My son's kindergarten class has several 7 yr olds in it.

[Anonymous]

Read the Outliers if you haven't already. The author and the studies showed the positive impact of being one of the oldest for sports (the book talked about hockey).

My bday is in Dec. and I was always one of the oldest in the class. My DD's bday is also in Dec. and she was just in the middle of the back for age (several summer bday kids were held back). I do think the older kids have an advantage for reading readiness and athletic performance.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Read the Outliers if you haven't already. The author and the studies showed the positive impact of being one of the oldest for sports (the book talked about hockey).

My bday is in Dec. and I was always one of the oldest in the class. My DD's bday is also in Dec. and she was just in the middle of the back for age (several summer bday kids were held back). I do think the older kids have an advantage for reading readiness and athletic performance.

Wasn't the Outliers book about PROFESSIONAL athletes?

Let's face it, folks (or at least those with a firm grip on reality), the vast majority of our kids are not going to be that great at sports. A few might win scholarships for college, a very, very few might go beyond that, but I'll bet the mortgage on my upper NW home that 99% of us have kids who will not be Olympic-caliber athletes.

Also, studies show that any academic advantage of red-shirting ends well before kids get to high school.

[Anonymous]

No -- Outliers showed how even young kids benefitted from being the oldest...read the book. The sports chapter was just one chapter.

I know I always enjoyed being one of the oldest in the class and can see how it is an advantage.

[Anonymous]

In high school, kids always assumed that the oldest kids got held back "for a reason."

[Anonymous]

You know, when I was in school, I always had this view that the older kids were the slower ones. Often times, they were, because they had been left back a grade. When did the tables turn? When did being "left back" become a good thing? I myself enjoyed being one of the youngest in my class (with a birthday in late October). Heck, if you were smart, you weren't left back, but you often ended up skipping a grade.

My son's birthday is in early September, and if he's showing readiness, I'm sending him to kindergarten right on time. I'd much prefer for him to be challenged than be bored in school because other kids are just learning the alphabet and he's already reading, etc. People need to think more about their children's development and less about whether they're going to be the top student--especially if they're not with their true peers. I'm not impressed when you tell me your kid is "gifted" in first grade if he's 8 or 9 years old.

[Anonymous]

Let children be where they are best suited for their own development -- not some arbitrary number/birthday. It's not skin off your back if your child is advanced for his/her age.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Let children be where they are best suited for their own development -- not some arbitrary number/birthday. It's not skin off your back if your child is advanced for his/her age.

I agree. It seems that many want to judge/criticize those who held their children back. What's the big deal? Why does it matter so much to them if there's a few kids in the grade who are 3-6 months past the cut-off? It sounds like some of those will be kids who really do need the extra time for some reason, and most anti-redshirters claim they don't begrudge those decisions. So what we're really talking about here are maybe 1-2 kids per grade where someone thinks the child shouldn't have been held back. Why do you care so much about them? Here are the only reasons I've heard:

(1) "Those poor children will be harmed by being held back!" This argument is that parents who hold their children back are hurting them, because the child will be bored or his self-esteem will be damaged when he wonders why he's the oldest in the grade. This argument doesn't make much sense to me. I assume the parents of these children know their kids better than some anonymous poster, and the parents can best judge what's best for the child. I don't see how anonymous strangers can predict how an unknown child's self-esteem will develop 10-15 years from now.

(2) "They will prey on young girls!" This argument is that a boy who is held back at some young grade (K or 1st) will eventually be much older and more mature than his peers when he is in 12th grade, and will inevitably become some sort of sexual predator who will threaten my daughter. I guess this argument presupposes that when a boy turns 19, he becomes some sort of suave Casanova who is irresistible to high school girls, or perhaps that at age 19 a boy experiences a sudden surge of hormones that makes him unable to control his urges. Neither strikes me a true, and both strike me as insulting. A boy who is a predator (and there are some out there) will be a predator no matter what his age, and a girl who is sexually active will be that way no matter how old the boys in her grade are.

