Do you consider redshirting cheating?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Love all the people in this thread who would never let their kids out of a private school or go to a school where their kids are a racial minority or who have a trust fund (!!) braying on about how their kids are learning so much resilience or whatever code word is popular now by being the youngest. Lol. Idiocy.

+1. Anyway they should be happy their kids will learn so much about resilience trying to catch up to the redshirted kids. Should be a win win for everyone

The redshirted kids? Who would have to catch up with them? They are the slow ones.

Then why do you care so much?

Because I believe that children are entitled to equality in public education. That means no public school education loopholes for parents worried about height and feelings etc.

So how do you implement.
that in practice? Redshirting is irrelevant in the face of nearly all other factors. What.do you do to change those? I am a big supporter of equality in education too, but focusing on redshirting as your cause celebre seems idiotic given how statistically rare it is and how in the end it seems not to matter much at all. It makes me think equality in education is not actually what you care about, to be honest.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yes, many lawyers and CEO's like my husband who frankly don't know a thing about appropriate development for a 5 year old. That's why this is a bizarre choice to leave up to parents. As the numbers show, either rich kids are slower, or this practice has a perceived advantage. If it didn't you'd see the redshirting option applied equally across the board.

Look, its not a big deal to admit that you want advantages for your child or that you have fears or worries about their potential.

This again!!! Of course I was worried they wouldn’t succeed as the youngest!!! That’s why I did it. What is wrong with you?

The anti-redshirt people.on this board are not aces with logical thinking, it's true.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yes, many lawyers and CEO's like my husband who frankly don't know a thing about appropriate development for a 5 year old. That's why this is a bizarre choice to leave up to parents. As the numbers show, either rich kids are slower, or this practice has a perceived advantage. If it didn't you'd see the redshirting option applied equally across the board.

Look, its not a big deal to admit that you want advantages for your child or that you have fears or worries about their potential.

This again!!! Of course I was worried they wouldn’t succeed as the youngest!!! That’s why I did it. What is wrong with you?

Nothing. Some think that taking an advantage that others can't take is cheating. I don't care what you call it but you seem totally perplexed why seeking an advantage by holding your child back is viewed as cheating.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yes, many lawyers and CEO's like my husband who frankly don't know a thing about appropriate development for a 5 year old. That's why this is a bizarre choice to leave up to parents. As the numbers show, either rich kids are slower, or this practice has a perceived advantage. If it didn't you'd see the redshirting option applied equally across the board.

Look, its not a big deal to admit that you want advantages for your child or that you have fears or worries about their potential.

This again!!! Of course I was worried they wouldn’t succeed as the youngest!!! That’s why I did it. What is wrong with you?

The anti-redshirt people.on this board are not aces with logical thinking, it's true.

Thats okay. I have smart kids. They can take care of me when I'm old. They will take care of your kids, too, if they need it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Love all the people in this thread who would never let their kids out of a private school or go to a school where their kids are a racial minority or who have a trust fund (!!) braying on about how their kids are learning so much resilience or whatever code word is popular now by being the youngest. Lol. Idiocy.

+1. Anyway they should be happy their kids will learn so much about resilience trying to catch up to the redshirted kids. Should be a win win for everyone

The redshirted kids? Who would have to catch up with them? They are the slow ones.

Then why do you care so much?

Because I believe that children are entitled to equality in public education. That means no public school education loopholes for parents worried about height and feelings etc.

So how do you implement.
that in practice? Redshirting is irrelevant in the face of nearly all other factors. What.do you do to change those? I am a big supporter of equality in education too, but focusing on redshirting as your cause celebre seems idiotic given how statistically rare it is and how in the end it seems not to matter much at all. It makes me think equality in education is not actually what you care about, to be honest.

Well, we lop off some kids at the ankles, to make them all the same height. That way the short kids can still be educated on time. I mean, since your some of the objections raised are that inane, lets make the solutions equally stupid!


I don't have a cause celebre. I'm just answering a question on a forum.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yes, many lawyers and CEO's like my husband who frankly don't know a thing about appropriate development for a 5 year old. That's why this is a bizarre choice to leave up to parents. As the numbers show, either rich kids are slower, or this practice has a perceived advantage. If it didn't you'd see the redshirting option applied equally across the board.

Look, its not a big deal to admit that you want advantages for your child or that you have fears or worries about their potential.

This again!!! Of course I was worried they wouldn’t succeed as the youngest!!! That’s why I did it. What is wrong with you?

Nothing. Some think that taking an advantage that others can't take is cheating. I don't care what you call it but you seem totally perplexed why seeking an advantage by holding your child back is viewed as cheating.

