TO THE MOM WHO RED SHIRTED HER SON AND COMPLAINS HE'S NOT CHALLENGED

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Here is a great article that smashes all these ADHD issues and rationalizations of red-shirting.


http://www.newyorker.com/tech/elements/youngest-kid-smartest-kid

Well, the article also says "younger students benefit from having older peers" so not sure why everyone is freaking out.

Not peers that are 1.5 and 2 years older than them. Peers that are a "couple of months" older than them.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Here is a great article that smashes all these ADHD issues and rationalizations of red-shirting.


http://www.newyorker.com/tech/elements/youngest-kid-smartest-kid

Well, the article also says "younger students benefit from having older peers" so not sure why everyone is freaking out.

Not peers that are 1.5 and 2 years older than them. Peers that are a "couple of months" older than them.

Anecdotally, my immature child behaves much much better around his cousins, who are several years older than him, than he does around his little brothers and sisters.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Here is a great article that smashes all these ADHD issues and rationalizations of red-shirting.


http://www.newyorker.com/tech/elements/youngest-kid-smartest-kid

Well, the article also says "younger students benefit from having older peers" so not sure why everyone is freaking out.

Also that article suffers from huge leaps of logic. It assumes (unwarrantedly) that redshirting is due to nothing more than a desire to game the system. I don't see the evidence for that at all. It does not focus on kids who already have any developmental issues. And it does not address the increased risk of ADHD diagnosis based on relative age, which has been found in many studies. This is just more crappy science journalism.

More recent research shows that " a delayed school start dramatically reduces hyperactivity at ages 7 and 11, a measure with strong negative links to student achievement."

http://www.sole-jole.org/15074.pdf

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Here is a great article that smashes all these ADHD issues and rationalizations of red-shirting.


http://www.newyorker.com/tech/elements/youngest-kid-smartest-kid

Well, the article also says "younger students benefit from having older peers" so not sure why everyone is freaking out.

Not peers that are 1.5 and 2 years older than them. Peers that are a "couple of months" older than them.

Vast majority of redshirted kids are late summer birthdays, meaning that the natural age range is increased from 12 months to maybe a max of 15 months. 2 years older is a very rare child, and most likely due to a diagnosed developmental issue.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP again- Red shirting spring birthdays in our area is becoming increasingly common- or at least it seems to me.
The mom that caused me to write the OP is "looking" now at gifted programs for her son because our school isn't challenging him. She's very quick to point out that her son has a genius IQ.

Could you imagine the poor teachers who have to deal with this obnoxious person? Red-shirting parents are the worst combo of helicoptering and tiger.

You know what's obnoxious? Judging and imaging that you know what's going on with this kid and this family. You don't like the mom and how she talks, I get it. You're inordinately threatened by a kid who has a higher IQ than your kid and might outperform them on tests, I get it. What you are NOT seeing is the concerns about focus, social-emotional skills, developmental issues perhaps due to prematurity, that can all lead to redshirting even when the child has excellent cognitive skills. Often times developmental issues are almost defined by radical uneveness in skill developments -- like advanced language and cognition, but very delayed motor skills and poor impulse control. Is redshirting the right solution for these kinds of kids in the long term? I don't pretend to know. But I can hardly blame parents for redshirting at a young age, when success in the classroom is so heavily defined these days by social skills, behavioral control, and fine-motor skills, as opposed to pure cognitive and language skills.

Most of those things will not improve repeating another year of standard preschool with younger peers. The problem is most families do not let their kids climb, play, and socialize (and make mistakes) on their own. They follow them around the playground, initiate and control playdates, decisions and step in on any possible fights. They give tablets more often than fine motor toys. You might want to read up on Peter Gray and the Freedom to Learn. Most parents, not just those that redshirt, need to wake-up and realize that they are ruining their kid's fine motor, social and behavioral skills. It starts as early as infants being propped up in chairs and saucers instead of on their bellies.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP again- Red shirting spring birthdays in our area is becoming increasingly common- or at least it seems to me.
The mom that caused me to write the OP is "looking" now at gifted programs for her son because our school isn't challenging him. She's very quick to point out that her son has a genius IQ.

Could you imagine the poor teachers who have to deal with this obnoxious person? Red-shirting parents are the worst combo of helicoptering and tiger.

