Why don’t schools make you just through some hoops for redshirting?

[Anonymous]

Rich suburbs of the South

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Rich suburbs of the South

Ok, why not discuss this in Birmingham Urban Moms and Dads then?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Rich suburbs of the South

Lol. A problem of your own making.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Rich suburbs of the South

Ok, why not discuss this in Birmingham Urban Moms and Dads then?

Why do you care? Obviously there is no "Birmingham Urban Moms and Dads."

It's not like the thread is in one of the forums on local school districts.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Rich suburbs of the South

Also a lot of places out West. I have family in Arizona and Utah and it's an issue there.

I actually think the reason why they are so strict about it in the DMV is because it's what inevitably happens when you aren't strict about it. It doesn't even take that many families deciding they are going to stretch the rule in order to try and get their kid an advantage before it's a problem, because even 2 or 3 kids in a class who are 18 or more months older than the youngest "on time" kids will skew behavior in the class enough to cause issues.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This whole argument is crazy. Different states have different cut off dates in The US. In WY, child must be 5 by August 1st for example.

We started in VA, with a a late September birthday boy that was born premature. Did not send to school when he was 4, because:

1) Kid is a very active boy (still is) did not have the capability to stay seated for hours at 4
2) If you adjust the age for due date, child would not have made the cut off in VA
3) When kid started school we want to move to Maryland that has a September 1st cut off

Judge me away, child went at 5 and yes they will be 18 their most of their Senior year, just like the October and November birthdays AND ALL their September birthday friends in Maryland.

Focus on your child and let the parents worry about their kids.

What is actually crazy is your inability to read the OP or understand that no one is arguing someone in your position shouldn't be allowed to redshirt.

This thread was created because there is an increasing trend in SOME places (not all, as many school districts are more rigid about it) to redshirt kids who are nowhere near the cut-off and have no developmental reason or keeping them back.

Literally not a single comment on this thread has indicated that anyone is bothered by someone holding a September birthday back so he can start K at 5 instead of at 4. That's absolutely what I would do too, in that situation.

What some of you don't seem to get is that most of us are not "anti-redshirters," we're fine with redshirting as it has historically been done -- for kids with birthdays near the deadline who simply are not ready to start K.

This thread is about people who have kids whose birthdays are nowhere close to the deadline, but abuse liberal redshirting rules because they want their kid to be bigger and "more advanced" in school. It's a weird thing to do but it absolutely happens. My sister lives in a district like this. A lot of it is done by families who are obsessed with athletes and will tell you point blank that they do it to increase the odds that their kid will make varsity or get recruited by colleges (keep in mind the kids in question are 5 and 6 years old). It sucks because as many posters have explained on the thread, it creates large age ranges in grades that make it harder for teachers to teach to a median maturity level, can increase bullying and exclusion (even of kids who are "on target" age wise but may still be a year or more younger than some of these redshirted kids), and can wreak havoc when the kids go through puberty.

If you aren't in a district like this, great! Redshirting where you live is probably normal and people mainly do it for reasons like this PP, which make perfect sense.

But there are place where people are increasingly redshirting kids with spring and even winter birthdays for athletic and academic advantage and it's a real issue.

Where are these places? I've lived and taught in pretty much every corner of the country and have never experienced it as a "real issue" or anything more than a major outlier for a spring/winter birthday to be redshirted.

It is definitely an extremely common occurrence in the fantasy school districts in the anti-redshirters fevered imaginations.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Some people will always skew things to their kid's advantage. They are not good parents.

Right? Particularly those parents that buy houses in historically redlined districts, e.g. the “good” schools. They are not good parents or people. Glad you agree.

And don't even get me started on those who feed their kids *Gasp* healthy foods or sign them up for outside therapies, lessons, etc. when there so many people in this country who cannot do that!!

These are the same folks complaining about parents supplementing with outside sports, music, art and other special interests as well and want to pretend that the school stuff is equal.

Redshirting is not equal to external supplementation. In fact, it is far less harmful to other students than external supplementation. I thought all you anti-redshirters were screaming about how redshirting parents were doing things that harmed other kids (though in the case of redshirting, there isn’t evidence of that, unlike supplementation). But I guess the truth is that you are fine with harming other kids when it comes to doing something that advantages your own kid.

Such overt hypocrites, the lot of you.

How is supplementing harmful to other students? If you are holding back a child due to their needs, one should help with those needs. Not just ignore it and hope it goes away. I could see doing it for a child in daily speech and daily ot, for example, but not because a parent says they are immature as kids are not supposed to be mature at age five and they will not gain maturity being placed in a younger peer group. The expectations for them are dumped down but if you know there is an issue you are failing them as a parent by not getting them help as soon as you see the problem.

