Enough is enough with the redshirting!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I have a Covid K kid. The year was a waste.

I enrolled her in 1st grade anyway figuring she would catch up.

She did.

I figure those that redshirted wanted to anyway and were just looking for an acceptable social excuse.

Most kids go to at least two years of preschool and maybe one year of pre-K. The smart kids are bored to tears with kindergarten. I wouldn’t have worried if my child was in Kindergarten during Covid. I would find other, more useful activities and keep her on track.

Actually most kids don't go to preschool at all. You are talking about wealthy children.

Not quite.

Thanks to universal PK programs and other free or subsidized preschool programs, preschool is very common for poor and working class kids. Though interestingly the percent of kids who attend preschool had risen to a majority (51%) in 2019 but then fell by nearly 10 percentage points by 2021. It's crept up again but is still not as high as it was pre-Covid. This is largely due to loss of availability -- the number of preschools shrank during that time and the number of available preschool seats in remaining programs also sank.

Daycare kids almost always attend some form of preschool. The 3s and 4s rooms at most daycares will teach kids most of what you'd expect them to learn in a formal preschool program -- how to share and get along with other kids, how to follow directions and listen, and how to take care of basic personal responsibilities (independent bathroom use and keeping track of personal belongings). They will generally also help kids develop some of the fine motor skills that are a precursor for writing, if not beginning to teach writing already. And it's increasingly common for daycare programs to also offer pre-literacy and early math skills (knowing letters and numbers, starting to associate sounds with letters), just as these early academics are also more common at formal preschools.

Wealthy kids are more likely to have a SAHM or a nanny. Sometimes wealthier families will do at least partial day preschool (2-5 days a week) in addition to have a SAHP or nanny, but there is often less focus on independence and less emphasis on academics in these programs. Some SAHPs and nannies will provide some of these skills at home but it's variable, and it's not really possible for a child to develop the classroom skills piece until they are in a classroom. So it's actually more common for the kids of wealthier families to start K with no or limited preschool and with fewer of the skills people associate with kindergarten readiness.

It is also more common for wealthy families to delay K. Redshirting is almost exclusively the purview of wealth families who can afford an additional year of childcare. The vast majority of poor, working class, and lower middle class kids are in group childcare from a young age which includes some kind of preschool program before kindergarten. These groups are less likely to fret about whether their children are "ready" for K because their kids have been in classroom environments for years already, and because even if they have some qualms about their young-for-the-grade K student being ready, they have to get over it as an additional year of childcare is a major burden, especially if there are any other kids in the family.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-oldest-kids-in-the-class-may-get-an-edge-in-college-admissions-1503052268

That says oldest in class and doesn’t stratify by whether that’s natural or redshirting.

So no.

There is always going to be an older group in any K class and yes, that older group shows an advantage.

It doesn’t follow that those who redshirt have the same benefits or more as those naturally older kids.

So much weird gaslighting. Just say it’s an advantage. That’s the annoying part. The denying it’s an advantage in any way.

It may be an advantage to be the oldest but it is a huge disadvantage to send a not ready very young kid to kindergarten. Shouldn’t be surprising which side parents err on.

Let’s say my kid starts K at age 4, turning five in late September. He is the youngest in his class. He will absolutely have a natural disadvantage against the kids who are already five some of whom will turn six end of year. Parents and pre K teacher think it’s best for him to wait. Why should I have to deal with this lottery of a birthday and suck up my “disadvantage” rather than make the choice to send my child next year when he is five? Because it would upset OP? Too bad.

The issue isn’t this. It’s kids who are born in the early part of the year red shirting to have an outrageous advantage.

Ah so some redshirting is ok aka if you agree with it.

NP to this thread.

Obviously the debate is over where to draw the line. Even you have a line. Do you think kids should be allowed to start K at age 7, at their parents' discretion, because they "aren't ready" (even if no demonstrated developmental delays)? Are you okay with your kid attending 4th grade with kids in full blown puberty? Do you want your children going to high school with kids who can drink legally? I'm guessing no.

So everyone has a breaking point with redshirting. It's fine and reasonable until it's not and everyone draws that line in a slightly different place but they all draw the line *somewhere*.

For me I think the cut off should be September 1st with flexibility with parents of summer birthdays (late June through August) because there's no obvious solution for what to do with summer birthdays -- some kids are ready for K as a young 5 and some aren't. A redshirted summer birthday will never be much older than other kids in class so you preserve a reasonably narrow age range for each cohort this way. No more than 14 months apart.

