Redshirted and Regretted It?

[Anonymous]

I have a summer birthday 15 y.o. son. He's very bright, and like you, OP, I worried that he'd be bored if we waited a year for him to go to kindergarten. I was wrong. Everything is new and exciting for kindergarteners -- even very academically able kids who've been in preschool for 2 or 3 years are faced with the challenge of learning all about their new environment and the people in it. Moreover, even with MCPS class sizes, we found that his teacher was able to differentiate among kids with different abilities/school readiness/maturity. If you child is curious and wants to learn, he will not be bored.

As for the sports issue, I was a complete nerd in high school and looked down on the jocks. Now, having reared two sports-loving kids (my daughter is by far the best athlete in our family), I've learned how important sports are in helping kids develop determination, resilience, discipline and the ability to work as a team member. This is true regardless of whether you play varsity in high school, D1 in college or pro sports. OP, whatever you decide about when to send your child to kindergarten, I hope you'll encourage his interest in sports. You might even discover, as I did, your inner jockette.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote: OP, whatever you decide about when to send your child to kindergarten, I hope you'll encourage his interest in sports. You might even discover, as I did, your inner jockette.

OP is laughing v. hard at the idea of uncovering an "inner jockette"!! Ha! In all seriousness, though, thank you for your perspective!

[Anonymous]

A PP here. So what you are saying is that we should continue to encourage people to continue to leapfrog children into Kindergarten to the point that what happens?

I have firsthand knowledge of many 6 year-olds in pre-kindergarten. Is this a good thing?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:A PP here. So what you are saying is that we should continue to encourage people to continue to leapfrog children into Kindergarten to the point that what happens?

I have firsthand knowledge of many 6 year-olds in pre-kindergarten. Is this a good thing?

PP and redshirt supporter here...

I would agree with you that having 6-year olds in PK (except for the occasional May birthday) violates the spirit of why a child should have the option of redshirting.

Here's what I would suggest:

Assuming that birthday cut off is Sept 1, I would give parents of all May 1-Aug 30 birthdays the option to redshirt if they, and the school, feel it would mitigate a disadvantage for the child due to their development. Otherwise, if the child is born before May 1, or if the parents and school feel the child is ready for the today's K curriculum, they should stay within their "normal" class.

Any objections to that?

[Anonymous]

No, but that isn't what is happening. I would have no objections if the range in a class were 14-15 months. Sadly it is often up to 18 months which is simply too much.

Your scenario presents no problems in my opinion, but it is already beyond what you suggest.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:No, but that isn't what is happening. I would have no objections if the range in a class were 14-15 months. Sadly it is often up to 18 months which is simply too much.

Your scenario presents no problems in my opinion, but it is already beyond what you suggest.

Well, at least we've found some common ground. Hopefully the number of parents/teachers who are abusing the system is held to a minimum. If you have a, say, January birthday kid who needs to redshirt b/c they are not ready for the K curriculum, then it is likely more of a learning developmental issue than an age developmental issue (they would be 5 yrs 9 months old)... and the child should receive the appropriate support (tutoring, special classes, etc).

I'd hope, and guess, that the vast majority of decisions to redshirt a summer birthday child have been done for the right reasons.

[Anonymous]

Well, my DH still debates this amongst his siblings as they were redshirted and he wasn't - relative to the deadline back then. He feels he would have done better both academically and sports. so the debate never ends. they probably will be 70 years old and still talking about it!

Seriously, our first two were born right after the cut-off and really have done beautifully academically, socially (and in sports for those interested) by being the eldest. Our kids attend private schools and have always been sufficiently stimulated and never bored once. We've always been struck by the youngest (boys) who at least in early levels (and are nearly 12 months younger than oldest in class) - really suffer socially and sometimes academically (holding pencils, focus, etc).

Our third is a very late summer birthday and while he is bright by the dc area measures, I just don't see him anywhere at the same level developmentally as the others. 11 months makes a huge difference. Had he been born just a few weeks later (or on the due date!) - this would not have been an issue. For us, its a clear forward decision to hold him back. But we do feel fortunate to be able to place him in environments where we know he will have great intellectual stimulation. I don't take that for granted as part of the equation.

Per the specific question, we've heard from a lot of friends in similar situations. I've heard often from those who wish they redshirted, those who had to redshirt later (at K, rather than pre-K, at middle school,etc.). I've even heard it from parents who were teachers who wish they had redshirted their childen! I've never heard it once a regret to redshirt. All the folks we are talking to are summer birthdays . . . and mostly boys (for what that is worth)

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:No, but that isn't what is happening. I would have no objections if the range in a class were 14-15 months. Sadly it is often up to 18 months which is simply too much.

Your scenario presents no problems in my opinion, but it is already beyond what you suggest.[/quote

The truth is that ONE size does NOT fit all. Every child develops differently and parents should let go of the absolute youngest cut-off date as the single determining factor for which class there child should enter. For example, I can think of a few children with summer birthdays with older siblings, these kids are leaps and bounds ahead of their pears and should definitely enter the older class. While many children with summer birthdays are not as advanced as children born in late Fall of the previous calendar year who would be their classmates if they simply used the cut-off date to determine which class they entered - and these kids may thrive if they are on the older side for their class.