If others enrich their kids and you choose not to, that’s on you too. Not the kid.

There is a lot being written about this now. The essential theory is that outside tutoring drives inequity in classrooms (some argue substantially) because it provides those students with educated and wealthy parents a huge leg up on the curriculum. Then, kids who wouldn’t be behind according to the standards but who don’t supplement will be classified as “behind,” when in fact they are doing fine, just not taught all the subject matter ahead of time.

I didn’t do a deep dive for links but here is a short interview out of the Harvard School of Education that touches on some of the considerations:

https://www.gse.harvard.edu/ideas/news/21/05/rapid-rise-private-tutoring

The role and impact of external tutoring and supplementary education is being widely discussed in education these days (unlike redshirting, which is a non-issue).

You do realize that parents can tutor young kids. It's not rocket science. No reason why if you can read and write and do basic math that you cannot grab a few workbooks and work with your kids. That's what we did. We never paid for it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think at this point people can see the anti-redshirters for what they are: aggressive hypocrites who attack little children. They always show who they are in the end. Every single time.

Are you trying to justify your choices? People are concerned with others holding back their kids as it is not developmentally appropriate for the held back kids nor the other kids in the classroom. If your kids have delays, send them on time and get them help. It's not a kid issue as the kids have no say, it's a parenting issue.

There are very few good reasons to hold back a child except significant special needs. And, really, those kids should go to school to get the therapies and supports.

Reality check. You can’t tell from looking at a kid if they have a special need. You have no idea what factors went in to a parent’s decision to hold back a kid. You’re making an assumption that because a child appears neurotypical and healthy, that the parents have no “developmentally appropriate” need to hold back.

I had a child with significant needs and the best thing we did was send them. My kid was in daily private therapies. If your child has delays they need help and one help is school. I don’t need to make assumptions, that was our situation. I quit my job and did 1-2 therapies a day and many other things to give my kid every chance to catch up. We did it for many years.

My August-born child had delays (fine motor, speech and language) and the IEP offered 20 minutes of speech 2x/week and 30 minutes of OT 3x/month. So for kids in a more self-contained setting/severe needs going to school to get the services might make sense, but for mine the "supports" were minimal

You are lucky as mine got 30 minutes of weekly group speech with 6-8 kids with unrelated needs and no OT. Our private evaluations recommended way more and even their screenings suggested my child needed more but that's all they would give. (though I suspect it was because we were doing so much privately). That honestly doesn't sound that minimal compared to what we go. I pulled my kid out of school early a few times a week or during lunch for private services till we could get them moved to after school which took years for slots to open up. You do what you have to do to help your kids.

Right, that's my point. Inevitably in these threads someone always brings out the "if your kid is delayed they need to be in school to get services!!"...I don't know exactly what they envision these services to be like but for all but the most severely delayed kids (e.g., usually in a self-contained SPED unit) the "services" aren't going to bridge the gap

We aren’t talking about kids who are that disabled they end up in self contained classrooms. You are making up stuff.

ok. then what are you talking about? my child was delayed and not ready to go to kindergarten right as he turned 5. pp said he should be sent on time "to get help." the help that he would receive was very minimal and we did not feel that putting him into a situation he was totally not ready for, and get "help" for roughly one hour per week (of the ~32 he'd be in school), was appropriate. he stayed in his preschool for another year, and got that same help but while he was in a program that was developmentally appropriate for him. *shrug*

You should be supplementing with private services and not just relying on the school. All that money for preschool could have been spent on it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We have a Sep 1 cut off. My kid’s kinder class of 20 kids has three 7 year olds. I’m just wondering why the schools don’t make it a little harder to hold back if you’re a school year birthday. I don’t even care about summer or late spring but socially it is a big gap for my own child to be with peers that much older. One is prone to bossing them around and teasing. Why don’t the schools require a medical reason for people holding kids who have birthdays that far from the cut off? I’m not talking about the kids who are 2m from the cutoff but kids who are 6+ months.

OP, public school funding is based on either enrollment or attendance depending on the state or district. That means public schools will do whatever it takes to get more butts in seats, including turning a blind eye to undesirable effects of excessive redshirting.

It is indeed a vast funding conspiracy that only brave anti-redshirters forge forward to disclose. You’ve discovered the secret. It’s probably Soros’ fault, somewhere.