Alternatively we should upend the entire school system and use the Montessori approach of mixed grade classrooms for early elementary in order to remove this issue. But that would require retraining all teachers and totally altering the curriculum so I get this will never happen.

There should also be a streamlined national cut off. I live in NY where were the last area with a December 31st cut off and I’d prefer not to send my kids with fall birthdays to kindergarten at 4 years old, but also concerned about redshirting in our small bubble, especially for my daughter.

PP here and I agree it should be standardized. We live in a district that is strict about redshirting -- you can't even redshirt a summer birthday without either some game playing to get around the cut offs or a demonstrated developmental delay. This was fine for us because our kid with an August birthday was ready for K "on time." However we will be moving to another part of the country when hat child is in 6th grade, and I am stressed because redshirting is far more prevalent in that area. But we were between a rock and a hard place -- even if we'd known about this move when we started her in K, I think it would have been challenging to redshirt her (people we know who did this without demonstrated delays sent their kids to private school for two years of K in order to fulfill state requirements that their 5 year old be enrolled in school but also to force the public school to let their kid do 1st grade at age 7). But where we are going she'll be a major outlier, the youngest in her grade and 90%+ of kids in her grade will be a minimum of 3-4 months older (with a large percent being 13-14 months older). And this change will hit in 6th grade as kids are entering puberty -- I feel like we are bracing for impact at this point.

It is what it is and we'll live but it's a crappy situation that feels totally unnecessary.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-oldest-kids-in-the-class-may-get-an-edge-in-college-admissions-1503052268

That says oldest in class and doesn’t stratify by whether that’s natural or redshirting.

So no.

There is always going to be an older group in any K class and yes, that older group shows an advantage.

It doesn’t follow that those who redshirt have the same benefits or more as those naturally older kids.

So much weird gaslighting. Just say it’s an advantage. That’s the annoying part. The denying it’s an advantage in any way.

It may be an advantage to be the oldest but it is a huge disadvantage to send a not ready very young kid to kindergarten. Shouldn’t be surprising which side parents err on.

Let’s say my kid starts K at age 4, turning five in late September. He is the youngest in his class. He will absolutely have a natural disadvantage against the kids who are already five some of whom will turn six end of year. Parents and pre K teacher think it’s best for him to wait. Why should I have to deal with this lottery of a birthday and suck up my “disadvantage” rather than make the choice to send my child next year when he is five? Because it would upset OP? Too bad.

The issue isn’t this. It’s kids who are born in the early part of the year red shirting to have an outrageous advantage.

Ah so some redshirting is ok aka if you agree with it.

NP to this thread.

Obviously the debate is over where to draw the line. Even you have a line. Do you think kids should be allowed to start K at age 7, at their parents' discretion, because they "aren't ready" (even if no demonstrated developmental delays)? Are you okay with your kid attending 4th grade with kids in full blown puberty? Do you want your children going to high school with kids who can drink legally? I'm guessing no.

So everyone has a breaking point with redshirting. It's fine and reasonable until it's not and everyone draws that line in a slightly different place but they all draw the line *somewhere*.

For me I think the cut off should be September 1st with flexibility with parents of summer birthdays (late June through August) because there's no obvious solution for what to do with summer birthdays -- some kids are ready for K as a young 5 and some aren't. A redshirted summer birthday will never be much older than other kids in class so you preserve a reasonably narrow age range for each cohort this way. No more than 14 months apart.

Alternatively we should upend the entire school system and use the Montessori approach of mixed grade classrooms for early elementary in order to remove this issue. But that would require retraining all teachers and totally altering the curriculum so I get this will never happen.

There should also be a streamlined national cut off. I live in NY where were the last area with a December 31st cut off and I’d prefer not to send my kids with fall birthdays to kindergarten at 4 years old, but also concerned about redshirting in our small bubble, especially for my daughter.