I thought the party line with DCUM anti-redshirt posters was that all redshirted kids were dumb and redshirting didn't matter. But here you are all worried about how it's an advantage, so much so that doing it is cheating (never mind that most school districts freely allow it).

Pick a lane. Honestly sometimes I think the DCUM anti-redshirt crowd should learn basic logic skills as they seem to be sorely lacking.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yes, many lawyers and CEO's like my husband who frankly don't know a thing about appropriate development for a 5 year old. That's why this is a bizarre choice to leave up to parents. As the numbers show, either rich kids are slower, or this practice has a perceived advantage. If it didn't you'd see the redshirting option applied equally across the board.

Look, its not a big deal to admit that you want advantages for your child or that you have fears or worries about their potential.

This again!!! Of course I was worried they wouldn’t succeed as the youngest!!! That’s why I did it. What is wrong with you?

The anti-redshirt people.on this board are not aces with logical thinking, it's true.

Thats okay. I have smart kids. They can take care of me when I'm old. They will take care of your kids, too, if they need it.

That’s right. Call a bunch of 4 year olds dumb again. You have demonstrated excellent decision making on this thread.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Love all the people in this thread who would never let their kids out of a private school or go to a school where their kids are a racial minority or who have a trust fund (!!) braying on about how their kids are learning so much resilience or whatever code word is popular now by being the youngest. Lol. Idiocy.

+1. Anyway they should be happy their kids will learn so much about resilience trying to catch up to the redshirted kids. Should be a win win for everyone

The redshirted kids? Who would have to catch up with them? They are the slow ones.

Then why do you care so much?

Because I believe that children are entitled to equality in public education. That means no public school education loopholes for parents worried about height and feelings etc.

So how do you implement.
that in practice? Redshirting is irrelevant in the face of nearly all other factors. What.do you do to change those? I am a big supporter of equality in education too, but focusing on redshirting as your cause celebre seems idiotic given how statistically rare it is and how in the end it seems not to matter much at all. It makes me think equality in education is not actually what you care about, to be honest.

Well, we lop off some kids at the ankles, to make them all the same height. That way the short kids can still be educated on time. I mean, since your some of the objections raised are that inane, lets make the solutions equally stupid!


I don't have a cause celebre. I'm just answering a question on a forum.

Ah. So, just basic idiocy in action. Okay, carry on.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yes, many lawyers and CEO's like my husband who frankly don't know a thing about appropriate development for a 5 year old. That's why this is a bizarre choice to leave up to parents. As the numbers show, either rich kids are slower, or this practice has a perceived advantage. If it didn't you'd see the redshirting option applied equally across the board.

Look, its not a big deal to admit that you want advantages for your child or that you have fears or worries about their potential.

This again!!! Of course I was worried they wouldn’t succeed as the youngest!!! That’s why I did it. What is wrong with you?

The anti-redshirt people.on this board are not aces with logical thinking, it's true.

Thats okay. I have smart kids. They can take care of me when I'm old. They will take care of your kids, too, if they need it.

That’s right. Call a bunch of 4 year olds dumb again. You have demonstrated excellent decision making on this thread.

No, the kids are innocent. Their parents are the insecure fools.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yes, many lawyers and CEO's like my husband who frankly don't know a thing about appropriate development for a 5 year old. That's why this is a bizarre choice to leave up to parents. As the numbers show, either rich kids are slower, or this practice has a perceived advantage. If it didn't you'd see the redshirting option applied equally across the board.

Look, its not a big deal to admit that you want advantages for your child or that you have fears or worries about their potential.

This again!!! Of course I was worried they wouldn’t succeed as the youngest!!! That’s why I did it. What is wrong with you?

Nothing. Some think that taking an advantage that others can't take is cheating. I don't care what you call it but you seem totally perplexed why seeking an advantage by holding your child back is viewed as cheating.

This isn’t it. I’m more shocked and your inability to see that sometimes we need to make different choices for our kids. I get that am lucky that I can afford to do it, and of course I get that my kid is better off because of it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yes, many lawyers and CEO's like my husband who frankly don't know a thing about appropriate development for a 5 year old. That's why this is a bizarre choice to leave up to parents. As the numbers show, either rich kids are slower, or this practice has a perceived advantage. If it didn't you'd see the redshirting option applied equally across the board.

Look, its not a big deal to admit that you want advantages for your child or that you have fears or worries about their potential.

This again!!! Of course I was worried they wouldn’t succeed as the youngest!!! That’s why I did it. What is wrong with you?

The anti-redshirt people.on this board are not aces with logical thinking, it's true.

