Forum Index
»
Schools and Education General Discussion
No one is missing that. If a private school wants to redshirt a significant part of a class, presumable any family buying into that school is on board with it. If you weren't, you'd just pick another school. I think most people are talking about redshirting in public schools. |
Then you either haven't been reading or you've just decided to define "legitimate" as only posts you agree with. A number of posters have talked about having kids who have been bullied or teased, either by redshirted kids or in general for being young, even though they were on time for the class (having a significant number of older kids in a K class is going to make the younger kids seem younger). |
Please bump those because I haven't seen any. |
Do you think there should be grades at all? Should I be able to send my child to school at 2 if I think they're ready? Should I be able to hold them back 4 years because I want to travel first and can't be bothered? If you agree that there are some limits, then the question is what the limits should be. You may think there's no negative effect to sending a kid a few years early, but you obviously draw the line somewhere and are therefore making some kind of judgment that it matters if kids in a single class are about the same age. In any case, having much older kids in a class can absolutely make it harder for the teacher to teach because it makes kids more dissimilar and it is easier to teach more similar kids. The teacher's job being harder makes it more likely that my kid's classroom experience won't be as good. There's also the bullying, boredom, sports domination, etc aspects. I don't begrudge parents who redshirted their kid because they and the school decided it was the appropriate decision in light of all facts (including the effects on the class s/he would go into) nor deny that it is an appropriate decision for some kids (and I have no trouble with a +/- 1 month judgment zone where we leave it entirely to parents). But given the number of parents I know who redshirted their boy so that he would have a competitive advantage particularly at sports (not actually so that they would be a superstar, but more for the social cache/confidence boosting reason), I absolutely do not trust that most parents are only doing this because their kid is legitimately behind in some way. There's a reason that non-school-based sports leagues use age cutoffs; it absolutely does matter and parents absolutely try to game the system. Why is it that for baseball we're like of course it's a problem have a kid play down even if they weren't great at baseball as a kid so started late... but in school it's super controversial to say that kids shouldn't typically redshirt? |
All of this. No one is saying that redshirting should be banned or that there aren't legitimate reasons to do it, but of course there should be limits and some of us feel the trend towards more redshirting, including redshirting of kids born in the spring, is really widening the window on what is acceptable to a degree that ultimately does a disservice to other children and the classroom environment as a whole. I find the argument that I'm supposed to just trust other parents to do the right thing so weird. While I know plenty of parents who I feel reasonably confident wouldn't abuse redshirting in order to get their kid an advantage, I also know plenty who would. Not everyone is interested in "playing socially" and lots of people are just out for their own or their kid's interest and could not care at all who else it impacts. Which is why I start giving side eye when I see it normalized for a not-insignificant number of March or April birthdays to be redshirted. I'm sorry, but when a cohort has 10 spring birthdays and 5 of them are redshirted kids, we are not longer in the realm of people redshirting out of necessity. In no world are half of these kids unready for kindergarten. I do think one thing that happens a lot is that one family will redshirt for totally legitimate reasons that might not be obvious to others, and this freaks out other competitive parents who then redshirt out of fear of being left behind. Literally for no other reason than because they heard some other kid with a May birthday is delaying kindergarten. Parents can be huge lemmings. Which is why having stricter cut offs and requiring some kind of justification that is approved by the school makes sense. |
NP I don't disagree that kids are at very different levels, but it has nothing to do with age. Kids should be separated into classrooms based on their ability IMO. And it's reevaluated yearly. Some kids enter K reading books and others don't even speak English, don't know their letters. |
Sorry, but I don’t consider the irrational fear and low likelihood your child *might get teased for being young as a legitimate complaint for when others feel their child should start kindergarten. That is a case by case problem. Your kid could potentially be teased about anything. |
No people have talked about this happening in the past, not hypothetical. And it's not just teasing, it's also shifting the baseline for what is normal or expected in school so that kids who are on time but at the younger end of the cohort come to be seen as "immature" when they are actually developmentally normal. And yes, while teasing is inevitable, it takes on a different flavor when there is a larger age gap between the kids. Being teased by a same age peer is different than being teased by a child 15-18 months older. And in any case, the concern over redshirting is not that it happens at all as that it may be happening too much at this point (it is much more common than it was 20 years ago), so we're actually talking about the impact of being in a classroom where a quarter or half of the kids are redshirted. But whatever, I can tell from the tone of your posts that you don't care and I could come to you with a 10 year study on the impacts of redshirting on grade cohorts that showed a significant impact on on-time kids and you'd still tell me "it's a personal decision, MYOB, the age of the kids in class doesn't matter." |
It's the people redshirting for no discernible reason who are responding to irrational fears of low likelihood events. It's so funny to me that: Concerns from a redshirting parent about their kid being marginalized or struggling due to being a few months younger than peers: Valid Concerns of a non-redshirting parent about their kid being marginalized or struggling due to being a year-plus younger than peers: Invalid |
So why don't schools do this (stricter cut offs)? It seems as if they may have a better sense about what's going on than all the hand wringing over hypothetical and baseless fears other parents have. Where is the data to back up your concerns as legitimate? If you don't trust your school, or the teachers who might get confused over what is appropriate kindergarten behavior, you also don't trust the other parents who might be out to screw you over, I'm not sure what to tell you other than you sound extremely paranoid and anxious. It's not the other parents job to manage your issues around this. |
The problem with this is that readiness for kindergarten (and other grades) is only partly about academics. It's also social and emotional. What do you do with the kid who is reading 1-2 grade levels ahead and totally comfortable with addition and subtraction at age 5, but who struggles with emotional regulation and is small even within their age cohort? Or the kid who is very mature for their age but struggling with sounding decoding even at age 7? These situations are common. That's why using age cohorts makes sense, because while of course there is a distribution of abilities for each of these metrics, generally along a bell curve, if you cluster kids along age cutoffs, you can find a mean and teach to it. Whether you're teaching phonics or how to handle feelings. The idea that you can use redshirting to create classes of kids who are all at the exact same level academically, socially, and emotionally? Impossible. Private schools come closest to this and they do it through a combination of redshirting, counseling out students who deviate too far from the mean, and limiting admissions to students who fit their mold AND who generally have relatively high-SES parents (which means you filter out a lot of kids with delays and behavioral issues). But public schools can't do that. And redshirting/advancing can help with kids on the far ends of the bell curve, but once kids closer to the mean are redshirting, you wind up really messing with the mean in ways that do in fact have negative consequences for other students. Especially true once honors/advanced coursework begins, as aggressive redshirting in a school can shift the baseline for admission to these programs, boxing out on-time kids who would normally be considered advanced but can't compete with kids in their grade who are 18 months older. |
Why does their reason need to be discernible to YOU? It is clear you feel someone else’s child is gaining an advantage over your child and that is the only gripe. They are all learning their alphabet in class and counting colored bears together. The teacher isn’t secretly teaching the 6 yr olds the Pythagorean theorem while your child is left to sort beans |
Some schools are strict about cut-offs, and then you encounter parents trying to make an endrun around it. We're in DCPS and I've known a number of parents who have tried to finagle their way into redshirting, and generally failed because there was no compelling reason why their kids needed to be held back. |
It should be discernible to someone. Why are people worried about the idea of requiring school approval for redshirting decisions? Shouldn't there need to be a documented reason for this? If not, why have age cut offs at all? |
Exactly!!! |