Since people are now redshirting spring bday kids

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Sorry, but I think boys are at a real disadvantage if they have summer bdays and their parents start on time. Every example I've seen has been awful... Including my older brother (August bday), my husband (September bday) , and multiple friends' boys (all summer and September bdays) . Every single one of them, without fail, says it was a mistake but to redshirt. Starting these immature kids in today's kindergarten is a recipe for adhd meds, anxiety, and social issues. Maybe you have the exceptional boy, if so, great.

Oh GMAFB!

I'm male, have an October birthday, started K at 4 years old, college at 17 and don't experience any of the pathologies you've listed.

Cool story, bro.

One anecdote deserves another.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I wonder if some of the angst of the anti redshirters is economic. Academic redshirting is done by those who can afford it if they see the need. People who can't afford another year of childcare may feel bitter about this.

I'm not a fan of redshirting, but it's not due to economic anxiety (we have a child in private, one that doesn't allow redshirting, AFAIK). It actually doesn't personally affect my situation at all. But I don't like it from a societal perspective, because once more and more people do it, it's becomes a slippery slope as to how far schools and curricula will have to adjust for older and older kids, not to mention teachers as they scramble to accommodate a wider range of ages in their lesson plans.

Finally, I do think it's an unfair advantage that a small percentage of affluent, mostly white families use to position their children in the top of the class academically and athletically (here, I'm not referring to legitimate developmental delays, recommendations of pediatricians, etc.). I think it also may exacerbate the achievement gap in some situations, when middle/lower SES minority families can't afford to do the same.

Wow. It's like you are trying to demonstrate the point about the lack of self-reflection from anti redshirt people.

PP back. How so? Curious to here what you think.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Sorry, but I think boys are at a real disadvantage if they have summer bdays and their parents start on time. Every example I've seen has been awful... Including my older brother (August bday), my husband (September bday) , and multiple friends' boys (all summer and September bdays) . Every single one of them, without fail, says it was a mistake but to redshirt. Starting these immature kids in today's kindergarten is a recipe for adhd meds, anxiety, and social issues. Maybe you have the exceptional boy, if so, great.

Oh GMAFB!

I'm male, have an October birthday, started K at 4 years old, college at 17 and don't experience any of the pathologies you've listed.

Cool story, bro.

One anecdote deserves another.

Yeah, your anecdote about how your mommy started you a year earlier than necessary so you could academically gun it and hand as many Chem classes as possible sure proves a point. I'm sure your social life was rich and you were incredibly well rounded with a parent like that. Ah, yes.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I wonder if some of the angst of the anti redshirters is economic. Academic redshirting is done by those who can afford it if they see the need. People who can't afford another year of childcare may feel bitter about this.

I am sure that it is.
This is an awesome opinion piece on it. The writer is halarious and sharp.
https://thelastpsychiatrist.com/2008/10/the_graying_of_kindergarten_th.html

Are you the poster who keeps flexing a non-extant intellect and demanding studies, redshirter?

No. I am the poster that enjoys reading funny and entertaining things on the internet . Which is why I I’ve this thread.

I read about the last psychiatrist from David Wong on Cracked. Also funny, entertaining and insightful. You should look him up.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Sorry, but I think boys are at a real disadvantage if they have summer bdays and their parents start on time. Every example I've seen has been awful... Including my older brother (August bday), my husband (September bday) , and multiple friends' boys (all summer and September bdays) . Every single one of them, without fail, says it was a mistake but to redshirt. Starting these immature kids in today's kindergarten is a recipe for adhd meds, anxiety, and social issues. Maybe you have the exceptional boy, if so, great.

Oh GMAFB!

I'm male, have an October birthday, started K at 4 years old, college at 17 and don't experience any of the pathologies you've listed.

Cool story, bro.

One anecdote deserves another.

No one cares if you send your own summer bday kid on time. Godspeed.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Sorry, but I think boys are at a real disadvantage if they have summer bdays and their parents start on time. Every example I've seen has been awful... Including my older brother (August bday), my husband (September bday) , and multiple friends' boys (all summer and September bdays) . Every single one of them, without fail, says it was a mistake but to redshirt. Starting these immature kids in today's kindergarten is a recipe for adhd meds, anxiety, and social issues. Maybe you have the exceptional boy, if so, great.

