Harvard study about downside of redshirting

[Anonymous]

PP here: just to clarify, I didn't actually care whether our son was among the oldest or not; I had just assumed he would be because of his birthday.

[Anonymous]

This Harvard study is from the point of view of public policy, not from that of education.

[Anonymous]

Most discussions are about boys. How about girls? Do they benefit from delaying kindergarten?

[Anonymous]

Do you want an older 18 year old, or 19 year old girl living under your roof?

[Anonymous]

This may have been said earlier--if so, apologies. I have no problem with individual kids being held back if that is what their parents/teachers deem best. The problem comes when enough people do it to essentially turn it into the de facto norm. There is an "arms race" sort of situation--i.e., people think "Well, X and Y were held back so my child will be small and young in comparison, so we'd better hold him/her back," etc., etc. Already many private schools have a de facto cut-off date of June 1 (some, such as Green Acres, make it official). Our son, who was not redshirted, has an early winter birthday (very early Dec.). Before he started school I was sure he would be one of the oldest--after all, with a Sept. 1 cutoff, he logically should have been among roughly the oldest quarter of kids. Well, not even close! He is smack in the middle of the age spectrum because of all the summer birthday kids being held back. I find that shocking. I agree with the PPs that it is a slippery slope--after all, *someone* has to be the youngest/smallest in the class. The line must be drawn before the norm becomes 6 for kindergarten.

this was exactly what I was trying to get at earlier - you said it much better than I did!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:This may have been said earlier--if so, apologies. I have no problem with individual kids being held back if that is what their parents/teachers deem best. The problem comes when enough people do it to essentially turn it into the de facto norm. There is an "arms race" sort of situation--i.e., people think "Well, X and Y were held back so my child will be small and young in comparison, so we'd better hold him/her back," etc., etc. Already many private schools have a de facto cut-off date of June 1 (some, such as Green Acres, make it official). Our son, who was not redshirted, has an early winter birthday (very early Dec.). Before he started school I was sure he would be one of the oldest--after all, with a Sept. 1 cutoff, he logically should have been among roughly the oldest quarter of kids. Well, not even close! He is smack in the middle of the age spectrum because of all the summer birthday kids being held back. I find that shocking. I agree with the PPs that it is a slippery slope--after all, *someone* has to be the youngest/smallest in the class. The line must be drawn before the norm becomes 6 for kindergarten.

I agree. But for the independent schools in the area, you cannot act as if there is any choice in the matter. The SCHOOLS are deciding where "accepted" kids are placed, and they have all decided "summer birthday" means "next year".

[Anonymous]

I would also add that even though the children may be getting older, the expectations have also ramped up a bit since I was in school nearly thirty-...erm years ago.

I remember learning the alphabet in kindegarten. My son was already starting to read, not because he's brilliant but because that was what they were teaching. The general level of learning in competitive public and private schools has changed dramatically since the 1970s, with all kinds of advanced learning opportunities, etc. I think the schools are encouraging redshirting just to keep up with their neighbors. Come test time, they don't want their first graders to look like they're behind the other schools.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I agree. But for the independent schools in the area, you cannot act as if there is any choice in the matter. The SCHOOLS are deciding where "accepted" kids are placed, and they have all decided "summer birthday" means "next year".

And yet everyone still stresses that they pick the school that is the best fit for their child. If the school won't allow my child to start school when I think he is ready, then it is not the best place for my child. I realize that there are a lot of factors, but this is a big one to me. If a school wants my child to repeat kindergarten without getting to know my child or seeing any evidence other than his birth date (which is within the cut off), I really question their approach to education.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I agree. But for the independent schools in the area, you cannot act as if there is any choice in the matter. The SCHOOLS are deciding where "accepted" kids are placed, and they have all decided "summer birthday" means "next year".

And yet everyone still stresses that they pick the school that is the best fit for their child. If the school won't allow my child to start school when I think he is ready, then it is not the best place for my child. I realize that there are a lot of factors, but this is a big one to me. If a school wants my child to repeat kindergarten without getting to know my child or seeing any evidence other than his birth date (which is within the cut off), I really question their approach to education.

I'm the PP to whom you are responding. You bring up an interesting point. My feeling is that most of the highly sought after independent schools in DC routinely redshirt. I can say that at Beauvoir, I've never met a summer birthday boy in the "correct" grade .

Are there any parents of summer birthday boys at the following schools who have NOT been redshirted?:

Beauvoir
Sidwell
Maret
GDS

[Anonymous]

I can't answer the PP's question but am curious to see if others have opinions. I'm a public school product and parent, and perhaps that is why I don't see any great problem with parents redshirting if they believe it's in their child's best interest. But perhaps it's a different story in private schools, which would explain why there's so much angst (from my quick reads of the private school board, it's a very angst-ridden process) and why parents are so quick to accuse redshirters of trying to gain an unfair advantage. Dunno, but maybe it's one more reason to be glad we chose public and are lucky enough to live in a good district.

[Anonymous]

As some PPs have indicated, I think private schools have helped increase this trend, if not driven it. I see the trend in red-shirting more in areas where greater numbers of kids go to private school OR in neighborhoods where families may start public, but because of the quality of schools want to leave their options open for private later.

And to those that argue people are making deliberate choices about what is best for their individual child's development, I am glad to hear some people are. Unfortunately that is not the the case in the majority of examples I have seen. It seems every week lately I hear the parent of a normally developing one or two year old boy with an early summer birthday state that they will hold their son back (and plan preschool around it so that they can send them to two different kindergartens). They say, "It just makes sense to make sure he isn't the youngest in class." That is when I begin to question the motivation and whether this is truly just "trendy".

[Anonymous]

I think, for some parents, it does make a big difference financially.
In my case, sending my child to a public school for kindergarten (and only paying for a nanny), vs trying for a private school which wished to send her to preK due to her birthday (school tuition PLUS the nanny), was a no-brainer, though if I switch her back later, I wonder if I'll face the same issue....At least I still have that extra 16K stashed away, to pay for tutors if need be...

[Anonymous]

And that extra year of preschool etc DOES come at a cost, if you're not a SAHM...

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I agree. But for the independent schools in the area, you cannot act as if there is any choice in the matter. The SCHOOLS are deciding where "accepted" kids are placed, and they have all decided "summer birthday" means "next year".

I'm the PP to whom you are responding. You bring up an interesting point. My feeling is that most of the highly sought after independent schools in DC routinely redshirt. I can say that at Beauvoir, I've never met a summer birthday boy in the "correct" grade .

Are there any parents of summer birthday boys at the following schools who have NOT been redshirted?:

Beauvoir
Sidwell
Maret
GDS

Chilling true anecdote: an acquaintance's son applied to one of the above schools (don't want to name which one for privacy's sake) for K for this fall. He was accepted, but asked to go into PreK instead, and his birthday is in March--yes, *March*!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
I'm the PP to whom you are responding. You bring up an interesting point. My feeling is that most of the highly sought after independent schools in DC routinely redshirt. I can say that at Beauvoir, I've never met a summer birthday boy in the "correct" grade .

Are there any parents of summer birthday boys at the following schools who have NOT been redshirted?:

Beauvoir
Sidwell
Maret
GDS

Yes, we have a son who is in the "right" grade. My issue on this is not so much with "summer birthdays", but rather when it encroaches earlier, April, March, and yes December from "the year before". There has to be a youngest in each class, but it becomes absurd when it is THAT much younger for artificial reasons.