PP here and I agree it should be standardized. We live in a district that is strict about redshirting -- you can't even redshirt a summer birthday without either some game playing to get around the cut offs or a demonstrated developmental delay. This was fine for us because our kid with an August birthday was ready for K "on time." However we will be moving to another part of the country when hat child is in 6th grade, and I am stressed because redshirting is far more prevalent in that area. But we were between a rock and a hard place -- even if we'd known about this move when we started her in K, I think it would have been challenging to redshirt her (people we know who did this without demonstrated delays sent their kids to private school for two years of K in order to fulfill state requirements that their 5 year old be enrolled in school but also to force the public school to let their kid do 1st grade at age 7). But where we are going she'll be a major outlier, the youngest in her grade and 90%+ of kids in her grade will be a minimum of 3-4 months older (with a large percent being 13-14 months older). And this change will hit in 6th grade as kids are entering puberty -- I feel like we are bracing for impact at this point.

It is what it is and we'll live but it's a crappy situation that feels totally unnecessary.

I would redshirt

[Anonymous]

I redshirted my mid-September. Kindergarten would have been virtual and he had a chronic illness that could keep him out of school at the time. I am happy I did it because we found out he was adhd and like many boys his age is behind in executive functioning skills. I think some parents aren’t sure what to do to when their kid is either academically or socially behind their peers and they feel the only option is redshirting. I think excessive redshirting is a symptom of the problem that parents feel that is their only option.

[Anonymous]

We are at an International School now and there are definitely already 1/2 10 year olds in my August 2016 boy's class. We weren't giving up free PreK 3 in DC so he definitely started on time. I mostly find it a bit annoying when the boys are talking about mature subjects too early.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I redshirted my mid-September. Kindergarten would have been virtual and he had a chronic illness that could keep him out of school at the time. I am happy I did it because we found out he was adhd and like many boys his age is behind in executive functioning skills. I think some parents aren’t sure what to do to when their kid is either academically or socially behind their peers and they feel the only option is redshirting. I think excessive redshirting is a symptom of the problem that parents feel that is their only option.

I understand this, health is of course most important, but redshirting an ADHD kid is typically a bad idea. It's worse because they are older and get bored and act out more.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There are two ten year olds in my child’s third grade class. When will a school draw a line with this?

In practical terms, how does this impact you?

I'm not someone who redshirted BTW.

In practical terms, my kids school offers advanced math and ELA to the top 25% of the grade. And that group is like, every single red shirted kid plus maybe 10 others. (Not NP). My kid is fine and is in the advanced group anyways, but you shouldn’t take an advanced spot away from a child if you were made to repeat K or held back from K voluntarily. You’re not an advanced and gifted learner you’re just supposed to be in the next grade up.

But they are doing the same academics as the other kids. They haven’t had an extra year of learning just an extra year of playing in preschool.

And their brains are a full year more mature. There is a reason that (most) kids can’t learn to read at age 3 but (most) kids can learn to read at age 6. Their brains have developed. There is a reason why my August kids cogat score said he was 99th percentile for age but 94th percentile for grade.

JFC. Love how you had to include the specific numbers, mom. How many months old was your snowflake when he rolled over? Walked? Talked? I’ll bet you have always monitored how he stacks up against his peers

That is a weird reply. I'm pointing out that my child would have been chosen for GT if done by age, but it was done by grade, and he missed the cut off because he was young. If I'd held him back a year, he'd have been in GT. That's the point. The redshirted kids can "look" very gifted when in reality, they aren't. They're just being compared to a younger cohort. And the OP's question was "how does it affect you", and I'm answering. They are taking a finite resource from other children by purposely holding them back to compete with younger, smaller, children in school and in sports.

If GT was that important to you, then, you should have redshirted.

In the other hand you don’t know that the next years’ classmates won’t have had 26 kids who score better and only 25 slots. Then who will you blame?

I agree. Another who doesn’t understand a program that is incorrectly called “gifted and talented”. If it was a true gifted program it would have very high standards and there may be no students in the class who qualify or ten students who qualify. It would vary every year. Instead they simply take the kids who tested highest. Your child didn’t test high enough. Don’t blame kids who are older in the class.

My oldest daughter was at a school where the cut off date was December 31. She has many friends who went to kindergarten at age four and turned five months later. Many boys delayed kindergarten for a year but we weren’t aware of girls taking another year.

They changed to October cut off shortly after to be more in line with most schools. Ridiculous to think it matters with a bright developmentally typical child. It probably helped that there were no “gifted” programs in the schools. The AP classes, the ones that really mattered, were filled with students graduating at 17 and 18.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I redshirted my mid-September. Kindergarten would have been virtual and he had a chronic illness that could keep him out of school at the time. I am happy I did it because we found out he was adhd and like many boys his age is behind in executive functioning skills. I think some parents aren’t sure what to do to when their kid is either academically or socially behind their peers and they feel the only option is redshirting. I think excessive redshirting is a symptom of the problem that parents feel that is their only option.

