The data is in. Redshirting makes a difference. The kids get an advantage.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Interesting. She says in the clip that it can be attributed to teacher bias. That they focus on the older students. Wonder if there is any attempt to educate teachers if they are harming outcomes of students who weren't redshirted/reclassified?

There is always going to be a cutoff. So what is the solution?

It I human nature, especially in th younger years because an 18 month age difference in pre-k for example is HUGE and the older kids are just gonna be easier.

But it's only 18 months because of redshirting. If the teachers can't handle the younger students, who fall within the stated birthdates, then the schools need to eliminate redshirting. Or, educate teachers.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Or we can age norm all the standardized test scores. So someone who can sit still for the lesson and test at age 7 is not getting an advantage over the barely 6 year old who still has the wiggles.

standardized test scores are a minimal piece of it.

All the tests in 2nd and 3rd grade that determine G&T eligibility would be part of this. That early testing sets up many kids for the future either way. And you can norm by month of birth and not just year.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Interesting. She says in the clip that it can be attributed to teacher bias. That they focus on the older students. Wonder if there is any attempt to educate teachers if they are harming outcomes of students who weren't redshirted/reclassified?

There is always going to be a cutoff. So what is the solution?

It I human nature, especially in th younger years because an 18 month age difference in pre-k for example is HUGE and the older kids are just gonna be easier.

But it's only 18 months because of redshirting. If the teachers can't handle the younger students, who fall within the stated birthdates, then the schools need to eliminate redshirting. Or, educate teachers.

They can try.....

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My boys are Fall babies, so on the older side for grade. They’re terrible at sports. They got OK grades. They are Ivy legacy with zero chance at attending.

You all are making way too much of this. No matter when your kid starts kindergarten, they will end up where they end up. Parent the child you have. There are no secret fast track tricks. You have no idea what the future holds.

+1. I have a November birthday son who is not good at sports despite being one of the oldest on the teams. He does ok academically and is smart but certainly not an outstanding student by any means. My brother, on the other hand, has a September birthday and went on time so he was one of the youngest by a lot. Excellent student and star athlete. You just never know and it’s different for each kid.

The answer is to let each parent decide what’s best.

Whatever. The facts are pretty clear that redshirting may be what is best (if you can afford it.)

Exactly. Trust that people know their kids and capabilities. It does nobody any good to force a kid not quite ready to start kindergarten.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There is more nuance that the link suggests when making a decision for an individual child. Average trends aren't always the best way to make important parenting decisions. The research also isn't entirely black and white. There are advantages of being young and learning from older students, and there are also disadvantages for a child who isn't challenged.

The field doesn't have the consensus that this thread suggests.

Like what?

Credible studies show that in Montessori mixed-age classrooms, the younger kids are pulled along further by the older kids while the older kids get no benefit. So being in a mixed age group is a benefit to younger kids compared to same-aged peers who aren't around older kids.

Which would strongly imply that a not-redshirted kid who can handle the academics and social changes would do better than a redshirted kid who could have also handled them, all other things being equal.

I'd like to see these credible studies. The beauty of Montessori is that the older children help "teach" the youngers, so they gain mastery over the concepts. I'm a huge believer in the Montessori for this aspect, the early introduction to concrete math concepts and the idea of self-sufficiency learned through chores. I attended as a preschooler and sent my two boys there. Hope to continue the line with my grandchildren on my dime when the time comes.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My boys are Fall babies, so on the older side for grade. They’re terrible at sports. They got OK grades. They are Ivy legacy with zero chance at attending.

You all are making way too much of this. No matter when your kid starts kindergarten, they will end up where they end up. Parent the child you have. There are no secret fast track tricks. You have no idea what the future holds.

+1. I have a November birthday son who is not good at sports despite being one of the oldest on the teams. He does ok academically and is smart but certainly not an outstanding student by any means. My brother, on the other hand, has a September birthday and went on time so he was one of the youngest by a lot. Excellent student and star athlete. You just never know and it’s different for each kid.

The answer is to let each parent decide what’s best.

Whatever. The facts are pretty clear that redshirting may be what is best (if you can afford it.)

Exactly. Trust that people know their kids and capabilities. It does nobody any good to force a kid not quite ready to start kindergarten.

