiculously below average when it comes to math). My point is that even kids who aren't at the top of the pack manage to go onto lead happy and successful lives. FWIW, my BIL barely made it through HS and college and he makes triple the salary I do. He does well in the business world b/c he is super outgoing, funny and sharp. I wish I had his people skills --- they would serve me a lot better than my Phi Beta Kappa. But back to redshirting: parents should do what's best for their kids and not worry about what other parents are doing...and feel confident knowing that whatever they decide, their kids will be just fine. I'm confident that my parents didn't agonize over my education the way parents seem to today --- and I have awesome parents (well-educated, type A, classic over-achievers --- who for whatever reason seemed to take a laid back approach to my education/upbringing).

[Anonymous]

Thanks. I do agree with you that too many parents worry about what other parents do for or with their children, worry about other parents' or kids' goals (Ivy, money, pro bono work, sports) and worry about other people's happiness or lack thereof. Instead, we should focus more on our wants, desires, happiness and goals...and not necessary assume these will be the same as others or force our desires and goals on others. The ego is the elephant in the room.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Relax your child is fine.

My child will graduate from K at 5 next year. He is at the head of the pack (according to his teacher). He was also selected by his older peers to be the class representative with the administration vis-a-vis the wishes of his class. He did not attend any pre-school but has an older brother in Grade 3.

Would you remove my son from K because he is at the head of the pack? Would you place him in pre-K or Grade 2? What does chronological age have to do with anything? The teacher is well aware that he could be with his intellectual peers in the second or third grade but we choose to redshirt him. The teacher is so appreciative because she admires the way his older classmates follow his example. It also makes her day to day job easier.

The teacher agreed with our decision to redshirt my child whom she reluctantly informed us she could move up after his first month at K. By the way, we redshirted him because this was the first time away from home in a school setting. He loves the class. He loves his teacher. He loves the advantages he has ... all the other kids are counting to 10 and he helps them read and count. Do you think it is fair for a 5 year-old that reads and has mastered all the basic computational skills in elementary school math to be placed in a class with your 5- or 6-year-old child?

You are wasting emotionally energy worrying about the ages of kids in your class. I assure you that if your child were the oldest in the class he would necessarily by at the head of the pack!

if he'll graduate at 5, you didn't redshirt him. am i missing something?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:We have the same problem with our July born DD. She is doing quite well academically, but socially and behaviorally she is "immature". The teacher told me our DD is behind the others in maturity. I said, "Look at your birthday wall, she's a year younger than over half of these kids." The teacher was shocked and said, WHAT she's not 6? No, my kid just went to K on time.
Parents, just keep thinking your 6 y.o. is brilliant while he's doing 5 y.o. work. It clearly makes you feel good about yourselves.

i so agree with you. thanks for putting it so pointedly.

[Anonymous]

interesting article on redshirting and why it's not simply "focus on your own kid and you'll be fine" BS i kept reading on this thread. a little bit of social responsibility please!
http://www.slate.com/id/2196423

[Anonymous]

I read the linked-article.

And if your child has medical or physical-pscycho-social impediments that might require red shirting then family, school and health care providers should recommend so. If your child is an early maturer (intellectually, psychosocially, and physically) at 4 1/2 or 5 years old why wait if all stake holders are in favour.

Outside of regulatory and legal requirements and guidelines from State to State the final decision still rests with family and school.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:interesting article on redshirting and why it's not simply "focus on your own kid and you'll be fine" BS i kept reading on this thread. a little bit of social responsibility please!
http://www.slate.com/id/2196423

I read this article. A main point seems to be that red shirting is bad for some kids, not bad for them the first few years, but later on, because by being a year older than their classmates, they are legally allowed to drop out of school before high school is over.

So the idea is, even if holding kids back a year might be the best thing for the socially or emotionally in kindergarten, you shoudln't do it, because it woudl allow the kid to srop out of school a grade earlier, in high school?

I just can't think like that, about my own child. If I am making a decision for him oh her, I am thinking about what is best for him or her in kindergarten and first grade. Not what might happen to them, or to some other kids, 11 years later in high school.

If the high school was good, and interesting, and relevant; woudln't kids want to stay enrolled in it till the end? Seems like that is a better solution to the high school drop out problem; not refusing to hold a child back if it is warrented, because he might drop out of high school later.

[Anonymous]

One makes the best decision for your child in the present ... not the distant future. Where is the data that redshirted kids drop out of high school at a later date at a greater rate? There is no well controlled study to support this contention? One would have to control for many confounders including type of school (public vs private) (urban vs rural) (single gender vs coed), socio-economic status, presence or absence of parent (s), educational level attainment of parent (s) and/or mentors, student academic performance, skipping and/or repeating grades, criminal activity and late developing medical and psychiatric pathology.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:One makes the best decision for your child in the present ... not the distant future. Where is the data that redshirted kids drop out of high school at a later date at a greater rate? There is no well controlled study to support this contention? One would have to control for many confounders including type of school (public vs private) (urban vs rural) (single gender vs coed), socio-economic status, presence or absence of parent (s), educational level attainment of parent (s) and/or mentors, student academic performance, skipping and/or repeating grades, criminal activity and late developing medical and psychiatric pathology.

Down the road it might be very weird when the student can vote in a presidential election as a junior in high school or be graduating college after standard 4 year attendance at age 24 or 25.

[Anonymous]

Down the road it might be very weird when the student can vote in a presidential election as a junior in high school or be graduating college after standard 4 year attendance at age 24 or 25.

What's so wierd about exercising your constitutional right to vote in America when you are of age? Are you implying that Americans without a primary or high school diploma should not vote? There are millions of Americans without a high school diploma (whether still in school or out) who are eligible to vote? There are many Americans that have not graduated from College (including Bill Gates) by the age of 24 or 25. Why should Bill Gates, and others, that pay taxes in this country not vote? I do not understand what's so weird about this? In fact, there is a large percentage of Americans that do not graduate from College after "standard 4 year attendance".

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:One makes the best decision for your child in the present ... not the distant future. Where is the data that redshirted kids drop out of high school at a later date at a greater rate? There is no well controlled study to support this contention? One would have to control for many confounders including type of school (public vs private) (urban vs rural) (single gender vs coed), socio-economic status, presence or absence of parent (s), educational level attainment of parent (s) and/or mentors, student academic performance, skipping and/or repeating grades, criminal activity and late developing medical and psychiatric pathology.

Down the road it might be very weird when the student can vote in a presidential election as a junior in high school or be graduating college after standard 4 year attendance at age 24 or 25.

"Down the road"? This already is happening. Any child who is held back or fails a year or two in jigh school may well be 18 as a junior. With all the high staes testing, this is a reality in many states, and it has nothing to do with redshirting.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Down the road it might be very weird when the student can vote in a presidential election as a junior in high school or be graduating college after standard 4 year attendance at age 24 or 25.

What's so wierd about exercising your constitutional right to vote in America when you are of age? Are you implying that Americans without a primary or high school diploma should not vote? There are millions of Americans without a high school diploma (whether still in school or out) who are eligible to vote? There are many Americans that have not graduated from College (including Bill Gates) by the age of 24 or 25. Why should Bill Gates, and others, that pay taxes in this country not vote? I do not understand what's so weird about this? In fact, there is a large percentage of Americans that do not graduate from College after "standard 4 year attendance".

Nothing weird about voting. Voting as an early high-schooler however, is.

Are you suggesting is it ok to be driving in Junior High?