Oh GMAFB!

I'm male, have an October birthday, started K at 4 years old, college at 17 and don't experience any of the pathologies you've listed.

Cool story, bro.

One anecdote deserves another.

Yeah, your anecdote about how your mommy started you a year earlier than necessary so you could academically gun it and hand as many Chem classes as possible sure proves a point. I'm sure your social life was rich and you were incredibly well rounded with a parent like that. Ah, yes.

Wow, how bitter are you?

I was a physics and math major, BTW. I hated chem.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I wonder if some of the angst of the anti redshirters is economic. Academic redshirting is done by those who can afford it if they see the need. People who can't afford another year of childcare may feel bitter about this.

I can't speak for all anti-redshirters, but for me, the issue has nothing to do with economics. I can afford to keep my September DD home for another year, but I'm not going to. My issue with parents who redshirt is that it seems to be the latest example of how our society is more concerned about making things easier for kids to excel than it is with equipping them with the skills needed to work hard and deal with set backs. Instead of manipulating situations to make them easier for our kids to handle, why aren't we allowing them to be in situations where they may struggle a bit so that they can build confidence, resiliency, and grit?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Sorry, but I think boys are at a real disadvantage if they have summer bdays and their parents start on time. Every example I've seen has been awful... Including my older brother (August bday), my husband (September bday) , and multiple friends' boys (all summer and September bdays) . Every single one of them, without fail, says it was a mistake but to redshirt. Starting these immature kids in today's kindergarten is a recipe for adhd meds, anxiety, and social issues. Maybe you have the exceptional boy, if so, great.

Oh GMAFB!

I'm male, have an October birthday, started K at 4 years old, college at 17 and don't experience any of the pathologies you've listed.

Cool story, bro.

One anecdote deserves another.

Yeah, your anecdote about how your mommy started you a year earlier than necessary so you could academically gun it and hand as many Chem classes as possible sure proves a point. I'm sure your social life was rich and you were incredibly well rounded with a parent like that. Ah, yes.

Do you not see how nasty your post is?

Can no one be sincere here? Why are you on the attack?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I wonder if some of the angst of the anti redshirters is economic. Academic redshirting is done by those who can afford it if they see the need. People who can't afford another year of childcare may feel bitter about this.

I'm not a fan of redshirting, but it's not due to economic anxiety (we have a child in private, one that doesn't allow redshirting, AFAIK). It actually doesn't personally affect my situation at all. But I don't like it from a societal perspective, because once more and more people do it, it's becomes a slippery slope as to how far schools and curricula will have to adjust for older and older kids, not to mention teachers as they scramble to accommodate a wider range of ages in their lesson plans.

Finally, I do think it's an unfair advantage that a small percentage of affluent, mostly white families use to position their children in the top of the class academically and athletically (here, I'm not referring to legitimate developmental delays, recommendations of pediatricians, etc.). I think it also may exacerbate the achievement gap in some situations, when middle/lower SES minority families can't afford to do the same.

Wow. It's like you are trying to demonstrate the point about the lack of self-reflection from anti redshirt people.

Can you please expand on this? Do you typically see a moose and shout “squirrel!” in total confidence that saying black is white is a failsafe strategy?

Do you genuinely not understand the hypocrisy shown by making the two statements in bold apparently without any irony? Amazing. Keep digging in deeper.

You’re attempting to gain a quasi private school advantage in the public system, and you’re scummy for it. People have been gentle with your hysterical ass but hell.

I see you don't like having your deep hypocrisy noticed. Take a breath. Also, why do you think I redshirted? I didn't. I don't need to have redshirted to observe glaring hypocrites, though. I mean, that PP laid it out herself.

You need a dictionary and a shrink - and a profession. How old are your kids? Are you aware of what board you’re trolling?

Ah, the elegance of the logically cornered anti-DCUM redshirter. Thanks for being an object lesson!