Although the standard cut-off date for most private schools is August. 31/Sept. 1 (sorry I'm not sure which), it should be understood that the cut-off date simply marks the very youngest a child can be even considered an applicant to a class, but in no way does that mean all children who technically make the cut-off are also developmentally, emotionally and physcially on par with their older peers in the class. These children may benefit from waiting a year before being subjected to the stressors of school. The issue comes down to "readiness" which is very subjective and not always immediately obvious. In many cases there is no right answer or to look at it another way - either choice would work out fine. I urge parents to let go the pre-conceived notion that the cut-off date measures what year their child should enter school, and instead take into consideration and evaluate the manifold social, emotial and physical indicators as to whether their child is better suited to be on the older side for their class or the younger side and then go with their gut.

[Anonymous]

The truth is that ONE size does NOT fit all. Every child develops differently and parents should let go of the absolute youngest cut-off date as the single determining factor for which class there child should enter. For example, I can think of a few children with summer birthdays with older siblings, these kids are leaps and bounds ahead of their pears and should definitely enter the older class. While many children with summer birthdays are not as advanced as children born in late Fall of the previous calendar year who would be their classmates if they simply used the cut-off date to determine which class they entered - and these kids may thrive if they are on the older side for their class.

Although the standard cut-off date for most private schools is August. 31/Sept. 1 (sorry I'm not sure which), it should be understood that the cut-off date simply marks the very youngest a child can be even considered an applicant to a class, but in no way does that mean all children who technically make the cut-off are also developmentally, emotionally and physcially on par with their older peers in the class. These children may benefit from waiting a year before being subjected to the stressors of school. The issue comes down to "readiness" which is very subjective and not always immediately obvious. In many cases there is no right answer or to look at it another way - either choice would work out fine. I urge parents to let go the pre-conceived notion that the cut-off date measures what year their child should enter school, and instead take into consideration and evaluate the manifold social, emotial and physical indicators as to whether their child is better suited to be on the older side for their class or the younger side and then go with their gut.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote: they probably will be 70 years old and still talking about it!

No, they will just be 70 and going into Kindergarten

Summer birthdays are tricky, but at least this poster has NO problem with a grey area mack to May 31 or so. My issue is the Spring and now winter birthdays who are a full cycle older. I think there is more common ground on this thread that some think.

Quite frankly, I do not consider summer birthdays to be redshirting at all.

[Anonymous]

I am just starting to research this issue and it has me thinking...my birthday is May 31 and until now I had never really thought of my birthday being late. Are May birthdays really now considered young enough to redshirt?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:A PP here. So what you are saying is that we should continue to encourage people to continue to leapfrog children into Kindergarten to the point that what happens?

I have firsthand knowledge of many 6 year-olds in pre-kindergarten. Is this a good thing?

6 year olds in PreK? Oh my - that seems like it is going way too far. I feel for folks who are told or believe that their DC is immature, etc. OTOH, I remember a lot of kids in HS who were a year older and in my grade. Most of them were quite restless.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A PP here. So what you are saying is that we should continue to encourage people to continue to leapfrog children into Kindergarten to the point that what happens?

I have firsthand knowledge of many 6 year-olds in pre-kindergarten. Is this a good thing?

6 year olds in PreK? Oh my - that seems like it is going way too far. I feel for folks who are told or believe that their DC is immature, etc. OTOH, I remember a lot of kids in HS who were a year older and in my grade. Most of them were quite restless.

With the exception of special needs children (as defined and diagnosed by a medical doctor), any parent who would let their otherwise typical 6-yr old kid be placed in a pre-k program is a lunatic. I imagine a 20-year old HS senior exacting revenge in the most heinous way.

[Anonymous]

One reason that I do not like redshirting is that in my experience frequently (not always) the parents that chose to redshirt indulge their child in other ways. The reason for the immaturity is about 20/80 younger age and low expectations.... I am a pre-K teacher BTW. Is red-shirting ever a good thing? yes but under very unusual circumstances, for example, adopted as a toddler with no English, lots of health concerns, some kids that were premies by more than 6 weeks and due date was after cutoff, etc. But a child that has been in pre-school and can still not behave appropriately does not need more time, he or she needs more attention (in some cases, this will be greater and more consistent discipline, in other cases more sensitive treatment).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:One reason that I do not like redshirting is that in my experience frequently (not always) the parents that chose to redshirt indulge their child in other ways. The reason for the immaturity is about 20/80 younger age and low expectations.... I am a pre-K teacher BTW. Is red-shirting ever a good thing? yes but under very unusual circumstances, for example, adopted as a toddler with no English, lots of health concerns, some kids that were premies by more than 6 weeks and due date was after cutoff, etc. But a child that has been in pre-school and can still not behave appropriately does not need more time, he or she needs more attention (in some cases, this will be greater and more consistent discipline, in other cases more sensitive treatment).

Interesting point: I've had a few convos with my DH about his DS and her children. As I explained to him, tackling his nephew's issues now will be a lot easier than when he is 15. And another 15 y.o. kid may not be as forgiving than the uncle when the kid takes a swing at him. Not everyone is going to call his parents in to take over the situation....