You're unhinged. But cool that your HS junior can buy beer I guess?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We have a Sep 1 cut off. My kid’s kinder class of 20 kids has three 7 year olds. I’m just wondering why the schools don’t make it a little harder to hold back if you’re a school year birthday. I don’t even care about summer or late spring but socially it is a big gap for my own child to be with peers that much older. One is prone to bossing them around and teasing. Why don’t the schools require a medical reason for people holding kids who have birthdays that far from the cut off? I’m not talking about the kids who are 2m from the cutoff but kids who are 6+ months.

OP, public school funding is based on either enrollment or attendance depending on the state or district. That means public schools will do whatever it takes to get more butts in seats, including turning a blind eye to undesirable effects of excessive redshirting.

It is indeed a vast funding conspiracy that only brave anti-redshirters forge forward to disclose. You’ve discovered the secret. It’s probably Soros’ fault, somewhere.

You're unhinged. But cool that your HS junior can buy beer I guess?

They want everyone to hold back their kids to justify their choice to hold back.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This whole argument is crazy. Different states have different cut off dates in The US. In WY, child must be 5 by August 1st for example.

We started in VA, with a a late September birthday boy that was born premature. Did not send to school when he was 4, because:

1) Kid is a very active boy (still is) did not have the capability to stay seated for hours at 4
2) If you adjust the age for due date, child would not have made the cut off in VA
3) When kid started school we want to move to Maryland that has a September 1st cut off

Judge me away, child went at 5 and yes they will be 18 their most of their Senior year, just like the October and November birthdays AND ALL their September birthday friends in Maryland.

Focus on your child and let the parents worry about their kids.

What is actually crazy is your inability to read the OP or understand that no one is arguing someone in your position shouldn't be allowed to redshirt.

This thread was created because there is an increasing trend in SOME places (not all, as many school districts are more rigid about it) to redshirt kids who are nowhere near the cut-off and have no developmental reason or keeping them back.

Literally not a single comment on this thread has indicated that anyone is bothered by someone holding a September birthday back so he can start K at 5 instead of at 4. That's absolutely what I would do too, in that situation.

What some of you don't seem to get is that most of us are not "anti-redshirters," we're fine with redshirting as it has historically been done -- for kids with birthdays near the deadline who simply are not ready to start K.

This thread is about people who have kids whose birthdays are nowhere close to the deadline, but abuse liberal redshirting rules because they want their kid to be bigger and "more advanced" in school. It's a weird thing to do but it absolutely happens. My sister lives in a district like this. A lot of it is done by families who are obsessed with athletes and will tell you point blank that they do it to increase the odds that their kid will make varsity or get recruited by colleges (keep in mind the kids in question are 5 and 6 years old). It sucks because as many posters have explained on the thread, it creates large age ranges in grades that make it harder for teachers to teach to a median maturity level, can increase bullying and exclusion (even of kids who are "on target" age wise but may still be a year or more younger than some of these redshirted kids), and can wreak havoc when the kids go through puberty.

If you aren't in a district like this, great! Redshirting where you live is probably normal and people mainly do it for reasons like this PP, which make perfect sense.

But there are place where people are increasingly redshirting kids with spring and even winter birthdays for athletic and academic advantage and it's a real issue.

I dont buy that OP’s experience isn’t an outlier and I don’t think it’s part of a trend. I also don’t think OP is privy to any information about these three kids, their needs or background, in order to determine that there wasn’t a recent for the holding back - she simply has no idea. All she knows is their age.

As for sports, if that’s what your friends are saying it’s pretty uneducated. Most club sports and big tournaments go by birth year and that is where the college recruiting comes from. Lacrosse was one of the hold outs for class year, but changed to birth year recently.

It’s high school sports are by grade. That’s what

That PP was specifically talking about getting recruited. No one these days is getting recruited by playing on a high school team. It’s through clubs and travel tours with spotlight tournaments and none of that is happening by grade year. If you are going to redshirt for this reason, then you should at least know what the rules are.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think at this point people can see the anti-redshirters for what they are: aggressive hypocrites who attack little children. They always show who they are in the end. Every single time.

Are you trying to justify your choices? People are concerned with others holding back their kids as it is not developmentally appropriate for the held back kids nor the other kids in the classroom. If your kids have delays, send them on time and get them help. It's not a kid issue as the kids have no say, it's a parenting issue.

There are very few good reasons to hold back a child except significant special needs. And, really, those kids should go to school to get the therapies and supports.