You keep crapping yourself and declaring a grand victory. Well done!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I wonder if some of the angst of the anti redshirters is economic. Academic redshirting is done by those who can afford it if they see the need. People who can't afford another year of childcare may feel bitter about this.

I'm not a fan of redshirting, but it's not due to economic anxiety (we have a child in private, one that doesn't allow redshirting, AFAIK). It actually doesn't personally affect my situation at all. But I don't like it from a societal perspective, because once more and more people do it, it's becomes a slippery slope as to how far schools and curricula will have to adjust for older and older kids, not to mention teachers as they scramble to accommodate a wider range of ages in their lesson plans.

Finally, I do think it's an unfair advantage that a small percentage of affluent, mostly white families use to position their children in the top of the class academically and athletically (here, I'm not referring to legitimate developmental delays, recommendations of pediatricians, etc.). I think it also may exacerbate the achievement gap in some situations, when middle/lower SES minority families can't afford to do the same.

Wow. It's like you are trying to demonstrate the point about the lack of self-reflection from anti redshirt people.

PP back. How so? Curious to here what you think.

I will be offline for several hours momentarily. I don't mean to post and run, and you asked a serious question, so I want to give you a serious answer, but I am sorry, I can't engage further for the rest of the day.

The lack of self-reflection is this: there isn't much evidence that redshirting has any real impact one way or the other on achievement gaps. In fact, looking at the studies out there, statistically speaking it's relatively rare. There's no real body of evidence linking low-SES performance to redshirting. However, there are literally years of analysis on the impact of private education and the achievement gap. Putting your child in a private school has a much more significant impact on the achievement gap than redshirting has or ever will. Withdrawing your child from the public system is known to have an impact in a way that redshirting doesn't even get close to touching.

It seems very much a lack of self-reflection to talk about doing something educationally advantageous that middle/lower SES families don't have the same access to when in the same breath you are sending your child to private school. I have nothing against private school -- I may eventually send one of my kids -- but I do think it's hypocritical to criticize parents who redshirt for allegedly harming lower SES students when you're opted out of the public system entirely.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I wonder if some of the angst of the anti redshirters is economic. Academic redshirting is done by those who can afford it if they see the need. People who can't afford another year of childcare may feel bitter about this.

I can't speak for all anti-redshirters, but for me, the issue has nothing to do with economics. I can afford to keep my September DD home for another year, but I'm not going to. My issue with parents who redshirt is that it seems to be the latest example of how our society is more concerned about making things easier for kids to excel than it is with equipping them with the skills needed to work hard and deal with set backs. Instead of manipulating situations to make them easier for our kids to handle, why aren't we allowing them to be in situations where they may struggle a bit so that they can build confidence, resiliency, and grit?

If I could "like" this comment 1000 times, I would. There has been a lot written recently about how kids need to experience some struggle--and even being allowed to experience failure--in order to be prepared adequately for adulthood. But instead, parents swoop in to try to ensure a soft landing for kids.

It reminds me of the discussion of "overparenting" in that book "How to Raise an Adult" by that Stanford dean. To me, redshirting for "soft" reasons is one example of overparenting.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I wonder if some of the angst of the anti redshirters is economic. Academic redshirting is done by those who can afford it if they see the need. People who can't afford another year of childcare may feel bitter about this.

I can't speak for all anti-redshirters, but for me, the issue has nothing to do with economics. I can afford to keep my September DD home for another year, but I'm not going to. My issue with parents who redshirt is that it seems to be the latest example of how our society is more concerned about making things easier for kids to excel than it is with equipping them with the skills needed to work hard and deal with set backs. Instead of manipulating situations to make them easier for our kids to handle, why aren't we allowing them to be in situations where they may struggle a bit so that they can build confidence, resiliency, and grit?

If I could "like" this comment 1000 times, I would. There has been a lot written recently about how kids need to experience some struggle--and even being allowed to experience failure--in order to be prepared adequately for adulthood. But instead, parents swoop in to try to ensure a soft landing for kids.

It reminds me of the discussion of "overparenting" in that book "How to Raise an Adult" by that Stanford dean. To me, redshirting for "soft" reasons is one example of overparenting.

