TO THE MOM WHO RED SHIRTED HER SON AND COMPLAINS HE'S NOT CHALLENGED

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:And you don't see the difference between an applicant who is older because they have gained life experience and an applicant who is a senior in high school as a 19 year old because their parents didn't think they could hack it in kindergarten?

I don't think colleges will care that much. The fact that a kid is turning 19 senior year, most likely during second semester or in the summer after, is not going to bother colleges that much. There has always been some variation in the age kids are when they apply to college. A couple of decades ago, one of my freshman year roommates was from Hong Kong and turned 20 shortly after the start of our freshman year. My college didn't care that she was a year or two older than most of the other freshmen. She was paying full freight.

The kid who is a little older is likely to be more mature and will probably need less handholding and support. A more mature freshman is less likely to do dumb things and cause the college trouble and cost them money. It's a plus for the college to enroll kids who are a little older.

Many of us went to college 17/18 without doing dumb things or costing money... our parents prepared us for college and taught us how to care for ourselves. They also nurtured us so we knew we could call when we need help. I knew I had 4 years at college then graduate school. I knew how much I could spend and if I needed something high cost beyond books, I'd call and ask. You start teaching this when your kids are young.

Of course some kids go to college earlier and do fine, but some kids will do better with a little more maturity. People are all different and what works for one may not work for another. Colleges recognize that in their applicants and accept individuals. Applicants come from all over the US and the rest of the world. Admissions officials don't have time to check on every school system's entry age rules.

Or, parents can step up and teach their kids the life skills they need to be successful... but most parents do not want to put in that time or effort, especially if they cannot be bothered teaching their kids before K. or helping with homework. Maturity comes partly with parenting and being taught life skills. You cannot complain kids cannot manage money, etc. if they've never been taught.

[Anonymous]

We're thinking of grayshirting.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:And you don't see the difference between an applicant who is older because they have gained life experience and an applicant who is a senior in high school as a 19 year old because their parents didn't think they could hack it in kindergarten?

I don't think colleges will care that much. The fact that a kid is turning 19 senior year, most likely during second semester or in the summer after, is not going to bother colleges that much. There has always been some variation in the age kids are when they apply to college. A couple of decades ago, one of my freshman year roommates was from Hong Kong and turned 20 shortly after the start of our freshman year. My college didn't care that she was a year or two older than most of the other freshmen. She was paying full freight.

The kid who is a little older is likely to be more mature and will probably need less handholding and support. A more mature freshman is less likely to do dumb things and cause the college trouble and cost them money. It's a plus for the college to enroll kids who are a little older.

Many of us went to college 17/18 without doing dumb things or costing money... our parents prepared us for college and taught us how to care for ourselves. They also nurtured us so we knew we could call when we need help. I knew I had 4 years at college then graduate school. I knew how much I could spend and if I needed something high cost beyond books, I'd call and ask. You start teaching this when your kids are young.

Of course some kids go to college earlier and do fine, but some kids will do better with a little more maturity. People are all different and what works for one may not work for another. Colleges recognize that in their applicants and accept individuals. Applicants come from all over the US and the rest of the world. Admissions officials don't have time to check on every school system's entry age rules.

Or, parents can step up and teach their kids the life skills they need to be successful... but most parents do not want to put in that time or effort, especially if they cannot be bothered teaching their kids before K. or helping with homework. Maturity comes partly with parenting and being taught life skills. You cannot complain kids cannot manage money, etc. if they've never been taught.

Overparenting doesn't help either. And recent consensus is that parents should NOT be helping kids with homework, and certainly not "teaching" kids before kindergarten. If by teaching you mean forcing them to learn letters and numbers, rather than reading to them, taking them out for walks in nature, cooking with them, and giving them blocks to play with.

http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2014/04/and-dont-help-your-kids-with-their-homework/358636/

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:And you don't see the difference between an applicant who is older because they have gained life experience and an applicant who is a senior in high school as a 19 year old because their parents didn't think they could hack it in kindergarten?

I don't think colleges will care that much. The fact that a kid is turning 19 senior year, most likely during second semester or in the summer after, is not going to bother colleges that much. There has always been some variation in the age kids are when they apply to college. A couple of decades ago, one of my freshman year roommates was from Hong Kong and turned 20 shortly after the start of our freshman year. My college didn't care that she was a year or two older than most of the other freshmen. She was paying full freight.