You know what's obnoxious? Judging and imaging that you know what's going on with this kid and this family. You don't like the mom and how she talks, I get it. You're inordinately threatened by a kid who has a higher IQ than your kid and might outperform them on tests, I get it. What you are NOT seeing is the concerns about focus, social-emotional skills, developmental issues perhaps due to prematurity, that can all lead to redshirting even when the child has excellent cognitive skills. Often times developmental issues are almost defined by radical uneveness in skill developments -- like advanced language and cognition, but very delayed motor skills and poor impulse control. Is redshirting the right solution for these kinds of kids in the long term? I don't pretend to know. But I can hardly blame parents for redshirting at a young age, when success in the classroom is so heavily defined these days by social skills, behavioral control, and fine-motor skills, as opposed to pure cognitive and language skills.

Most of those things will not improve repeating another year of standard preschool with younger peers. The problem is most families do not let their kids climb, play, and socialize (and make mistakes) on their own. They follow them around the playground, initiate and control playdates, decisions and step in on any possible fights. They give tablets more often than fine motor toys. You might want to read up on Peter Gray and the Freedom to Learn. Most parents, not just those that redshirt, need to wake-up and realize that they are ruining their kid's fine motor, social and behavioral skills. It starts as early as infants being propped up in chairs and saucers instead of on their bellies.

I just can't even ... this is possibly the dumbest post in this thread.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Here is a great article that smashes all these ADHD issues and rationalizations of red-shirting.


http://www.newyorker.com/tech/elements/youngest-kid-smartest-kid

Well, the article also says "younger students benefit from having older peers" so not sure why everyone is freaking out.

Not peers that are 1.5 and 2 years older than them. Peers that are a "couple of months" older than them.

Vast majority of redshirted kids are late summer birthdays, meaning that the natural age range is increased from 12 months to maybe a max of 15 months. 2 years older is a very rare child, and most likely due to a diagnosed developmental issue.

My child is in 1st and will turn 7 in late August. An on time child. We have already celebrated four 8yr old birthdays in her class. The earliest being March 4th. It is not just 12 months. Even my oldest is in 9th grade and she has been to two Sweet 16 parties already. She doesn't turn 15 until Sept 7th (an on time child)

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I do not understand holding a child back for social reasons. If you hold a child back and keep him or her with kids 1-2 years younger, you cannot complain they are immature as you are keeping them with kids who are far younger and do not have the social skills that can help them advance. Your chid will always be behind age/socially as they haven't been given the opportunity to mature and be with peers who may be what others consider more "mature."

You're right, you don't understand. Full stop.

+100 - It's ridiculous to assume that parents are making these decisions only for competitive reasons. We deliberated for 2 years and finally decided to red shirt our DS with a June birthday. It was an agonizing decision but the better option for us. I suspect that those of you complaining about the red shirted kid are also complaining about the disruptive, immature kid in the class and your school's inability to effectively manage him.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP again- Red shirting spring birthdays in our area is becoming increasingly common- or at least it seems to me.
The mom that caused me to write the OP is "looking" now at gifted programs for her son because our school isn't challenging him. She's very quick to point out that her son has a genius IQ.

Could you imagine the poor teachers who have to deal with this obnoxious person? Red-shirting parents are the worst combo of helicoptering and tiger.

You know what's obnoxious? Judging and imaging that you know what's going on with this kid and this family. You don't like the mom and how she talks, I get it. You're inordinately threatened by a kid who has a higher IQ than your kid and might outperform them on tests, I get it. What you are NOT seeing is the concerns about focus, social-emotional skills, developmental issues perhaps due to prematurity, that can all lead to redshirting even when the child has excellent cognitive skills. Often times developmental issues are almost defined by radical uneveness in skill developments -- like advanced language and cognition, but very delayed motor skills and poor impulse control. Is redshirting the right solution for these kinds of kids in the long term? I don't pretend to know. But I can hardly blame parents for redshirting at a young age, when success in the classroom is so heavily defined these days by social skills, behavioral control, and fine-motor skills, as opposed to pure cognitive and language skills.

Most of those things will not improve repeating another year of standard preschool with younger peers. The problem is most families do not let their kids climb, play, and socialize (and make mistakes) on their own. They follow them around the playground, initiate and control playdates, decisions and step in on any possible fights. They give tablets more often than fine motor toys. You might want to read up on Peter Gray and the Freedom to Learn. Most parents, not just those that redshirt, need to wake-up and realize that they are ruining their kid's fine motor, social and behavioral skills. It starts as early as infants being propped up in chairs and saucers instead of on their bellies.

I just can't even ... this is possibly the dumbest post in this thread.

