Forum Index
»
Private & Independent Schools
"Red-Shirting" of kids
![[Post New]](/jforum/templates/default/images/icon_minipost_new.gif){kind=icon}
Anonymous
I do not understand this. Surely it does not matter at that age, and I believe 19 to 20 is a more mature student. I say this because my friends sister got leukemia and missed so much school and repeated a year and was old. She did get cured though, but it took time. |
Anonymous
They're expected to practice what they preach and lead by example lest they be considered hypocritical blowhards. "No YOU'RE not allowed to give your child an advantage (because it might disadvantage MY child.") If you really meant that tripe instead of spewing disingenuous and thinly disguised self-serving tripe, then you'd shut up and lead by example. You think no-one should be allowed to do what's best for their child? Fine. PROVE IT. |
Anonymous
| My, a bit of an overreaction here. |
Anonymous
Any child with a winter birthday is not at the oldest range. That is generally in fall. Now when a student is 18 and as a junior can vote in a presidential election it is odd. Do some propose no guidelines ? Most redshirt boys are the product of parents who want them to be the biggest, best at sports, socially dominating. When that isn't happening grade repeating starts at entry years like 7 and 9. |
Anonymous
| My son's birthday is in early June and I started him in kindegarden when he was 6. Best decision I ever made. He is consistently an honor roll student and for the last three years has been described by his teachers as a natural leader. He is popular, comfortable in his own skin, and quietly confident. Yes, these are traits that are somewhat inherent, but I believe having the extra time with him at home, in addition to at least an extra year of physical and emotional growth, are most responsible for his academic and social success. If you have a child who skews physically small or emotionally immature, that extra year is the best gift you could give them. The trouble is, so many parents view adequate or superior academic performance as either synonymous with emotional maturity or the ultimate indication of it. Neither is true. |
Anonymous
I don't know if that's quite correct. I know that what gets talked about a lot is parents redshirting boys to give them some perceived advantage over other students. However, I suspect that the vast majority of redshirted kids were held back because their parents (and perhaps the schools) did not think the children were really ready for K or whatever the next grade might be, and so were just trying to avoid putting the child in a disadvantaged situation. I have not followed all these redshirting threads too closely, so I apologize if I missed it, but has anyone posted any credible data on the percentage of children that actually are redshirted (as opposed to just anecdotal reports)? Perhaps I am completely wrong in my belief that redshirting has not reached the epidemic proportions everyone here thinks. If so, could someone please link to that data? |
Anonymous
|
PP here. I did a little research on my own. No clear answer, but here are some useful links for others to enjoy. The CBS News article suggests that 10% of age-eligible kids were held back in some recent year, but the abstract to the NCES report it cites indicates that in 1996 6% of age-eligible kids were held back. If I am reading correctly, then there has been only a 4% increase in hold-backs since 1996? This does not seem too concerning. Perhaps I am reading the stats wrong.
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2007/06/20/earlyshow/living/parenting/main2955107.shtml http://nces.ed.gov/pubsearch/pubsinfo.asp?pubid=2006064 http://blogs.wsj.com/juggle/2007/06/05/should-you-hold-your-kids-back-to-give-them-an-academic-edge/ http://www.newamerica.net/blog/early-ed-watch/2008/confused-about-kindergarten-redshirting-5346 http://matthewyglesias.theatlantic.com/archives/2008/07/the_cost_of_redshirting.php |
Anonymous
|
"Most redshirt boys are the product of parents who want them to be the biggest, best at sports, socially dominating."
This statement infuriates me. My son, who is currently projected to be all of 5'6", will NEVER be the biggest, and frankly, he's not all that interested in sports which is fine with me. Making gross generalizations about people's motives is irresponsible and just plain wrong. I am sure there are isolated instances where parents have made the decision to wait a year based on some or all of those factors, but the vast majority of people I have spoken to (a lot as I agonize over this decision), have not. What continues to baffle me is why so many people who have never and will never have to consider these issues for their own children are so opinionated. The way I see it, it's a personal decision, period. If you feel that strongly, it seems to me your spiteful rhetoric would be better directed at those with actual authority to change the system rather than at those of us struggling to make the right choices for our children. Go troll another thread. |
Anonymous
|
Um, trolling is starting another topic on an existing thread. this thread IS about redshirting.
