a solution to the redshirting debate?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I've got a brilliant solution. Parents who want their child to be the oldest should conceive in April so that their child is born in January. To be safe, they should probably conceive towards the end of April, in-case their child is born early. So to all those parents of December-born children who are considering redshirting because they're worried about their child being the youngest:

You brought this on yourselves(or rather your child). You decided to conceive in March. I think you ought to own up to your poor planning and send your child the year he or she is supposed to go.

Your birthday is a direct result of the time of year you're born is a direct result of when your parents decided to conceive. It wasn't just something that happened. If you want your kid to be among the oldest, plan ahead of time.

Oh the privilege of fertilty!

+100 I can be a bit prickly but that poster has taken us to a new low.

My child was due in Nov but was born in Aug (very early preemie). Cut off is end of Sept. What do you think was the right choice for him?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I've got a brilliant solution. Parents who want their child to be the oldest should conceive in April so that their child is born in January. To be safe, they should probably conceive towards the end of April, in-case their child is born early. So to all those parents of December-born children who are considering redshirting because they're worried about their child being the youngest:

You brought this on yourselves(or rather your child). You decided to conceive in March. I think you ought to own up to your poor planning and send your child the year he or she is supposed to go.

Your birthday is a direct result of the time of year you're born is a direct result of when your parents decided to conceive. It wasn't just something that happened. If you want your kid to be among the oldest, plan ahead of time.

Oh the privilege of fertilty!

+100 I can be a bit prickly but that poster has taken us to a new low.

My child was due in Nov but was born in Aug (very early preemie). Cut off is end of Sept. What do you think was the right choice for him?

It's what we call tough ****. Besides, parents who have fall kids in areas with a September cut-off should really try to get theirs kids tested in early. I disagree with anything but a calendar cut-off. A September cut-off is just too early and really random. Ideally, you want all the students to be born in the same year.

[Anonymous]

It's what we call tough ****. Besides, parents who have fall kids in areas with a September cut-off should really try to get theirs kids tested in early. I disagree with anything but a calendar cut-off. A September cut-off is just too early and really random. Ideally, you want all the students to be born in the same year.

Why do you care what someone else chooses to do? I did not redshirt my kids, but I would have considered it if they weren't ready.
I think most of the kids redshirted are only a month or two older than the cutoff. I taught K, and I really never noticed that it was a problem. Most people don't redshirt kids who are ready. And, no, it doesn't mean they are dumb or have learning disabilities. It just means they are immature. And, that is a real thing.
You don't know what a child has been through. Certainly, a child who was born two months early is going to have different challenges than one who was at full term. Does that mean he needs to be redshirted? Depends on the kid. You also don't know what other issues may have occurred in the child or his family.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Sounds good to me. There are twins at a public school I will not name who were born in early May and are enormous compared to the others. So ridiculous and everyone talks about it.

But they aren’t enormous because they are 4 or 5 months too old. They’d be big regardless. I am anti redshirting but some of the youngest kids in my two kids’ classes are actually the biggest. And this year neither of them have any redshirted kids I don’t think.

[Anonymous]

Immaturity at age 5-6 is a normal part of child development and balances out bu age 8 or 9.

If I see an older child in a grade, I assume some kind of developmental delay or disability - that there was a reason why this family felt that for the next twelve years their child would be behind their same age peers and unable to catch up as most kids do with normal childhood maturity / development.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

It's what we call tough ****. Besides, parents who have fall kids in areas with a September cut-off should really try to get theirs kids tested in early. I disagree with anything but a calendar cut-off. A September cut-off is just too early and really random. Ideally, you want all the students to be born in the same year.

Why do you care what someone else chooses to do? I did not redshirt my kids, but I would have considered it if they weren't ready.
I think most of the kids redshirted are only a month or two older than the cutoff. I taught K, and I really never noticed that it was a problem. Most people don't redshirt kids who are ready. And, no, it doesn't mean they are dumb or have learning disabilities. It just means they are immature. And, that is a real thing.
You don't know what a child has been through. Certainly, a child who was born two months early is going to have different challenges than one who was at full term. Does that mean he needs to be redshirted? Depends on the kid. You also don't know what other issues may have occurred in the child or his family.

Don't bother. The previous PP is obviously not able to understand higher order thinking and it will distress her.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Immaturity at age 5-6 is a normal part of child development and balances out bu age 8 or 9.

If I see an older child in a grade, I assume some kind of developmental delay or disability - that there was a reason why this family felt that for the next twelve years their child would be behind their same age peers and unable to catch up as most kids do with normal childhood maturity / development.