(3) It puts my "right aged" child at a competitive disadvantage. I rarely see any anti-redshirter write this explicitly, but I think this is the real reason driving a lot of the fear/anger. Despite all the claims that redshirting is ineffective, that it doesn't matter after 3rd grade, and that it actually harms the older child, many parents are afraid it actually works. And they don't want their own child born in the October-March range to lose the opportunity to be being among the oldest half of the class. They worry that their sons will be less likely to be the smartest, most athletic, and most confident leaders of the class. I can actually understand this (usually unspoken) argument; it makes logical sense. But no one likes to say it out loud, because it shows they're just as crass and competitive as the mom who holds her child back for competitive reasons.

(BTW, before anyone accuses me of being some self-interested redshirter, I'll disclose that my child started school right on time, and is the fourth youngest in the grade.)

[Anonymous]

# 3 above is it, folks. Plain and simple competitiveness and fear.

[Anonymous]

I think it works in the early years so less summer kids admitted to top schools, less deemed gifted because they advanced for 5 or 6 but not for 7.

Too many people doing it, it as become a problem. In my kids preschool at the end of the year, he was turning 4 while a peer was turning 6.

[Anonymous]

I'm tired of the administrators bragging that they have prek reading at 1st grade level, well that is less impressive when a 6 year old is doing it vs. 4 year old.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I think it works in the early years so less summer kids admitted to top schools, less deemed gifted because they advanced for 5 or 6 but not for 7.

Too many people doing it, it as become a problem. In my kids preschool at the end of the year, he was turning 4 while a peer was turning 6.

I too am frustrated by it. My DS is at beauvoir and has classmates 1 1/2 years+ older than him. Especially the boys. I can't figure out if the school is encouraging it or not. Or if they think it makes them more ready to sit still, read, etc... It makes me uncomfortable that there are kids so much bigger and older than him in his class. And I think, at times, it's intimidating to the younger (age/grade appropriate) kids.

Mothers have been telling me the pre-k/k classes this year will continue the trend.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think it works in the early years so less summer kids admitted to top schools, less deemed gifted because they advanced for 5 or 6 but not for 7.

Too many people doing it, it as become a problem. In my kids preschool at the end of the year, he was turning 4 while a peer was turning 6.

I too am frustrated by it. My DS is at beauvoir and has classmates 1 1/2 years+ older than him. Especially the boys. I can't figure out if the school is encouraging it or not. Or if they think it makes them more ready to sit still, read, etc... It makes me uncomfortable that there are kids so much bigger and older than him in his class. And I think, at times, it's intimidating to the younger (age/grade appropriate) kids.

Mothers have been telling me the pre-k/k classes this year will continue the trend.

My daughter is in the same boat at a similar school. She has a summer birthday, and we decided to put her forward - a very difficult decision. Academically and athletically, she is running circles around the older kids, and I don't think that they will ever catch up with HER. But they can be intimidating. They're big, they've done nursery twice, they know all the tricks, and they are often more sophisticated than her (and not in a good way).

I'm thinking of pulling her out of her private school after this year. Either she will repeat kindergarten at another private, or we will move to a suburb with excellent public schools. She'll still be one of the youngest kids in her class, but at least she won't be a full 1 1/2 year younger than them.

It's frustrating. I don't think that all of these kids seem to be catching up, even with the gift of an extra year. And it hurts the other kids.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Read the Outliers if you haven't already. The author and the studies showed the positive impact of being one of the oldest for sports (the book talked about hockey).

My bday is in Dec. and I was always one of the oldest in the class. My DD's bday is also in Dec. and she was just in the middle of the back for age (several summer bday kids were held back). I do think the older kids have an advantage for reading readiness and athletic performance.

I read The Outliers, and I believe that the hockey team theory was debunked.

[Anonymous]

Yeah, it's sad that some parents want to game the system. I guess it's up to them.

[Anonymous]

I have seen 30% - 50% of classes held
Back.