Reality check. You can’t tell from looking at a kid if they have a special need. You have no idea what factors went in to a parent’s decision to hold back a kid. You’re making an assumption that because a child appears neurotypical and healthy, that the parents have no “developmentally appropriate” need to hold back.

I had a child with significant needs and the best thing we did was send them. My kid was in daily private therapies. If your child has delays they need help and one help is school. I don’t need to make assumptions, that was our situation. I quit my job and did 1-2 therapies a day and many other things to give my kid every chance to catch up. We did it for many years.

My August-born child had delays (fine motor, speech and language) and the IEP offered 20 minutes of speech 2x/week and 30 minutes of OT 3x/month. So for kids in a more self-contained setting/severe needs going to school to get the services might make sense, but for mine the "supports" were minimal

You are lucky as mine got 30 minutes of weekly group speech with 6-8 kids with unrelated needs and no OT. Our private evaluations recommended way more and even their screenings suggested my child needed more but that's all they would give. (though I suspect it was because we were doing so much privately). That honestly doesn't sound that minimal compared to what we go. I pulled my kid out of school early a few times a week or during lunch for private services till we could get them moved to after school which took years for slots to open up. You do what you have to do to help your kids.

Right, that's my point. Inevitably in these threads someone always brings out the "if your kid is delayed they need to be in school to get services!!"...I don't know exactly what they envision these services to be like but for all but the most severely delayed kids (e.g., usually in a self-contained SPED unit) the "services" aren't going to bridge the gap

We aren’t talking about kids who are that disabled they end up in self contained classrooms. You are making up stuff.

She said delayed not disabled, but you know that. Not all special needs are visible to the eye, nor are they always diagnosed before K.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Rich suburbs of the South

Also a lot of places out West. I have family in Arizona and Utah and it's an issue there.

I actually think the reason why they are so strict about it in the DMV is because it's what inevitably happens when you aren't strict about it. It doesn't even take that many families deciding they are going to stretch the rule in order to try and get their kid an advantage before it's a problem, because even 2 or 3 kids in a class who are 18 or more months older than the youngest "on time" kids will skew behavior in the class enough to cause issues.

People must not be bothered that much, otherwise they would be at the school board meetings demanding change.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Just enroll your kid in kindergarten already. Yes, your kid will be among the youngest and the early years of grade school will have more twists and turns, but in the long run it's better. That way, your student graduates from high school at 17 instead of 19 or 20.

Our summer birthday started college at almost 18 and will graduate with a bachelor's at 21. A lot of her redshirted peers in the same grade are already 23. They'll graduate with a bachelor's at 24/25/26. Half their 20s are already over, and now what? Grad school? They'll be almost 30 by the time they hit the workforce...

Look ahead 20 years, OP. Redshirting actually holds your kid back later.

This is….objectively not better. Also (and, again.) if they’re graduating in May at 20 - or, in the vast majority of cases, at 19…it’s not redshirting, something else is going on

That’s what you’re missing. There are now kids who have Jan/Feb birthdays with a Sep 1 cutoff held back for “the gift of time” and the kids are tough additions in the grade. In this case, they boss around the younger kids and there have been issues with teasing. It’s not ideal for the other kids.

Where do you live??

This is what I want to know. I have three kids ranging elementary to high school and they’ve attended different schools each, and I’ve NEVER seen redshirted kids with Jan/Feb birthdays in their classes. My youngest had an April bday, but otherwise it’s been May-August birthdays for those kids.

Agreed. There was some weirdness around Covid and virtual instruction with kids starting late, but I'm otherwise unaware of anyone redshirted with a birthday earlier than June, and really it's usually July-September birthdays who are redshirted. I'm pretty sensitive to this as someone with a kid with a labor day birthday who wasn't redshirted, but there aren't a lot of kids who are more than 12 months older than her. She also has several friends with August and September birthdays who weren't redshirted.

I do think K and 1st grade teachers often have unrealistic expectations for younger students and those were really hard for my kid. My 4-5yo kindergartner was sent to the office almost daily that first month of kindergarten for pushing to get to the front of the line when lining up. The principal told her if she came back, that she'd call her parents. My kid thought that would be a reward, as she'd get a private party with the principal and her parents. Totally didn't get it.

It ended up being a really traumatic start to school with a 4-5 yo who was crying and upset about going to school every day. Kindergarten was too much seat time and the behavior expectations didn't work for her. She's always been far ahead on academics, so that was never the issue. It's was the other expectations.

Did she go to preschool? Mine went to a strict preschool that set the kids up well so the transition was no problem. I think these play based programs are part of the problem.

