Why is redshirting so common around here?

[Anonymous]

Multiple posters on this thread have posted very rational reasons against redshirting.

Your opinion. Most kids that are redshirted are on the cusp. Why do you object to that?

[Anonymous]

I'm curious if anyone can tells us if their on time child has been directly impacted by having a red shirted child in their class. And I mean a direct impact. Not some sort of theory.

[Anonymous]

I think most anti redshirters are those who want to send their Sept kid but feel guilty. Or, have an October kid and resent that he is not the oldest.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Multiple posters on this thread have posted very rational reasons against redshirting.

Your opinion. Most kids that are redshirted are on the cusp. Why do you object to that?

Not that PP, but I object on principle to making personal exceptions that aren't warranted. I object especially to all the disingenuous reasons given. If your child's behavior or skills are delayed and he isn't where his classmates are, just admit it. And if he would be fine but you want him to have an advantage his peers don't have, admit that too. Only one poster has.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I think most anti redshirters are those who want to send their Sept kid but feel guilty. Or, have an October kid and resent that he is not the oldest.

This doesn't apply to me, but I would still point out that there's a big difference between "not wanting your kid to be the youngest because of other parents not starting their kids on time" and "resenting that their kid isn't the oldest." You sound like a defensive redshirter.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Multiple posters on this thread have posted very rational reasons against redshirting.

Your opinion. Most kids that are redshirted are on the cusp. Why do you object to that?

Not that PP, but I object on principle to making personal exceptions that aren't warranted. I object especially to all the disingenuous reasons given. If your child's behavior or skills are delayed and he isn't where his classmates are, just admit it. And if he would be fine but you want him to have an advantage his peers don't have, admit that too. Only one poster has.

+1

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Multiple posters on this thread have posted very rational reasons against redshirting.

Your opinion. Most kids that are redshirted are on the cusp. Why do you object to that?

Not that PP, but I object on principle to making personal exceptions that aren't warranted. I object especially to all the disingenuous reasons given. If your child's behavior or skills are delayed and he isn't where his classmates are, just admit it. And if he would be fine but you want him to have an advantage his peers don't have, admit that too. Only one poster has.

We redshirted DD. She is now in first and at the bottom of her class. Being evaluated for learning disabilities. We knew she was behind. And she continues to be behind. I'm really glad we made the decision we did.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I think most anti redshirters are those who want to send their Sept kid but feel guilty. Or, have an October kid and resent that he is not the oldest.

On the contrary. I'll admit it only anonymously: I feel smug that my September kids were obviously ready and we never had to worry about their performance.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Multiple posters on this thread have posted very rational reasons against redshirting.

Your opinion. Most kids that are redshirted are on the cusp. Why do you object to that?

Not that PP, but I object on principle to making personal exceptions that aren't warranted. I object especially to all the disingenuous reasons given. If your child's behavior or skills are delayed and he isn't where his classmates are, just admit it. And if he would be fine but you want him to have an advantage his peers don't have, admit that too. Only one poster has.

We redshirted DD. She is now in first and at the bottom of her class. Being evaluated for learning disabilities. We knew she was behind. And she continues to be behind. I'm really glad we made the decision we did.

Delaying LD and SN kids is reasonable and appropriate. The anti-r.s.'ing on here is aimed exclusively at parents who redshirt their kids to gain an advantage, not to mitigate real issues with their children's readiness. You sound like you made the right call for your DD and did not negatively impact the kids who started on time. Which is really the issue, obfuscation attempts by redshirters notwithstanding.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Multiple posters on this thread have posted very rational reasons against redshirting.

Your opinion. Most kids that are redshirted are on the cusp. Why do you object to that?

Not that PP, but I object on principle to making personal exceptions that aren't warranted. I object especially to all the disingenuous reasons given. If your child's behavior or skills are delayed and he isn't where his classmates are, just admit it. And if he would be fine but you want him to have an advantage his peers don't have, admit that too. Only one poster has.