This has nothing to do with people knowing their kids. If you believe it does, you’ll believe anything.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If waiting a few months is advantageous, then waiting 18 months must be even better, right? Why not redshirt for a couple of years? You would also be able to physically dominate the class, as well as mentally.

Seriously... this is not news. Has your young child ever played a sport with a kid 1+ years older? Come on. I guess the title is right though, the kids certainly do get an advantage. Whether you really believe that's best for children is another thing.

It 100 percent provides an advantage in sports to be 12-19 months older than the rest.

Okay, but most sports now have strict guidelines around age. You aren’t going to have a kid who is 19 months older on a sports team unless the parents are lying about the child’s age.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My boys are Fall babies, so on the older side for grade. They’re terrible at sports. They got OK grades. They are Ivy legacy with zero chance at attending.

You all are making way too much of this. No matter when your kid starts kindergarten, they will end up where they end up. Parent the child you have. There are no secret fast track tricks. You have no idea what the future holds.

+1. I have a November birthday son who is not good at sports despite being one of the oldest on the teams. He does ok academically and is smart but certainly not an outstanding student by any means. My brother, on the other hand, has a September birthday and went on time so he was one of the youngest by a lot. Excellent student and star athlete. You just never know and it’s different for each kid.

The answer is to let each parent decide what’s best.

Whatever. The facts are pretty clear that redshirting may be what is best (if you can afford it.)

Exactly. Trust that people know their kids and capabilities. It does nobody any good to force a kid not quite ready to start kindergarten.

If they have no special needs and they are not ready, ever wonder what happened? Either the parents or preschool failed to meet their needs.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If waiting a few months is advantageous, then waiting 18 months must be even better, right? Why not redshirt for a couple of years? You would also be able to physically dominate the class, as well as mentally.

Seriously... this is not news. Has your young child ever played a sport with a kid 1+ years older? Come on. I guess the title is right though, the kids certainly do get an advantage. Whether you really believe that's best for children is another thing.

It 100 percent provides an advantage in sports to be 12-19 months older than the rest.

Okay, but most sports now have strict guidelines around age. You aren’t going to have a kid who is 19 months older on a sports team unless the parents are lying about the child’s age.

For high school sports, you do as it goes by grade, not age.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If waiting a few months is advantageous, then waiting 18 months must be even better, right? Why not redshirt for a couple of years? You would also be able to physically dominate the class, as well as mentally.

Seriously... this is not news. Has your young child ever played a sport with a kid 1+ years older? Come on. I guess the title is right though, the kids certainly do get an advantage. Whether you really believe that's best for children is another thing.

It 100 percent provides an advantage in sports to be 12-19 months older than the rest.

Okay, but most sports now have strict guidelines around age. You aren’t going to have a kid who is 19 months older on a sports team unless the parents are lying about the child’s age.

Wrong. Most sports don’t have strict age guidelines. At school, it is grade level. My child played against another who was well over a year older.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My boys are Fall babies, so on the older side for grade. They’re terrible at sports. They got OK grades. They are Ivy legacy with zero chance at attending.

You all are making way too much of this. No matter when your kid starts kindergarten, they will end up where they end up. Parent the child you have. There are no secret fast track tricks. You have no idea what the future holds.

+1. I have a November birthday son who is not good at sports despite being one of the oldest on the teams. He does ok academically and is smart but certainly not an outstanding student by any means. My brother, on the other hand, has a September birthday and went on time so he was one of the youngest by a lot. Excellent student and star athlete. You just never know and it’s different for each kid.

The answer is to let each parent decide what’s best.

Whatever. The facts are pretty clear that redshirting may be what is best (if you can afford it.)

Exactly. Trust that people know their kids and capabilities. It does nobody any good to force a kid not quite ready to start kindergarten.

If they have no special needs and they are not ready, ever wonder what happened? Either the parents or preschool failed to meet their needs.

Bingo

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We started our summer kid on time, kid was one of the youngest in the class. The early years were the toughest (the behavioral marks weren't as strong as redshirted peers) but you couldn't tell the age difference by upper elementary. Our kid learned to become a go getter early. Nothing was going to be handed to this kid, no Scooby snack awarded just for being a year or two older. Kid started college at 17, is now in college (honor's college) on the honor rolls and societies.