The kid who is a little older is likely to be more mature and will probably need less handholding and support. A more mature freshman is less likely to do dumb things and cause the college trouble and cost them money. It's a plus for the college to enroll kids who are a little older.

Many of us went to college 17/18 without doing dumb things or costing money... our parents prepared us for college and taught us how to care for ourselves. They also nurtured us so we knew we could call when we need help. I knew I had 4 years at college then graduate school. I knew how much I could spend and if I needed something high cost beyond books, I'd call and ask. You start teaching this when your kids are young.

And yet schools like Harvard actively encourage admitted students to take a gap year before they start. They want older freshmen.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I have two boys, both late Spring birthdays. Both started school on time. both have classmates that are 17-18 months older (ie February - crazy, right?).

My anecdotal observation is that the kids who were redshirted had no apparent social or academic issues and these were basically cosmetic/athletic redshirts at the age of 4 (or 6).

Fast forward, the kids are in middle elementary now and you can see the sports difference and the social maturity difference in terms of interest in the opposite sex and general aggressiveness towards 'action'


In terms of academics, these kids are at worst in the middle of the grade (based on class placement like math that is either accelerated, regular or support) but it does change the dynamic considerably, regardless of whether it is kindergarten (no not Kindy, please) or 7th grade.

In total, as others have said, if your kid is an introvert, being an older introvert won't change anything. If your kid is on the small side, they might always be on the small side, and being older and on the small side won't change that.

Gaming the system is otherwise a fools game and not worth it and ultimately, it makes school a race to the bottom when you have 7 year olds kicking ass in kindergarten or 15 year olds doing great in 8th grade.

Does everyone remember those rare kids who used to skip grades and be super smart? My grandfathers both enrolled in college at 16. Now we have 16 year olds in 9th and 10th grade. It is a total crock and shameful.

Once again: NOBODY is redshirting for athletic advantage or simply because the kid is an introvert. And just like kids used to skip grades, they also used to be held back. I am sorry that the visibility of another child's struggles bothers you so much, but maybe stop and think about what kind of person you are.

They absolutely are.

Maybe in 8th grade, but not kindergarten. It just does not happen. Perhaps that is the reason you heard but absent an extreme outlier it does not happen.

[Anonymous]

They absolutely are in Kindergarten...and in some cases it is both K and 8th grade. It is truly insane which is why OP created this post.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:And you don't see the difference between an applicant who is older because they have gained life experience and an applicant who is a senior in high school as a 19 year old because their parents didn't think they could hack it in kindergarten?

I don't think colleges will care that much. The fact that a kid is turning 19 senior year, most likely during second semester or in the summer after, is not going to bother colleges that much. There has always been some variation in the age kids are when they apply to college. A couple of decades ago, one of my freshman year roommates was from Hong Kong and turned 20 shortly after the start of our freshman year. My college didn't care that she was a year or two older than most of the other freshmen. She was paying full freight.

The kid who is a little older is likely to be more mature and will probably need less handholding and support. A more mature freshman is less likely to do dumb things and cause the college trouble and cost them money. It's a plus for the college to enroll kids who are a little older.

Many of us went to college 17/18 without doing dumb things or costing money... our parents prepared us for college and taught us how to care for ourselves. They also nurtured us so we knew we could call when we need help. I knew I had 4 years at college then graduate school. I knew how much I could spend and if I needed something high cost beyond books, I'd call and ask. You start teaching this when your kids are young.

And yet schools like Harvard actively encourage admitted students to take a gap year before they start. They want older freshmen.

They want older freshmen who have taken a gap year or have some sort of life experience. Taking a simply older recently graduated senior is NOT what they want. You don't see the distinction?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:And you don't see the difference between an applicant who is older because they have gained life experience and an applicant who is a senior in high school as a 19 year old because their parents didn't think they could hack it in kindergarten?

I don't think colleges will care that much. The fact that a kid is turning 19 senior year, most likely during second semester or in the summer after, is not going to bother colleges that much. There has always been some variation in the age kids are when they apply to college. A couple of decades ago, one of my freshman year roommates was from Hong Kong and turned 20 shortly after the start of our freshman year. My college didn't care that she was a year or two older than most of the other freshmen. She was paying full freight.

