Why is redshirting so common around here?

[Anonymous]

We've been told the paperwork for the one-year exemption is just a formality and that everyone is approved. They don't have time to assess everyone who wants to delay a year and they let the parents decide.

Anonymous wrote:

That's actually not how MCPS does it.

If you will turn 5 between September 2 and October 15, you may apply for early entrance to kindergarten.

http://www.montgomeryschoolsmd.org/departments/forms/pdf/271-6.pdf

If you will have turned 5 by September 1, you may apply for a one-year exemption for delayed entry due to immaturity.

http://www.montgomeryschoolsmd.org/departments/forms/pdf/560-19.pdf

I know that MCPS does not routinely admit children for early entrance to kindergarten. I don't know if MCPS routinely allows children to delay entry for a year due to immaturity.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

This is a good point. We are in MD and I never see redshirting as an issue. But now you've explained why. We likely don't see the same issues as the VA schools.

Kids are redshirted in Va, too. I don't see it as a problem. Personal decision.

Agree. I was just wondering if the people on here who are SO anti-redshirting are in VA and see more redshirted kids than in MD. Who knows. I wish there was some statistics. Because I have a sense it is not statistically significant...

What level must it reach to make it statistically significant to your mind?

From http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Redshirting_%28academic%29 (you can dig deeper to the actually sources, this is an overview)

"The National Center for Education Statistics (NCES) reports that academic redshirting occurs at the rate of about 9% per year among kindergarten-age children. The change has been even larger in first grade: over a period of forty years, the proportion of six-year-olds in first grade went from 96% to 84%."

[Anonymous]

that's interesting. dd is in 4th now but in her k year about 1/3 of the children in her grade in moco were red-shirted which is clearly higher than this national stat (33% v. 9%).

Anonymous wrote:
What level must it reach to make it statistically significant to your mind?

From http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Redshirting_%28academic%29 (you can dig deeper to the actually sources, this is an overview)

"The National Center for Education Statistics (NCES) reports that academic redshirting occurs at the rate of about 9% per year among kindergarten-age children. The change has been even larger in first grade: over a period of forty years, the proportion of six-year-olds in first grade went from 96% to 84%."

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

... red-shirting in order to spare their children that kind of self-esteem blow is not economically feasible for all parents.

What does this mean? Do the public schools require a fee to start a child the next year?

I think it would be wrong for the schools to charge parents a fee to do what they deem best for their children. Parents know their children best and should decide what is right for their own children.

It means that the options are sending your child to public school on time vs. paying for another year of pre-K and/or full-time childcare or keeping your child at home with you (which is not an option for people with paid employment).

Unless someone is struggling economically, it is generally better to do what is best for the child rather than what costs less. What is the good of saving money on child care if the child would be better suited to wait a year?

Kids grow and develop at different rates. Two children can be exactly the same age, but be at very different places in both physical and mental maturity. It's more important to do what is right for an individual child than to try to fit the child into a situation for which he or she is not yet ready.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:that's interesting. dd is in 4th now but in her k year about 1/3 of the children in her grade in moco were red-shirted which is clearly higher than this national stat (33% v. 9%).

Anonymous wrote:
What level must it reach to make it statistically significant to your mind?

From http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Redshirting_%28academic%29 (you can dig deeper to the actually sources, this is an overview)

"The National Center for Education Statistics (NCES) reports that academic redshirting occurs at the rate of about 9% per year among kindergarten-age children. The change has been even larger in first grade: over a period of forty years, the proportion of six-year-olds in first grade went from 96% to 84%."

How did you know everyone's birthday? Seriously - we don't have that info for our kids class.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Unless someone is struggling economically, it is generally better to do what is best for the child rather than what costs less. What is the good of saving money on child care if the child would be better suited to wait a year?

Kids grow and develop at different rates. Two children can be exactly the same age, but be at very different places in both physical and mental maturity. It's more important to do what is right for an individual child than to try to fit the child into a situation for which he or she is not yet ready.

Very many people are struggling economically. "Redshirting" is an issue for the upper middle class.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:We've been told the paperwork for the one-year exemption is just a formality and that everyone is approved. They don't have time to assess everyone who wants to delay a year and they let the parents decide.

That's what I figured, thanks.

