The data is in. Redshirting makes a difference. The kids get an advantage.

[Anonymous]

My boys are Fall babies, so on the older side for grade. They’re terrible at sports. They got OK grades. They are Ivy legacy with zero chance at attending.

You all are making way too much of this. No matter when your kid starts kindergarten, they will end up where they end up. Parent the child you have. There are no secret fast track tricks. You have no idea what the future holds.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We started our summer kid on time, kid was one of the youngest in the class. The early years were the toughest (the behavioral marks weren't as strong as redshirted peers) but you couldn't tell the age difference by upper elementary. Our kid learned to become a go getter early. Nothing was going to be handed to this kid, no Scooby snack awarded just for being a year or two older. Kid started college at 17, is now in college (honor's college) on the honor rolls and societies.

Never, ever hold your kid. It pays off later!

Interesting anecdote with a data point of one child. My sons had a different experience as some of the oldest in their class and were later top sports recruits due to this advantage. No one gave them a scooby snack for being older, but they were bigger and more physically mature than their peers and this gave them a lot of confidence that their hard work would be rewarded. No regrets sending them to the Ivy leave at 19.

You contradict yourself. They are not working harder, they are bigger and older so it’s not comparable. It’s sad you did not have the confidence in your kid to send them on time and support them. It probably would have been the same outcome if they were talented.

No, it’s a snowball effect. My kids prove Malcolm Gladwell’s point. They were bigger and stronger earlier so they got on the best teams with lots of playing time, which made them even better and want to work harder, which reinforced more playing time and success. His data shows a strong correlation between older players and success at becoming professionals. It doesn’t even out later.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:My boys are Fall babies, so on the older side for grade. They’re terrible at sports. They got OK grades. They are Ivy legacy with zero chance at attending.

You all are making way too much of this. No matter when your kid starts kindergarten, they will end up where they end up. Parent the child you have. There are no secret fast track tricks. You have no idea what the future holds.

Your attitude has likely reduced their self esteem. Thus your input may lack value.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:My boys are Fall babies, so on the older side for grade. They’re terrible at sports. They got OK grades. They are Ivy legacy with zero chance at attending.

You all are making way too much of this. No matter when your kid starts kindergarten, they will end up where they end up. Parent the child you have. There are no secret fast track tricks. You have no idea what the future holds.

+1. I have a November birthday son who is not good at sports despite being one of the oldest on the teams. He does ok academically and is smart but certainly not an outstanding student by any means. My brother, on the other hand, has a September birthday and went on time so he was one of the youngest by a lot. Excellent student and star athlete. You just never know and it’s different for each kid.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My boys are Fall babies, so on the older side for grade. They’re terrible at sports. They got OK grades. They are Ivy legacy with zero chance at attending.

You all are making way too much of this. No matter when your kid starts kindergarten, they will end up where they end up. Parent the child you have. There are no secret fast track tricks. You have no idea what the future holds.

Your attitude has likely reduced their self esteem. Thus your input may lack value.

Idiot, she’s being honest about her kids. The entitlement you’ve likely fostered in your kids won’t help them with anything in life.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We started our summer kid on time, kid was one of the youngest in the class. The early years were the toughest (the behavioral marks weren't as strong as redshirted peers) but you couldn't tell the age difference by upper elementary. Our kid learned to become a go getter early. Nothing was going to be handed to this kid, no Scooby snack awarded just for being a year or two older. Kid started college at 17, is now in college (honor's college) on the honor rolls and societies.

Never, ever hold your kid. It pays off later!

Interesting anecdote with a data point of one child. My sons had a different experience as some of the oldest in their class and were later top sports recruits due to this advantage. No one gave them a scooby snack for being older, but they were bigger and more physically mature than their peers and this gave them a lot of confidence that their hard work would be rewarded. No regrets sending them to the Ivy leave at 19.

You contradict yourself. They are not working harder, they are bigger and older so it’s not comparable. It’s sad you did not have the confidence in your kid to send them on time and support them. It probably would have been the same outcome if they were talented.

So sorry you’re sad. I have a lot of confidence in my kids, and like most of the rest of you in the private school forum I try to put them in the most advantageous position I can that will promote their success. Why else did I spend up to $50k per year on their K-12 education? If I were worried that other people would criticize my family for our privilege I would send them to the local large education factory as young as possible and keep my fingers crossed. Starting them later worked out great for them, but I appreciate that’s not everyone’s choice.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My boys are Fall babies, so on the older side for grade. They’re terrible at sports. They got OK grades. They are Ivy legacy with zero chance at attending.