The kid who is a little older is likely to be more mature and will probably need less handholding and support. A more mature freshman is less likely to do dumb things and cause the college trouble and cost them money. It's a plus for the college to enroll kids who are a little older.

Many of us went to college 17/18 without doing dumb things or costing money... our parents prepared us for college and taught us how to care for ourselves. They also nurtured us so we knew we could call when we need help. I knew I had 4 years at college then graduate school. I knew how much I could spend and if I needed something high cost beyond books, I'd call and ask. You start teaching this when your kids are young.

Of course some kids go to college earlier and do fine, but some kids will do better with a little more maturity. People are all different and what works for one may not work for another. Colleges recognize that in their applicants and accept individuals. Applicants come from all over the US and the rest of the world. Admissions officials don't have time to check on every school system's entry age rules.

Or, parents can step up and teach their kids the life skills they need to be successful... but most parents do not want to put in that time or effort, especially if they cannot be bothered teaching their kids before K. or helping with homework. Maturity comes partly with parenting and being taught life skills. You cannot complain kids cannot manage money, etc. if they've never been taught.

Overparenting doesn't help either. And recent consensus is that parents should NOT be helping kids with homework, and certainly not "teaching" kids before kindergarten. If by teaching you mean forcing them to learn letters and numbers, rather than reading to them, taking them out for walks in nature, cooking with them, and giving them blocks to play with.

http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2014/04/and-dont-help-your-kids-with-their-homework/358636/

Not all kids have to be forced to learn. If your kids need to be forced, perhaps how you are doing it along with your low expectations for early learning is the issue. Why do you also assume that no fun occurs if children have academic knowledge? There is plenty of time for both and you are very selfish for not helping your kids be prepared for school. You also realize if you read to kids and point out the words, some kids are bright enough to pick up how to read via that?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:They absolutely are in Kindergarten...and in some cases it is both K and 8th grade. It is truly insane which is why OP created this post.

Look, something like 4-5% of kids redshirt. Even if half of these are due to their parents' Machievellian manipulations to "get a leg up," that means that in a class of 20-25 kindergartners you might have ONE redshirted kid due to nothing else than a desire to "game the system."

What this is really about is revealing your own hyper-competitiveness that goes nuts at the idea of a single child being a year older than yours. And your intolerance of any differences.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They absolutely are in Kindergarten...and in some cases it is both K and 8th grade. It is truly insane which is why OP created this post.

Look, something like 4-5% of kids redshirt. Even if half of these are due to their parents' Machievellian manipulations to "get a leg up," that means that in a class of 20-25 kindergartners you might have ONE redshirted kid due to nothing else than a desire to "game the system."

What this is really about is revealing your own hyper-competitiveness that goes nuts at the idea of a single child being a year older than yours. And your intolerance of any differences.

Nationwide, maybe, 5% of children are redshirted. Locally, in some schools it is 25% or more.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They absolutely are in Kindergarten...and in some cases it is both K and 8th grade. It is truly insane which is why OP created this post.

Look, something like 4-5% of kids redshirt. Even if half of these are due to their parents' Machievellian manipulations to "get a leg up," that means that in a class of 20-25 kindergartners you might have ONE redshirted kid due to nothing else than a desire to "game the system."

What this is really about is revealing your own hyper-competitiveness that goes nuts at the idea of a single child being a year older than yours. And your intolerance of any differences.

Nationwide, maybe, 5% of children are redshirted. Locally, in some schools it is 25% or more.

If you're talking about private schools, then that is the school deliberately shaping their student body. But nuh-uh, there is no public K in this area where 25% of the kids are redshirted. How absurd.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They absolutely are in Kindergarten...and in some cases it is both K and 8th grade. It is truly insane which is why OP created this post.

Look, something like 4-5% of kids redshirt. Even if half of these are due to their parents' Machievellian manipulations to "get a leg up," that means that in a class of 20-25 kindergartners you might have ONE redshirted kid due to nothing else than a desire to "game the system."

What this is really about is revealing your own hyper-competitiveness that goes nuts at the idea of a single child being a year older than yours. And your intolerance of any differences.

According to http://nces.ed.gov/programs/coe/indicator_tea.asp 9% of children at first kindergarten entry are 6 years old. That would indicate that >9% of children are redshirted _at first kindergarten entry_ since some school districts still allow children to start at 4 years old. That 9% floor then increases as parents decide their child needs a second turn at K, or does a "Pre-First" year between K and 1. It will further increase with the redshirts in middle school.