(And yet they do have time to assess everyone who wants to start a year early, and they don't let the parents decide...)

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

... red-shirting in order to spare their children that kind of self-esteem blow is not economically feasible for all parents.

What does this mean? Do the public schools require a fee to start a child the next year?

I think it would be wrong for the schools to charge parents a fee to do what they deem best for their children. Parents know their children best and should decide what is right for their own children.

It means that the options are sending your child to public school on time vs. paying for another year of pre-K and/or full-time childcare or keeping your child at home with you (which is not an option for people with paid employment).

Unless someone is struggling economically, it is generally better to do what is best for the child rather than what costs less. What is the good of saving money on child care if the child would be better suited to wait a year?

Kids grow and develop at different rates. Two children can be exactly the same age, but be at very different places in both physical and mental maturity. It's more important to do what is right for an individual child than to try to fit the child into a situation for which he or she is not yet ready.

+1

At our school in VA we estimated 10% of the class was red-shirted. On the high end. 1-2 kids per classes of 21-22.

Birthdays are posted in the classrooms.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

... red-shirting in order to spare their children that kind of self-esteem blow is not economically feasible for all parents.

What does this mean? Do the public schools require a fee to start a child the next year?

I think it would be wrong for the schools to charge parents a fee to do what they deem best for their children. Parents know their children best and should decide what is right for their own children.

It means that the options are sending your child to public school on time vs. paying for another year of pre-K and/or full-time childcare or keeping your child at home with you (which is not an option for people with paid employment).

Unless someone is struggling economically, it is generally better to do what is best for the child rather than what costs less. What is the good of saving money on child care if the child would be better suited to wait a year?

Kids grow and develop at different rates. Two children can be exactly the same age, but be at very different places in both physical and mental maturity. It's more important to do what is right for an individual child than to try to fit the child into a situation for which he or she is not yet ready.

+1

At our school in VA we estimated 10% of the class was red-shirted. On the high end. 1-2 kids per classes of 21-22.

Birthdays are posted in the classrooms.

Birthdays are posted in our room too - but no years. So just the month and day.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

... red-shirting in order to spare their children that kind of self-esteem blow is not economically feasible for all parents.

What does this mean? Do the public schools require a fee to start a child the next year?

I think it would be wrong for the schools to charge parents a fee to do what they deem best for their children. Parents know their children best and should decide what is right for their own children.

It means that the options are sending your child to public school on time vs. paying for another year of pre-K and/or full-time childcare or keeping your child at home with you (which is not an option for people with paid employment).

Unless someone is struggling economically, it is generally better to do what is best for the child rather than what costs less. What is the good of saving money on child care if the child would be better suited to wait a year?

Kids grow and develop at different rates. Two children can be exactly the same age, but be at very different places in both physical and mental maturity. It's more important to do what is right for an individual child than to try to fit the child into a situation for which he or she is not yet ready.

+1

At our school in VA we estimated 10% of the class was red-shirted. On the high end. 1-2 kids per classes of 21-22.

Birthdays are posted in the classrooms.

I think 1 or 2 redshirted kids per class won't have much of an effect overall. But I'm sure someone out there feels differently.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

... red-shirting in order to spare their children that kind of self-esteem blow is not economically feasible for all parents.

What does this mean? Do the public schools require a fee to start a child the next year?

I think it would be wrong for the schools to charge parents a fee to do what they deem best for their children. Parents know their children best and should decide what is right for their own children.

It means that the options are sending your child to public school on time vs. paying for another year of pre-K and/or full-time childcare or keeping your child at home with you (which is not an option for people with paid employment).

Unless someone is struggling economically, it is generally better to do what is best for the child rather than what costs less. What is the good of saving money on child care if the child would be better suited to wait a year?

Kids grow and develop at different rates. Two children can be exactly the same age, but be at very different places in both physical and mental maturity. It's more important to do what is right for an individual child than to try to fit the child into a situation for which he or she is not yet ready.

+1

At our school in VA we estimated 10% of the class was red-shirted. On the high end. 1-2 kids per classes of 21-22.

Birthdays are posted in the classrooms.

Birthdays are posted in our room too - but no years. So just the month and day.

Ours has years too - I was surprised to see that.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

... red-shirting in order to spare their children that kind of self-esteem blow is not economically feasible for all parents.