You all are making way too much of this. No matter when your kid starts kindergarten, they will end up where they end up. Parent the child you have. There are no secret fast track tricks. You have no idea what the future holds.

+1. I have a November birthday son who is not good at sports despite being one of the oldest on the teams. He does ok academically and is smart but certainly not an outstanding student by any means. My brother, on the other hand, has a September birthday and went on time so he was one of the youngest by a lot. Excellent student and star athlete. You just never know and it’s different for each kid.

The answer is to let each parent decide what’s best.

[Anonymous]

So does research actually find that redshirting will provide an academic and/or social advantage for children? The answer may be more complicated than you think.

Research on redshirting suggests that it is associated with a small academic advantage (that is, higher academic test scores), and test scores seem to increase at a greater rate in first and second grade. However, this effect may begin to fade as early as the end of first grade. This research is all correlational, meaning we do not know whether it is redshirting that causes these advantages or if it is simply associated with advantages. The parents that choose to redshirt their children are often different from the parents who do not — most notably they are often the families that can afford to make this choice.

There are some potential disadvantages to redshirting. Redshirting can be expensive because it often requires an extra year of daytime childcare, creating a hardship for many families. It can create unnecessary delays for kids who may benefit more from getting started with school. Also, kids who physically mature earlier than their peers could be bullied for looking different from their peers, and starting in the workforce later in life could be financially costly.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My boys are Fall babies, so on the older side for grade. They’re terrible at sports. They got OK grades. They are Ivy legacy with zero chance at attending.

You all are making way too much of this. No matter when your kid starts kindergarten, they will end up where they end up. Parent the child you have. There are no secret fast track tricks. You have no idea what the future holds.

+1. I have a November birthday son who is not good at sports despite being one of the oldest on the teams. He does ok academically and is smart but certainly not an outstanding student by any means. My brother, on the other hand, has a September birthday and went on time so he was one of the youngest by a lot. Excellent student and star athlete. You just never know and it’s different for each kid.

The answer is to let each parent decide what’s best.

Whatever. The facts are pretty clear that redshirting may be what is best (if you can afford it.)

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:We started our summer kid on time, kid was one of the youngest in the class. The early years were the toughest (the behavioral marks weren't as strong as redshirted peers) but you couldn't tell the age difference by upper elementary. Our kid learned to become a go getter early. Nothing was going to be handed to this kid, no Scooby snack awarded just for being a year or two older. Kid started college at 17, is now in college (honor's college) on the honor rolls and societies.

Never, ever hold your kid. It pays off later!

Pretty broad statement given the differences between kids. Holding ours back as a late summer kid has made a big difference for her.

[Anonymous]

I'm old now and from a time when you started with your entire birth year. I was a November birthday and among the youngest and smallest in my class -- it sucked. At one point, my parents were considering having me skip a grade in elementary. Now, I would have been redshirted and would have been at the middle age wise.

[Anonymous]

Interesting. She says in the clip that it can be attributed to teacher bias. That they focus on the older students. Wonder if there is any attempt to educate teachers if they are harming outcomes of students who weren't redshirted/reclassified?

There is always going to be a cutoff. So what is the solution?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Interesting. She says in the clip that it can be attributed to teacher bias. That they focus on the older students. Wonder if there is any attempt to educate teachers if they are harming outcomes of students who weren't redshirted/reclassified?

There is always going to be a cutoff. So what is the solution?

It I human nature, especially in th younger years because an 18 month age difference in pre-k for example is HUGE and the older kids are just gonna be easier.

[Anonymous]

Honestly, the correlation is between pre-k education, not age.

Behavioral issues are related to lack of exposure.


Every single kid in my DCs pre-k class were developing at the same rate by year 4, and everyone entered kinder that year. There were differences in year 2 and 3, but by year 4 everyone was with the program, or had appropriate interventions.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Honestly, the correlation is between pre-k education, not age.

Behavioral issues are related to lack of exposure.


Every single kid in my DCs pre-k class were developing at the same rate by year 4, and everyone entered kinder that year. There were differences in year 2 and 3, but by year 4 everyone was with the program, or had appropriate interventions.

LOL. Yeah right. 18 months is nothing at age 4. Eyeroll..