So you don't think technology and hover parents (always stepping in to help) have anything to do with the increasing poor fine motor skills that preschool and K teachers are seeing?

You don't think that many kids are socially immature and have behavior issues because they aren't given years of free time to play outside in a non-structured environment before K?

You don't think the increase in ADHD has to do with a current parent's mindset of perfection and the increasing technology and instant gratification kids are demanding?

I sure do.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yep. April was the oldest in my sons class. Plus, I personally know of other kids in different grades who are April/May. My friend- her son was *tiny tiny* with some speech problems- was an April/May too and she held him back. Although I could honestly see it in her situation.

How big of you to give your stamp of approval to the redshirting that you approve of

Why, thank you! *smooches*

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I do not understand holding a child back for social reasons. If you hold a child back and keep him or her with kids 1-2 years younger, you cannot complain they are immature as you are keeping them with kids who are far younger and do not have the social skills that can help them advance. Your chid will always be behind age/socially as they haven't been given the opportunity to mature and be with peers who may be what others consider more "mature."

You're right, you don't understand. Full stop.

+100 - It's ridiculous to assume that parents are making these decisions only for competitive reasons. We deliberated for 2 years and finally decided to red shirt our DS with a June birthday. It was an agonizing decision but the better option for us. I suspect that those of you complaining about the red shirted kid are also complaining about the disruptive, immature kid in the class and your school's inability to effectively manage him.

Nope, the disruptive kids are always the red-shirted kids - at least that I have seen in my 3 kids classes.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I do not understand holding a child back for social reasons. If you hold a child back and keep him or her with kids 1-2 years younger, you cannot complain they are immature as you are keeping them with kids who are far younger and do not have the social skills that can help them advance. Your chid will always be behind age/socially as they haven't been given the opportunity to mature and be with peers who may be what others consider more "mature."

You're right, you don't understand. Full stop.

+100 - It's ridiculous to assume that parents are making these decisions only for competitive reasons. We deliberated for 2 years and finally decided to red shirt our DS with a June birthday. It was an agonizing decision but the better option for us. I suspect that those of you complaining about the red shirted kid are also complaining about the disruptive, immature kid in the class and your school's inability to effectively manage him.

OK, that's fine, just don't complain how school is not challenging for your kid. That's what this thread is about.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP again- Red shirting spring birthdays in our area is becoming increasingly common- or at least it seems to me.
The mom that caused me to write the OP is "looking" now at gifted programs for her son because our school isn't challenging him. She's very quick to point out that her son has a genius IQ.

Could you imagine the poor teachers who have to deal with this obnoxious person? Red-shirting parents are the worst combo of helicoptering and tiger.

You know what's obnoxious? Judging and imaging that you know what's going on with this kid and this family. You don't like the mom and how she talks, I get it. You're inordinately threatened by a kid who has a higher IQ than your kid and might outperform them on tests, I get it. What you are NOT seeing is the concerns about focus, social-emotional skills, developmental issues perhaps due to prematurity, that can all lead to redshirting even when the child has excellent cognitive skills. Often times developmental issues are almost defined by radical uneveness in skill developments -- like advanced language and cognition, but very delayed motor skills and poor impulse control. Is redshirting the right solution for these kinds of kids in the long term? I don't pretend to know. But I can hardly blame parents for redshirting at a young age, when success in the classroom is so heavily defined these days by social skills, behavioral control, and fine-motor skills, as opposed to pure cognitive and language skills.

Most of those things will not improve repeating another year of standard preschool with younger peers. The problem is most families do not let their kids climb, play, and socialize (and make mistakes) on their own. They follow them around the playground, initiate and control playdates, decisions and step in on any possible fights. They give tablets more often than fine motor toys. You might want to read up on Peter Gray and the Freedom to Learn. Most parents, not just those that redshirt, need to wake-up and realize that they are ruining their kid's fine motor, social and behavioral skills. It starts as early as infants being propped up in chairs and saucers instead of on their bellies.

I just can't even ... this is possibly the dumbest post in this thread.

Says a mom that red-shirted but doesn't want to take any blame. "My child was born this way"

[Anonymous]

Interesting from that article:

But then, something happens: after that early boost, their performance takes a nosedive. By the time they get to eighth grade, any disparity has largely evened out—and, by college, younger students repeatedly outperform older ones in any given year.

[Anonymous]

To the ADHD mom, we get it. But you need to understand is that we are seeing upwards of 20-25% of a classroom with vanity redshirts and it has a material effect on the social and academic experience in the grade.