Yes, she was in a daycare with a formal preschool program for ages 2-3 and moved to a well respected preschool for age 4. The issue wasn't with her preparations, but with the expectations for kindergarten--a public school program in the DMV. There was an enormous amount of seat time at her desk (2+ hours at a time) and expectations that she could sit quietly and read and write independently. On the very first week of kindergarten the teacher gave all the kids lined paper, told them to stretch out their sounds and write a "personal narrative" telling her about themselves. No joke. It was part of the now defunct Lucy Caulkins curriculum--you can Google it. The whole kindergarten day was really designed for 1st or 2nd grader. There was too much sitting, too much individual work at desks, they were expected to focus on a single task for too long at a time, etc. Many of the older kids in the grade really thrived and the younger ones, including mine, were miserable and had lots of behavior issues.

Those academics are not a normal K, so not sure where you are sending your kid. But, yes, kids should be able to sit at age 5. You picked a bad school for your child, and that is the issue. It also doesn't sound like your prek or preschool prepared your child at all. The only publics that might do that would be a charter and when you knew it was a bad fit, you should have moved your kid. THat's not normal for a regular public where at least half the class or more cannot read or write.

My kid was well prepared could do the academics, even though I think they were absurd. It was the pace of the day and behavior expectations that were the problem. The kindergarten program was designed for 7 yos.

It is a well respected public school in the DMV. I bought a house and sent my kid to the zoned school. I didn't "pick" the wrong school for my kid. It wasn't a charter. It was the neighborhood school.

Then take it up with the school but that is NOT a normal K class where kids are expected to fully read and write. Most aren't reading or writing at that age which sucks for those of our kids who are. Guess your well respected school wasn't so great as you thought it was and money can buy you self-segregation from the rest of our kids but not good academics.

I don't think it's that much of an outlier. Academic expectations in K have increased dramatically from when we were kids. If I'd known this I would have thought more about redshirting rather than following the cutoffs and starting a 4 yo in kindergarten.

The academic standards for K are the same, however, upper grades are much lower. Your well-respected school was the issue and that's not a typical K curriculum so perhaps the issue was that school and you should have joined the PTA and advocated for a better curriculum. Or, given it was all rich families and many of those kids went in reading it was developmentally appropriate for that cohort.

Have you ever considered a child's feelings toward being held back?

My kid was terribly bored in elementary school. Especially the early grades as they were not academically challenging at all.

You realize that the Lucy Caulkins curriculum that I mentioned was one of the most popular choices for schools across the US a few years ago, right? There's even a NY Times podcast about it. My daughter's school was right in step with the bulk of other US schools. Perhaps you're just really out of date on what's happening in education? The curriculum has now been dropped, and I fully supported that choice, but K has moved to be even more academic. It's not about making friends, learning the alphabet, shapes, colors and counting like it used to be. It covers what used to be first grade content.

Maybe where your live but not where we live. More academics is good, not bad. Kids who did preschool and have parents or Nannie’s who work with them should have social skills, colors, letters and pre reading or reading. That’s what a good preschool works on. K is for academics.

The fact that you're not familiar with the Lucy Caulkins curriculum and the fall out from it proves that you are 100% out of touch with early elementary education and nothing you say should be given any credit. It's been huge deal and has disrupted the entire American education system. You're clearly unfamiliar with anything that you're talking about.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We have a Sep 1 cut off. My kid’s kinder class of 20 kids has three 7 year olds. I’m just wondering why the schools don’t make it a little harder to hold back if you’re a school year birthday. I don’t even care about summer or late spring but socially it is a big gap for my own child to be with peers that much older. One is prone to bossing them around and teasing. Why don’t the schools require a medical reason for people holding kids who have birthdays that far from the cut off? I’m not talking about the kids who are 2m from the cutoff but kids who are 6+ months.

OP, public school funding is based on either enrollment or attendance depending on the state or district. That means public schools will do whatever it takes to get more butts in seats, including turning a blind eye to undesirable effects of excessive redshirting.

It is indeed a vast funding conspiracy that only brave anti-redshirters forge forward to disclose. You’ve discovered the secret. It’s probably Soros’ fault, somewhere.

You're unhinged. But cool that your HS junior can buy beer I guess?

+1 totally unhinged! People are saying it’s annoying and a distraction in the classroom. No one has taken it to the level you have. You lack major social skills and an inability to read the room. Work on that… teach your children those skills too so they won’t have the same issues you do in life. Redshirting was not the answer.