Never, ever hold your kid. It pays off later!

Interesting anecdote with a data point of one child. My sons had a different experience as some of the oldest in their class and were later top sports recruits due to this advantage. No one gave them a scooby snack for being older, but they were bigger and more physically mature than their peers and this gave them a lot of confidence that their hard work would be rewarded. No regrets sending them to the Ivy leave at 19.

You contradict yourself. They are not working harder, they are bigger and older so it’s not comparable. It’s sad you did not have the confidence in your kid to send them on time and support them. It probably would have been the same outcome if they were talented.

So sorry you’re sad. I have a lot of confidence in my kids, and like most of the rest of you in the private school forum I try to put them in the most advantageous position I can that will promote their success. Why else did I spend up to $50k per year on their K-12 education? If I were worried that other people would criticize my family for our privilege I would send them to the local large education factory as young as possible and keep my fingers crossed. Starting them later worked out great for them, but I appreciate that’s not everyone’s choice.

Did you ever stop to think your expensive private holds kids back for their needs, not the kids. Easier on teachers and that allows them to space kids out who they want to take like siblings but they only have limited spots.

Also, come MS and HS, many privates are not that rigorous like they tell you. Especially if kids are not starting Algebra in 6th or 7th.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My boys are Fall babies, so on the older side for grade. They’re terrible at sports. They got OK grades. They are Ivy legacy with zero chance at attending.

You all are making way too much of this. No matter when your kid starts kindergarten, they will end up where they end up. Parent the child you have. There are no secret fast track tricks. You have no idea what the future holds.

+1. I have a November birthday son who is not good at sports despite being one of the oldest on the teams. He does ok academically and is smart but certainly not an outstanding student by any means. My brother, on the other hand, has a September birthday and went on time so he was one of the youngest by a lot. Excellent student and star athlete. You just never know and it’s different for each kid.

The answer is to let each parent decide what’s best.

Whatever. The facts are pretty clear that redshirting may be what is best (if you can afford it.)

Exactly. Trust that people know their kids and capabilities. It does nobody any good to force a kid not quite ready to start kindergarten.

This has nothing to do with people knowing their kids. If you believe it does, you’ll believe anything.

Sure, nothing at all. Busy bodies on the internet should decide where the line in the sand is.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If waiting a few months is advantageous, then waiting 18 months must be even better, right? Why not redshirt for a couple of years? You would also be able to physically dominate the class, as well as mentally.

Seriously... this is not news. Has your young child ever played a sport with a kid 1+ years older? Come on. I guess the title is right though, the kids certainly do get an advantage. Whether you really believe that's best for children is another thing.

It 100 percent provides an advantage in sports to be 12-19 months older than the rest.

AT least club soccer is by birth year, not grade. And, college coaches do not care one bit about HS soccer. They only recruit from top clubs.

So the kid might dominate being a 15-16 year old Freshmen in HS--but where it matters he's still playing with his birth year. Then, a lot of times none of his friends are on his club team because they are all on one a birth year lower.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My boys are Fall babies, so on the older side for grade. They’re terrible at sports. They got OK grades. They are Ivy legacy with zero chance at attending.

You all are making way too much of this. No matter when your kid starts kindergarten, they will end up where they end up. Parent the child you have. There are no secret fast track tricks. You have no idea what the future holds.

+1. I have a November birthday son who is not good at sports despite being one of the oldest on the teams. He does ok academically and is smart but certainly not an outstanding student by any means. My brother, on the other hand, has a September birthday and went on time so he was one of the youngest by a lot. Excellent student and star athlete. You just never know and it’s different for each kid.

The answer is to let each parent decide what’s best.

Whatever. The facts are pretty clear that redshirting may be what is best (if you can afford it.)

Exactly. Trust that people know their kids and capabilities. It does nobody any good to force a kid not quite ready to start kindergarten.

If they have no special needs and they are not ready, ever wonder what happened? Either the parents or preschool failed to meet their needs.

Why would I wonder what happened? I can see how this plays out in the real world with actual people I know. These redshirted kids are anything but failures.