My child had significant delays and a fall kid and went. If anything it helped. If your kids are behind you don’t ignore it and you help and get them help. It’s easier to hold back than put in the effort.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There are two ten year olds in my child’s third grade class. When will a school draw a line with this?

In practical terms, how does this impact you?

I'm not someone who redshirted BTW.

In practical terms, my kids school offers advanced math and ELA to the top 25% of the grade. And that group is like, every single red shirted kid plus maybe 10 others. (Not NP). My kid is fine and is in the advanced group anyways, but you shouldn’t take an advanced spot away from a child if you were made to repeat K or held back from K voluntarily. You’re not an advanced and gifted learner you’re just supposed to be in the next grade up.

But they are doing the same academics as the other kids. They haven’t had an extra year of learning just an extra year of playing in preschool.

And their brains are a full year more mature. There is a reason that (most) kids can’t learn to read at age 3 but (most) kids can learn to read at age 6. Their brains have developed. There is a reason why my August kids cogat score said he was 99th percentile for age but 94th percentile for grade.

JFC. Love how you had to include the specific numbers, mom. How many months old was your snowflake when he rolled over? Walked? Talked? I’ll bet you have always monitored how he stacks up against his peers

That is a weird reply. I'm pointing out that my child would have been chosen for GT if done by age, but it was done by grade, and he missed the cut off because he was young. If I'd held him back a year, he'd have been in GT. That's the point. The redshirted kids can "look" very gifted when in reality, they aren't. They're just being compared to a younger cohort. And the OP's question was "how does it affect you", and I'm answering. They are taking a finite resource from other children by purposely holding them back to compete with younger, smaller, children in school and in sports.

If GT was that important to you, then, you should have redshirted.

In the other hand you don’t know that the next years’ classmates won’t have had 26 kids who score better and only 25 slots. Then who will you blame?

I agree. Another who doesn’t understand a program that is incorrectly called “gifted and talented”. If it was a true gifted program it would have very high standards and there may be no students in the class who qualify or ten students who qualify. It would vary every year. Instead they simply take the kids who tested highest. Your child didn’t test high enough. Don’t blame kids who are older in the class.

My oldest daughter was at a school where the cut off date was December 31. She has many friends who went to kindergarten at age four and turned five months later. Many boys delayed kindergarten for a year but we weren’t aware of girls taking another year.

They changed to October cut off shortly after to be more in line with most schools. Ridiculous to think it matters with a bright developmentally typical child. It probably helped that there were no “gifted” programs in the schools. The AP classes, the ones that really mattered, were filled with students graduating at 17 and 18.

Every school district does it differently. Here there are few slots and no one fully knows how the kids are chosen.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I have a Covid K kid. The year was a waste.

I enrolled her in 1st grade anyway figuring she would catch up.

She did.

I figure those that redshirted wanted to anyway and were just looking for an acceptable social excuse.

Most kids go to at least two years of preschool and maybe one year of pre-K. The smart kids are bored to tears with kindergarten. I wouldn’t have worried if my child was in Kindergarten during Covid. I would find other, more useful activities and keep her on track.

Actually most kids don't go to preschool at all. You are talking about wealthy children.

That’s not true. Almost 90% of DC students go to public preschools. Others go to private preschools. Public preschools are in every state and full time pre-K for all students is in about 10 or 15 states with many city schools having pre-K the same as Kindergarten. The states are getting there in terms of equality for all preschoolers.

But most kids do some type of preschool.

[Anonymous]

NP. Wow, this thread grew fast. I assume the crazy anti-redshirters are frothing again? I don’t have the energy to wade through it.

OP: This is not a serious issue, speaking as a parent of teens and young adults. I did not redshirt. In fact one of my kids is a young spring birthday and has often been the youngest or close to it. I read the absolute meltdowns about redshirting from anti-redshirting posters and understand why kids have no resiliency these days — their parents can’t model it. Crazy, sad people.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-oldest-kids-in-the-class-may-get-an-edge-in-college-admissions-1503052268

That says oldest in class and doesn’t stratify by whether that’s natural or redshirting.

So no.

There is always going to be an older group in any K class and yes, that older group shows an advantage.