Some areas of the country probably see very little redshirting, which means to get that 9% floor, some areas of the country (like around the DC area) will have more redshirting. My children's classes are 1/4-1/3rd redshirted by high school entry, so obviously on the high end.

People redshirt based simply on when the birthday is. Based on not wanting their child to be the youngest. Based on wanting their child to have an academic or athletic edge. As well as redshirting due to concerns about academics, or social abilities, or family upheaval, or all the "good" reasons. None of that matters terribly much when you have a child who is age appropriate for first grade, but because that child is 3 months younger than the _next youngest child_ and in a class with children 16+ months older than him, he is struggling with inappropriate behavioral or academic expectations. Whereas if the class age weren't stilted 3-6 months older than it should be, he would be on the "low end of normal" rather than "there is something wrong with this child."

It's not competitiveness. It's concern.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:And you don't see the difference between an applicant who is older because they have gained life experience and an applicant who is a senior in high school as a 19 year old because their parents didn't think they could hack it in kindergarten?

I don't think colleges will care that much. The fact that a kid is turning 19 senior year, most likely during second semester or in the summer after, is not going to bother colleges that much. There has always been some variation in the age kids are when they apply to college. A couple of decades ago, one of my freshman year roommates was from Hong Kong and turned 20 shortly after the start of our freshman year. My college didn't care that she was a year or two older than most of the other freshmen. She was paying full freight.

The kid who is a little older is likely to be more mature and will probably need less handholding and support. A more mature freshman is less likely to do dumb things and cause the college trouble and cost them money. It's a plus for the college to enroll kids who are a little older.

Many of us went to college 17/18 without doing dumb things or costing money... our parents prepared us for college and taught us how to care for ourselves. They also nurtured us so we knew we could call when we need help. I knew I had 4 years at college then graduate school. I knew how much I could spend and if I needed something high cost beyond books, I'd call and ask. You start teaching this when your kids are young.

And yet schools like Harvard actively encourage admitted students to take a gap year before they start. They want older freshmen.

I think it's also about gaining some perspective between the rat race of getting into a high school and the rat race of succeeding in college.

[Anonymous]

To the people who say parents aren't red shirting for sports reasons, a dad told me last week he was holding his August birthday because of sports. He doesn't want to have the smallest kid on the football field. Period.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They absolutely are in Kindergarten...and in some cases it is both K and 8th grade. It is truly insane which is why OP created this post.

Look, something like 4-5% of kids redshirt. Even if half of these are due to their parents' Machievellian manipulations to "get a leg up," that means that in a class of 20-25 kindergartners you might have ONE redshirted kid due to nothing else than a desire to "game the system."

What this is really about is revealing your own hyper-competitiveness that goes nuts at the idea of a single child being a year older than yours. And your intolerance of any differences.

According to http://nces.ed.gov/programs/coe/indicator_tea.asp 9% of children at first kindergarten entry are 6 years old. That would indicate that >9% of children are redshirted _at first kindergarten entry_ since some school districts still allow children to start at 4 years old. That 9% floor then increases as parents decide their child needs a second turn at K, or does a "Pre-First" year between K and 1. It will further increase with the redshirts in middle school.

Some areas of the country probably see very little redshirting, which means to get that 9% floor, some areas of the country (like around the DC area) will have more redshirting. My children's classes are 1/4-1/3rd redshirted by high school entry, so obviously on the high end.

People redshirt based simply on when the birthday is. Based on not wanting their child to be the youngest. Based on wanting their child to have an academic or athletic edge. As well as redshirting due to concerns about academics, or social abilities, or family upheaval, or all the "good" reasons. None of that matters terribly much when you have a child who is age appropriate for first grade, but because that child is 3 months younger than the _next youngest child_ and in a class with children 16+ months older than him, he is struggling with inappropriate behavioral or academic expectations. Whereas if the class age weren't stilted 3-6 months older than it should be, he would be on the "low end of normal" rather than "there is something wrong with this child."

It's not competitiveness. It's concern.

I just don't believe you have any classes in public school with 1/3 of the kids redshirted. That would mean that every kid with a birthday in the summer or fall redshirted. Data?