What does this mean? Do the public schools require a fee to start a child the next year?

I think it would be wrong for the schools to charge parents a fee to do what they deem best for their children. Parents know their children best and should decide what is right for their own children.

It means that the options are sending your child to public school on time vs. paying for another year of pre-K and/or full-time childcare or keeping your child at home with you (which is not an option for people with paid employment).

Unless someone is struggling economically, it is generally better to do what is best for the child rather than what costs less. What is the good of saving money on child care if the child would be better suited to wait a year?

Kids grow and develop at different rates. Two children can be exactly the same age, but be at very different places in both physical and mental maturity. It's more important to do what is right for an individual child than to try to fit the child into a situation for which he or she is not yet ready.

+1

At our school in VA we estimated 10% of the class was red-shirted. On the high end. 1-2 kids per classes of 21-22.

Birthdays are posted in the classrooms.

I think 1 or 2 redshirted kids per class won't have much of an effect overall. But I'm sure someone out there feels differently.

That's how I feel too. You would never pick out who they were either. They aren't towering over the kids or running circles around the other kids socially or academically.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

... red-shirting in order to spare their children that kind of self-esteem blow is not economically feasible for all parents.

What does this mean? Do the public schools require a fee to start a child the next year?

I think it would be wrong for the schools to charge parents a fee to do what they deem best for their children. Parents know their children best and should decide what is right for their own children.

It means that the options are sending your child to public school on time vs. paying for another year of pre-K and/or full-time childcare or keeping your child at home with you (which is not an option for people with paid employment).

Unless someone is struggling economically, it is generally better to do what is best for the child rather than what costs less. What is the good of saving money on child care if the child would be better suited to wait a year?

Kids grow and develop at different rates. Two children can be exactly the same age, but be at very different places in both physical and mental maturity. It's more important to do what is right for an individual child than to try to fit the child into a situation for which he or she is not yet ready.

+1

At our school in VA we estimated 10% of the class was red-shirted. On the high end. 1-2 kids per classes of 21-22.

Birthdays are posted in the classrooms.

I think 1 or 2 redshirted kids per class won't have much of an effect overall. But I'm sure someone out there feels differently.

That's how I feel too. You would never pick out who they were either. They aren't towering over the kids or running circles around the other kids socially or academically.

Good point - just because kids were redshirted does not actually mean that they are at the top of the class academically or bigger than the others. Sometimes we are only talking about kids that are a few weeks older than the ones who went on time.

[Anonymous]

Ours has years too - I was surprised to see that.

What school or general area is this? I've been around schools for 20+ years and never seen this. I'm not doubting you, but I'd be interested to talk to the teacher to learn why years were included. Usually kids just like to know birthdays because birthdays are fun and exciting for them but they're not so interested in the year, just the month and date.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:that's interesting. dd is in 4th now but in her k year about 1/3 of the children in her grade in moco were red-shirted which is clearly higher than this national stat (33% v. 9%).

Anonymous wrote:
What level must it reach to make it statistically significant to your mind?

From http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Redshirting_%28academic%29 (you can dig deeper to the actually sources, this is an overview)

"The National Center for Education Statistics (NCES) reports that academic redshirting occurs at the rate of about 9% per year among kindergarten-age children. The change has been even larger in first grade: over a period of forty years, the proportion of six-year-olds in first grade went from 96% to 84%."

If you look at the wikipedia article, it notes that this is more prevalent in well off communities and private schools. My child's grades were also 1/4th - 1/3rd redshirted.

There are going to be some schools where maybe one child is redshirted, and others where you hit the trend of having summer birthday kids redshirted because that is what's done. If the redshirting were evenly distributed, at 10-15% per class, it might be noticeable but probably wouldn't overall stilt the atmosphere of the class, especially if you accept that most children who are redshirted are redshirted because of academic or emotional immaturity. But redshirting isn't evenly distributed. Some areas it's very common to the point a non redshirted child stands out at least in the early grades. Some areas redshirting is such an anomaly redshirted children stand out and can potentially be stigmatized.

I believe the parents who redshirt who say they made the best choice for their child. I wish they would offer me the same respect when I say redshirting has negatively affected my child's environment.