It doesn’t follow that those who redshirt have the same benefits or more as those naturally older kids.

So much weird gaslighting. Just say it’s an advantage. That’s the annoying part. The denying it’s an advantage in any way.

It may be an advantage to be the oldest but it is a huge disadvantage to send a not ready very young kid to kindergarten. Shouldn’t be surprising which side parents err on.

Let’s say my kid starts K at age 4, turning five in late September. He is the youngest in his class. He will absolutely have a natural disadvantage against the kids who are already five some of whom will turn six end of year. Parents and pre K teacher think it’s best for him to wait. Why should I have to deal with this lottery of a birthday and suck up my “disadvantage” rather than make the choice to send my child next year when he is five? Because it would upset OP? Too bad.

The issue isn’t this. It’s kids who are born in the early part of the year red shirting to have an outrageous advantage.

Ah so some redshirting is ok aka if you agree with it.

NP to this thread.

Obviously the debate is over where to draw the line. Even you have a line. Do you think kids should be allowed to start K at age 7, at their parents' discretion, because they "aren't ready" (even if no demonstrated developmental delays)? Are you okay with your kid attending 4th grade with kids in full blown puberty? Do you want your children going to high school with kids who can drink legally? I'm guessing no.

So everyone has a breaking point with redshirting. It's fine and reasonable until it's not and everyone draws that line in a slightly different place but they all draw the line *somewhere*.

For me I think the cut off should be September 1st with flexibility with parents of summer birthdays (late June through August) because there's no obvious solution for what to do with summer birthdays -- some kids are ready for K as a young 5 and some aren't. A redshirted summer birthday will never be much older than other kids in class so you preserve a reasonably narrow age range for each cohort this way. No more than 14 months apart.

Alternatively we should upend the entire school system and use the Montessori approach of mixed grade classrooms for early elementary in order to remove this issue. But that would require retraining all teachers and totally altering the curriculum so I get this will never happen.

Schools and counties have already drawn the lines. This thread is about OP not liking what happened when other parents followed the exact same rules that she did but made different choices within those rules. That’s a level of control over other children and families it is never going to be acceptable to try to have.

If OP had been prevented from starting her June birthday a year later she would have a valid complaint. She made a choice to send a young five and now she has to live with the outcomes.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I have a Covid K kid. The year was a waste.

I enrolled her in 1st grade anyway figuring she would catch up.

She did.

I figure those that redshirted wanted to anyway and were just looking for an acceptable social excuse.

Most kids go to at least two years of preschool and maybe one year of pre-K. The smart kids are bored to tears with kindergarten. I wouldn’t have worried if my child was in Kindergarten during Covid. I would find other, more useful activities and keep her on track.

Actually most kids don't go to preschool at all. You are talking about wealthy children.

That’s not true. Almost 90% of DC students go to public preschools. Others go to private preschools. Public preschools are in every state and full time pre-K for all students is in about 10 or 15 states with many city schools having pre-K the same as Kindergarten. The states are getting there in terms of equality for all preschoolers.

But most kids do some type of preschool.

Most kids do go to preschool, sometimes its called day care. Some don't as its $$$.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I redshirted my mid-September. Kindergarten would have been virtual and he had a chronic illness that could keep him out of school at the time. I am happy I did it because we found out he was adhd and like many boys his age is behind in executive functioning skills. I think some parents aren’t sure what to do to when their kid is either academically or socially behind their peers and they feel the only option is redshirting. I think excessive redshirting is a symptom of the problem that parents feel that is their only option.

I understand this, health is of course most important, but redshirting an ADHD kid is typically a bad idea. It's worse because they are older and get bored and act out more.

Flat out wrong. ADHD is an executive function delay and the extra time in preschool is beneficial not to mention it allows more time for therapy and medical intervention.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I redshirted my mid-September. Kindergarten would have been virtual and he had a chronic illness that could keep him out of school at the time. I am happy I did it because we found out he was adhd and like many boys his age is behind in executive functioning skills. I think some parents aren’t sure what to do to when their kid is either academically or socially behind their peers and they feel the only option is redshirting. I think excessive redshirting is a symptom of the problem that parents feel that is their only option.

My child had significant delays and a fall kid and went. If anything it helped. If your kids are behind you don’t ignore it and you help and get them help. It’s easier to hold back than put in the effort.

People paying for an extra year of preschool are also likely paying for treatment.