You know what they say about "assume." This is a great example of someone who has no clue.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Immaturity at age 5-6 is a normal part of child development and balances out bu age 8 or 9.

If I see an older child in a grade, I assume some kind of developmental delay or disability - that there was a reason why this family felt that for the next twelve years their child would be behind their same age peers and unable to catch up as most kids do with normal childhood maturity / development.

You know what they say about "assume." This is a great example of someone who has no clue.

We all make assumptions. You assume your child can't catch up.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I've got a brilliant solution. Parents who want their child to be the oldest should conceive in April so that their child is born in January. To be safe, they should probably conceive towards the end of April, in-case their child is born early. So to all those parents of December-born children who are considering redshirting because they're worried about their child being the youngest:

You brought this on yourselves(or rather your child). You decided to conceive in March. I think you ought to own up to your poor planning and send your child the year he or she is supposed to go.

Your birthday is a direct result of the time of year you're born is a direct result of when your parents decided to conceive. It wasn't just something that happened. If you want your kid to be among the oldest, plan ahead of time.

What if I was raped?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

If I see an older child in a grade, I assume some kind of developmental delay or disability - that there was a reason why this family felt that for the next twelve years their child would be behind their same age peers and unable to catch up as most kids do with normal childhood maturity / development.

If a child was red-shirted, that was their parents' fault, not theirs. How is it fair to judge a child for something that they had no control over? I completely disagree with red-shirting, but I was red-shirted because the decision of what I started school rested completely with my parents. I don't appreciate being labeled for something that wasn't my choice. Had it been up to me, I would have started school on time.

[Anonymous]

Redshirting is super common in my SAHM circle, especially with the youngest child. I think we can all figure out why!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

If I see an older child in a grade, I assume some kind of developmental delay or disability - that there was a reason why this family felt that for the next twelve years their child would be behind their same age peers and unable to catch up as most kids do with normal childhood maturity / development.

If a child was red-shirted, that was their parents' fault, not theirs. How is it fair to judge a child for something that they had no control over? I completely disagree with red-shirting, but I was red-shirted because the decision of what I started school rested completely with my parents. I don't appreciate being labeled for something that wasn't my choice. Had it been up to me, I would have started school on time.

Are you the OP from the other thread? I assume the same about kids who are older in a class, and I say this as a parent who didn't red shirt but then held my august birthday boy back in 1st grade when he faced academic and social struggles. I assume other parents will assume my child was either was struggling or wasn't ready at 5 and that's why he is now the oldest in the class. ITS NO BIG DEAL and it's not a negative thing. And other kids in his now 4th grade class see him as cool for being the oldest. He is not more mature or better academically than his 4th grade peers because he is the oldest. He fits right in. He's where he should be. You are too. Please go talk to a therapist. Start with your school counselor. Tell her your focus on this non-issue and how your are considering colleges based on it. Get a recommendation from her.

THIS site focuses on redshirting because parents are upset that other moms may be trying to get their kid some academic or social advantage by holding their kids back, but this site is just a bunch of talk. It's feeding this crazy narrative in your head. Get off here and go talk to a counselor.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Redshirting is super common in my SAHM circle, especially with the youngest child. I think we can all figure out why!

That’s funny. All of the redshirted kids of SAHMs I know are oldest. All of the youngest are sent on time.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

It's what we call tough ****. Besides, parents who have fall kids in areas with a September cut-off should really try to get theirs kids tested in early. I disagree with anything but a calendar cut-off. A September cut-off is just too early and really random. Ideally, you want all the students to be born in the same year.

Why do you care what someone else chooses to do? I did not redshirt my kids, but I would have considered it if they weren't ready.
I think most of the kids redshirted are only a month or two older than the cutoff. I taught K, and I really never noticed that it was a problem. Most people don't redshirt kids who are ready. And, no, it doesn't mean they are dumb or have learning disabilities. It just means they are immature. And, that is a real thing.
You don't know what a child has been through. Certainly, a child who was born two months early is going to have different challenges than one who was at full term. Does that mean he needs to be redshirted? Depends on the kid. You also don't know what other issues may have occurred in the child or his family.

Don't bother. The previous PP is obviously not able to understand higher order thinking and it will distress her.

+1

Try to ask the redshirt-haters to do basic math. It’s hilarious.

[Anonymous]

I think they should group K classes by age. If they have 100 kids and five classes, each class would represent an age band.

They balance classes for other reasons such as gender or race, no reason they can't add age to the calculation.