PP--apparently, the book does indeed reference redshirting by competitive parents as one example (I haven't finished the book yet).

https://www.chicagotribune.com/news/nationworld/ct-prj-how-to-raise-an-adult-julie-lythcott-haims-20150611-story.html

[Anonymous]

I’m just curious as to where the redshirters think thier children are somehow going to develop these mysterious social skills, other than , well , in kindergarten?

Oh wait.. you want your kids to lord over other children 1-2 years younger in their playgroup, so they can do it in K, in the name of “leadership”. Got it.

I have several friends with children with frank, and profound, special needs (and while this will be offensive to some - current useage of “special needs”). I can’t think of one that has held back their child.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I wonder if some of the angst of the anti redshirters is economic. Academic redshirting is done by those who can afford it if they see the need. People who can't afford another year of childcare may feel bitter about this.

I'm not a fan of redshirting, but it's not due to economic anxiety (we have a child in private, one that doesn't allow redshirting, AFAIK). It actually doesn't personally affect my situation at all. But I don't like it from a societal perspective, because once more and more people do it, it's becomes a slippery slope as to how far schools and curricula will have to adjust for older and older kids, not to mention teachers as they scramble to accommodate a wider range of ages in their lesson plans.

Finally, I do think it's an unfair advantage that a small percentage of affluent, mostly white families use to position their children in the top of the class academically and athletically (here, I'm not referring to legitimate developmental delays, recommendations of pediatricians, etc.). I think it also may exacerbate the achievement gap in some situations, when middle/lower SES minority families can't afford to do the same.

Wow. It's like you are trying to demonstrate the point about the lack of self-reflection from anti redshirt people.

PP back. How so? Curious to here what you think.

I will be offline for several hours momentarily. I don't mean to post and run, and you asked a serious question, so I want to give you a serious answer, but I am sorry, I can't engage further for the rest of the day.

The lack of self-reflection is this: there isn't much evidence that redshirting has any real impact one way or the other on achievement gaps. In fact, looking at the studies out there, statistically speaking it's relatively rare. There's no real body of evidence linking low-SES performance to redshirting. However, there are literally years of analysis on the impact of private education and the achievement gap. Putting your child in a private school has a much more significant impact on the achievement gap than redshirting has or ever will. Withdrawing your child from the public system is known to have an impact in a way that redshirting doesn't even get close to touching.

It seems very much a lack of self-reflection to talk about doing something educationally advantageous that middle/lower SES families don't have the same access to when in the same breath you are sending your child to private school. I have nothing against private school -- I may eventually send one of my kids -- but I do think it's hypocritical to criticize parents who redshirt for allegedly harming lower SES students when you're opted out of the public system entirely.

PP. First, there actually has been some research linking redshirting to widening the achievement gap--I posted this article earlier.

https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/09645292.2018.1468873

Second, comparing private school to redshirting is an imperfect analogy, IMO. We've done public and private, as have *many* families at our child's current school; some plan on going back to public at some point, so it's not a decision to do private all the way through. Further, we are not white or Asian, so to the extent that private leads to improved scores/performance, enrolling our kids in private would actually help close the achievement gap. (However, we do private now primarily for language immersion, not other academic reasons.) Finally, our school does give a lot of financial aid, and is fairly diverse as far as race/ethnicity and SES.

I will concede that in some cases the decision to enroll one's child in private is motivated by a desire to get a leg up. But certainly not in all cases, which is why I think the analogy doesn't work.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I have a few friends with 19 year old high school seniors due to red shirtting. It's crazy how much that one year makes in regards to their family dynamic. Lots of fighting and arguing with "I'm over 18!" being thrown around.

One friend called the police on her son because he didn't come home for two days (was angry at his parents). The police showed up at the friend's house where he was crashing and once they found out he was over 18, went back to her and admonished her for not revealing his age prior to making the call. Her FB post on the situation was hilarious because she felt like she had been SO wronged by the police.

Most non-redshirted kids turn 18 during their senior year as well. My October (non-redshirted) girl will be 18 for most of the school year