Thats okay. I have smart kids. They can take care of me when I'm old. They will take care of your kids, too, if they need it.

That’s right. Call a bunch of 4 year olds dumb again. You have demonstrated excellent decision making on this thread.

No, the kids are innocent. Their parents are the insecure fools.

+100 I don't think it's fair to label kids as slow or dumb because of a decision their parents made. I was redshirted, but had it been up to me, I would have started on time.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yes, many lawyers and CEO's like my husband who frankly don't know a thing about appropriate development for a 5 year old. That's why this is a bizarre choice to leave up to parents. As the numbers show, either rich kids are slower, or this practice has a perceived advantage. If it didn't you'd see the redshirting option applied equally across the board.

Look, its not a big deal to admit that you want advantages for your child or that you have fears or worries about their potential.

This again!!! Of course I was worried they wouldn’t succeed as the youngest!!! That’s why I did it. What is wrong with you?

The anti-redshirt people.on this board are not aces with logical thinking, it's true.

Thats okay. I have smart kids. They can take care of me when I'm old. They will take care of your kids, too, if they need it.

That’s right. Call a bunch of 4 year olds dumb again. You have demonstrated excellent decision making on this thread.

No, the kids are innocent. Their parents are the insecure fools.

The majority of young for their grade kids at our elementary school struggle. It’s just very structured. Not sending is based on the individual situation, not your general “insecure parents”.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yes, many lawyers and CEO's like my husband who frankly don't know a thing about appropriate development for a 5 year old. That's why this is a bizarre choice to leave up to parents. As the numbers show, either rich kids are slower, or this practice has a perceived advantage. If it didn't you'd see the redshirting option applied equally across the board.

Look, its not a big deal to admit that you want advantages for your child or that you have fears or worries about their potential.

This again!!! Of course I was worried they wouldn’t succeed as the youngest!!! That’s why I did it. What is wrong with you?

The anti-redshirt people.on this board are not aces with logical thinking, it's true.

Thats okay. I have smart kids. They can take care of me when I'm old. They will take care of your kids, too, if they need it.

That’s right. Call a bunch of 4 year olds dumb again. You have demonstrated excellent decision making on this thread.

No, the kids are innocent. Their parents are the insecure fools.

Come back and talk to us when you've enrolled your child in a school with a great schools score of 3 or 4 and pulled them out of any gifted programs, external tutoring, and homework help programs. Until then you look like a hypocritical fool.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If you have to manipulate confidence, its unwarranted. That is the point.

Ok, then it’s unwarranted for four-year-olds to be expected to be in kindergarten and Reading, writing, etc. Some can do it, most will struggle and fee like they suck because they are fish trying to climb a tree. Nearly all would be better spent doing something else.

\

Ok, then stop putting 7 year olds in K and let it become 4 year old appropriate again. Some will suck at it their whole life, some will be better at it, just like at 4.

Who is putting 7-year-olds in kindergarten? Or 4-year-olds? At least in Maryland, thanks to Governor Hogan's executive order, the only kids who are 4 on the first day of kindergarten did early entry. If you started on schedule, you're 5 on the first day. If you started with a one-year delay, you're 6. Hypothetically, I suppose, there might be kids who turned 6 between September 1 and the first day after Labor Day (September 5 this school year), and whose parents delayed their entry into kindergarten for a year, but I'm just not going to worry about that, just as I'm not going to worry about giraffes eating my azaleas.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If you have to manipulate confidence, its unwarranted. That is the point.

Ok, then it’s unwarranted for four-year-olds to be expected to be in kindergarten and Reading, writing, etc. Some can do it, most will struggle and fee like they suck because they are fish trying to climb a tree. Nearly all would be better spent doing something else.

\

Ok, then stop putting 7 year olds in K and let it become 4 year old appropriate again. Some will suck at it their whole life, some will be better at it, just like at 4.

Who is putting 7-year-olds in kindergarten? Or 4-year-olds? At least in Maryland, thanks to Governor Hogan's executive order, the only kids who are 4 on the first day of kindergarten did early entry. If you started on schedule, you're 5 on the first day. If you started with a one-year delay, you're 6. Hypothetically, I suppose, there might be kids who turned 6 between September 1 and the first day after Labor Day (September 5 this school year), and whose parents delayed their entry into kindergarten for a year, but I'm just not going to worry about that, just as I'm not going to worry about giraffes eating my azaleas.

Of course there are 6 year olds turning 7 in K, just as there are 5 year olds turning 6.

OP may be concerned with her August/September birthday child, but generally, the concern about redshirting is the children with spring and summer birthdays.