We redshirted DD. She is now in first and at the bottom of her class. Being evaluated for learning disabilities. We knew she was behind. And she continues to be behind. I'm really glad we made the decision we did.

Delaying LD and SN kids is reasonable and appropriate. The anti-r.s.'ing on here is aimed exclusively at parents who redshirt their kids to gain an advantage, not to mitigate real issues with their children's readiness. You sound like you made the right call for your DD and did not negatively impact the kids who started on time. Which is really the issue, obfuscation attempts by redshirters notwithstanding.

+1. Sounds like you did the right thing.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Are there any rational anti-redshirting people? The ones posting here sound totally nutty.

I suspect that you think everyone who disagrees with you is nutty.

No, actually. I'd love to have a rational discussion of the implications of age in a classroom with an accurate description of the distribution of ages of children in the classrooms. I'd love to hear some anti-redshirts put forth cogent, calm arguments about why skewing the ages matters, if in fact such a skew statistically happens. I'd love to see numbers so I could get a sense as to whether redshirting has any significant statistical impact and if so, how. I'd love to see a clear-headed discussion of school structures and grades. Give me something coherent to work with, at least! But all I see here are frothy ramblings and broadly sweeping generalizations about 2+ year age differences and 19-year-old seniors.

I like you.

Multiple posters on this thread have posted very rational reasons against redshirting. You just choose to ignore them so you can keep justifying your selfish decision to give your kids an unnecessary leg up at the expense of other children. You want to pretend that your child's advantage is not a zero sum game, but of course it is. The curriculum gets modified toward older than average students, the expectations are shifted upwards for all children, and social development among kids who are potentially a year and a half apart can be very, very different with younger kids usually getting the shorter end of the stick. But you knew all that.

Can you prove school districts have changed their curriculum due to red shirting? I find that a bit far fetched. At most I would guess there are only one or two red shirted kids in a class which hardly seems worth changing an entire curriculum.

http://healthland.time.com/2012/03/06/adhd-why-the-youngest-students-in-a-class-are-most-likely-to-be-diagnosed/

It's not exactly a change in curriculum, but it is definitely a change in expectations.

[Anonymous]

If your child's behavior or skills are delayed and he isn't where his classmates are, just admit it.

I think that is why they are holding them back.

[Anonymous]

Delaying LD and SN kids is reasonable and appropriate

Nope. They are the ones who need to be in school and getting extra help. The ones that benefit are the young ones who are just a little immature socially.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Multiple posters on this thread have posted very rational reasons against redshirting.

Your opinion. Most kids that are redshirted are on the cusp. Why do you object to that?

Not that PP, but I object on principle to making personal exceptions that aren't warranted. I object especially to all the disingenuous reasons given. If your child's behavior or skills are delayed and he isn't where his classmates are, just admit it. And if he would be fine but you want him to have an advantage his peers don't have, admit that too. Only one poster has.

We redshirted DD. She is now in first and at the bottom of her class. Being evaluated for learning disabilities. We knew she was behind. And she continues to be behind. I'm really glad we made the decision we did.

Delaying LD and SN kids is reasonable and appropriate. The anti-r.s.'ing on here is aimed exclusively at parents who redshirt their kids to gain an advantage, not to mitigate real issues with their children's readiness. You sound like you made the right call for your DD and did not negatively impact the kids who started on time. Which is really the issue, obfuscation attempts by redshirters notwithstanding.

This is PP. We had to make the decision to hold her back based on very little information though. Kind of a gut feeling and backed up by her pre-k teacher. Unfortunately we've discovered she really is behind and there may be LD. But we did not know that for sure when we had to decide about K. It was an agonizing decision and we got lots of input from friends both positive and negative. It ends up that we did the right thing. But what if we'd done it and she caught right up by first grade. Would we then be considered disingenuous? Just some food for thought.

[Anonymous]

I object on principle to making personal exceptions that aren't warranted

It's not a personal exemption. It is a law that says that kids don't have to go to school until they are 6 or 7-depending on the state.