This age discrepancy due to "redshirting" is ridiculous

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I taught K for one year and first for 11. I know that redshirting an immature kid is worthwhile.(I'm talking about a child who is within three months of the cutoff.) Redshirting a "slow" child does not pay off.

Unless you also taught middle and high school, you have too narrow a view of redshirting. The young 5 who was redshirted may thrive in 1st and 2nd. Only to flounder in middle or high because he caught up with his age peers years ago, and now feels surrounded by "kids." Or the high schooler who drops out because he's just done with school, whereas keeping him on grade level might have kept him slightly more engaged and slightly more willing to finish school.

Longitudinal studies of retaining children do not indicate beneficial outcomes across the board.

[Anonymous]

Longitudinal studies of retaining children do not indicate beneficial outcomes across the board

I agree with that. But, redshirting a four year old boy is far from retaining. I don't recommend blandket redshirting except for the very young.

[Anonymous]

Middle and high school is where the very young child is at a particular disadvantage.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Middle and high school is where the very young child is at a particular disadvantage.

Yes, I have a neighbor whose child started school in another state where the cut-off date was December 31. The child made the cut-off by only a few days. They moved here, where the child was at least 15 months younger than the oldest in the grade. It was fine at first, but became a huge issue in middle school. Her interests and maturity level matched up much better with the kids in the grade below(who were actually her age) and she ended up being exposed to certain things before she was really ready. If they move again, the mom hopes she can get her back in the correct grade because she sees that it's a better fit for the child.

[Anonymous]

This is an issue where people are missing the forest for the trees. It reminds me of the vaccine issue, where decisions by individual families are starting to have implications for the entire group.

The vast majority of redshirted children are wealthy, white males. This should send up a million red flags for anyone who is parenting any child who is not a privileged, white boy or anyone who cares about bridging the achievement gap. Are we seriously going to allow the system to be co-opted in such a way to confer MORE privilege on white men???? Are poor kids doomed to always be the youngest in the class because their parents can't afford to exploit the loophole? Are girls all doomed to be in the lowest reading groups because the boys are a full year older?

If your child is not ready for public K, by all means, opt out. Put them in private K or keep them home. Use whatever supports you need to get them to where they can succeed in public school. But then you should be required to put your child in first grade.

If you can't get your kid up to speed by first grade, perhaps you need an IEP or a different school. But parents absolutely should not be able to manipulate the public school system to try to give their kids an advantage. Just because that is not what YOU are doing, doesn't mean that is not what everyone else is doing!

PS. I think that a case could be made for redshirting or promoting kids on the extreme edges of the cutoffs either way. Also the preemie kids, of course. But this generalized "all September boys should be redshirted" stuff is extremely worrisome.

[Anonymous]

The vast majority of redshirted children are wealthy, white males

Source?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Middle and high school is where the very young child is at a particular disadvantage.

Yes, I have a neighbor whose child started school in another state where the cut-off date was December 31. The child made the cut-off by only a few days. They moved here, where the child was at least 15 months younger than the oldest in the grade. It was fine at first, but became a huge issue in middle school. Her interests and maturity level matched up much better with the kids in the grade below(who were actually her age) and she ended up being exposed to certain things before she was really ready. If they move again, the mom hopes she can get her back in the correct grade because she sees that it's a better fit for the child.

And my summer b-day son who went to school on time hit puberty early..I am very glad we did not wait a year or he would be totally out of place. He already looks older than many of his peers..with a deep voice and ready to shave in 7th grade. Now of course I had no inkling of that when he was 5...but I just sent him on time knowing that which ever year he went he would still have the same intelligence etc. If you send the earlier year, the child might start out behind or if you wait your child is more likley to get bored and learn less. No perfect answer.

[Anonymous]

PS. I think that a case could be made for redshirting or promoting kids on the extreme edges of the cutoffs either way. Also the preemie kids, of course. But this generalized "all September boys should be redshirted" stuff is extremely worrisome

I think you are welcome to start your September boy. However, as a former K teacher, I would not recommend it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:This is an issue where people are missing the forest for the trees. It reminds me of the vaccine issue, where decisions by individual families are starting to have implications for the entire group.