To answer your point, the reason parents are concerned about the choices others are making is because it DOES impact their "right age" children. Teachers are forced to teach a grade above to students who should be a grade above. It causes "right age" children to wonder what is wrong with them. It causes "right age" children to feel inferior on the playground and in the classroom when "big Johnny" is reading books in Kindergarten. There are issues down stream as well in terms of disparity in adolescence and the social context that is affected in the jr. high school years. It causes additional anxiety when some kids are driving a year to 18 months sooner than others (maybe that is a good thing, LOL). But yes, the decisions parents are making impact the entire school community, and as the PP suggests, it is the administrators who need to formulate a policy so all parents are on the same page in terms of the age ranges and expectations for each grade. |
Anonymous
Only posting actual reasons parents gave me for redshirting. No need to be hostile. That is just the reality among competitive well-off families. Middle and lower income families usually send their children to school ASAP . |
Anonymous
Congratulations for proving PP 12:59's point: practice what you preach and lead by example lest you be considered a hypocritical blowhard. "No YOU'RE not allowed to give your child an advantage (because it might disadvantage MY child.") If you really meant that tripe instead of spewing disingenuous and thinly disguised self-serving tripe, then you'd shut up and lead by example. You think no-one should be allowed to do what's best for their child? Fine. PROVE IT." You seem to be having a hard time with the put up or shut up part. Blowhard. |
Anonymous
Congratulations, PP. I'm sure it was a decision you pondered over carefully and you were driven by your desire to do the best you could for your child. That's great that it worked out well for him and for you. He's lucky to have such a devoted parent. |
Anonymous
|
The issue being debated in this thread is the conflict between individual good and the collective/social good.
Red shirting might benefit the occasional child with developmental difficulties. But its become a trend, and no matter what people say, its not always agonizing to the parents doing it. I see this all around me. Introverted/not-so-bright/shy/less athletic children are being held back in the hopes that the extra year will magically make them extroverted, precocious, and athletic. Sometimes it does help - particularly with the cognitive stuff simply because 12 months is a large chunk of a child's life. (Theoretically, everyone should redshirt their kids. This is why it has become a trend.) Often, my bet is that it does nothing. Or the effects wear off once all the children learn to read. As a trend, it goes against the collective good - of the class, the school, the community, and ultimately the country. (That was the point of the Harvard study.) So everyone on this thread is right. The individual parent is buying a real or theoretical advantage for the child. The people arguing against it are arguing for the common good. The school system is failing everyone by not regulating this redshirting madness. There should be a balance between the individual good and the common good. |
Anonymous
|
For those who make judgments about parents who red-shirt, please consider that many parents would never have considered red-shirting if we didn't feel forced into it by both the current state of affairs and by messaging from several private schools in the area.
My husband and I were each the youngest in our classes, and I'm perfectly happy with my son being the youngest in his class by a year. Given his parentage and general disposition, will likely be the smallest guy in the class however old he is, and is highly unlikely to focus on any sport that is contingent on size. When it turns out that he'll be with kids 18 months older than he is, though, that just doesn't seem to make sense to send him at the "correct age." Also, this red-shirting trend made me so frustrated that I met with the admissions director of a local private school whom I know and asked her if she could be candid. She replied that it really is a case-by-case determination, but that the bulk of the time the school recommends that summer boys stay back a year. So the choice is to red-shirt and go to the school you prefer (or the the school your kid gets accepted to in this environment) or send your kid to another school (assuming that any schools you'd want to send him to let's him in to K without red-shirting, which I'm sure varies from school district to school district) over the matter. Personally, I don't like the red-shirting trend, but I'm not going to make a school decision (that will likely impact younger siblings as well) based on it. It's really frustrating all around. |
Anonymous
|
I agree it is frustrating as a parent, particularly one who is not interested in red-shirting for whatever reason. Schools are very forceful about wanting older kids, and in a way that is entirely uncaring about the individual child and his/her abilities. I don't understand what this is all about or where it is coming from!! Why does a Sept child HAVE to go to independent schools a year late? Why can't it be based on that kid's abilities?! What is up with this nuttiness?
|