The vast majority of redshirted children are wealthy, white males. This should send up a million red flags for anyone who is parenting any child who is not a privileged, white boy or anyone who cares about bridging the achievement gap. Are we seriously going to allow the system to be co-opted in such a way to confer MORE privilege on white men???? Are poor kids doomed to always be the youngest in the class because their parents can't afford to exploit the loophole? Are girls all doomed to be in the lowest reading groups because the boys are a full year older?

If your child is not ready for public K, by all means, opt out. Put them in private K or keep them home. Use whatever supports you need to get them to where they can succeed in public school. But then you should be required to put your child in first grade.

If you can't get your kid up to speed by first grade, perhaps you need an IEP or a different school. But parents absolutely should not be able to manipulate the public school system to try to give their kids an advantage. Just because that is not what YOU are doing, doesn't mean that is not what everyone else is doing!

PS. I think that a case could be made for redshirting or promoting kids on the extreme edges of the cutoffs either way. Also the preemie kids, of course. But this generalized "all September boys should be redshirted" stuff is extremely worrisome.

Most wealthy white males that are being redshirted are in schools with other wealth white kids, they are not generally in schools with poor minority kids. By the time they get to college and are around a more diverse group, the advantage of being a year older isn't there anymore. Redshirting in wealthy schools doesn't impact the kids in poorer school who are being judge against other people in their classes. If you really think that by the time kids get to college being a year older makes a difference academically, you are mistaken. By the way, I'm neither white nor male. Don't make this about race.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

The vast majority of redshirted children are wealthy, white males

Source?

Wasn't it Morley Safer?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

+1,000. Either the kindergarten teachers in Virginia are totally incompetent because they can't teach an "immature" child of kindergarten age, or the entire education system has gone off the deep end because they have created a kindergarten curriculum that is fundamentally impossible for 5% - 25% of children (those who are redshirted) to participate in. Or else, parents are gaming the system and the teachers are complicit because they either don't feel like taking on the entitled parents or because they are lazy and don't want to have to create a differentiated learning environment that meets the needs of all 5 year olds.

Which is it?

One of the children I taught and recommended repeat K was just fine academically. But, his interests were those of younger children. He did not fit in socially and he was close to the cutoff age.

Well, in that case, I am going to be in favor of redshirting all kids! Or all boys! Or whatever your lone example proved.

[Anonymous]

Sept kids also have to play soccer with the kids a year behind them. This excludes some kids from a lot of social activities with their grade.

[Anonymous]

One of the children I taught and recommended repeat K was just fine academically. But, his interests were those of younger children. He did not fit in socially and he was close to the cutoff age.

Well, in that case, I am going to be in favor of redshirting all kids! Or all boys! Or whatever your lone example proved.

I only taught K one year. The rest was first grade. I did not redshirt my April boy. I wouldn't recommend that--but it might have helped him. He was immature--not slow, just immature.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

PS. I think that a case could be made for redshirting or promoting kids on the extreme edges of the cutoffs either way. Also the preemie kids, of course. But this generalized "all September boys should be redshirted" stuff is extremely worrisome

I think you are welcome to start your September boy. However, as a former K teacher, I would not recommend it.

And why not? What is so fundamentally wrong with our children that they cannot keep up with their age group? Or is it the kindergarten curriculum that is fundamentally broken? There is no other reason that 5% or more of the cohort can't cut it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

One of the children I taught and recommended repeat K was just fine academically. But, his interests were those of younger children. He did not fit in socially and he was close to the cutoff age.

Well, in that case, I am going to be in favor of redshirting all kids! Or all boys! Or whatever your lone example proved.

I only taught K one year. The rest was first grade. I did not redshirt my April boy. I wouldn't recommend that--but it might have helped him. He was immature--not slow, just immature.

April???? Jesus Christ. You people are unbelievable.