Red shirting, again.

[Anonymous]

The issue isn't summer birthdays. While I am not a fan, I can understand why parents 'on the line' would wait for June-August birthdays.

My issue is with the pre June birthdays. At our kids school, there are a significant number of December to May birthdays - from the year before.

This means that there are ranges of ~18 months between youngest and oldest kids in the class. 13-15 months is one thing, but 18 months is absurd.

I would hope that even the most ardent redshirting proponents would understand the complaints of those of us who are experiencing this firsthand.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Actually, my child and I would BOTH be cheating...that was my point. And of course, he would be at the top of the pack--he would be older than everybody else. You're already cheating by holding your child back one year, why should you care if I hold my child back three years? After all, cheating is cheating.

Goodness, I hope your child shows more maturity and comprehension than you do.

[Anonymous]

Why is 18 months absurd? Why not have a class for every unique age in a given year ... all 365 ? Or do you prefer 1 year gaps? One month spreads? 1/2 year gaps/spreads? Why? please justify with data/science , not emotion and tears.

[Anonymous]

I frankly don't care whether you hold your child back 1, 3 or 5 years. I also do not care whether you accelerate your child 1, 3 or 5 years? If you and your child are happy and can cope it's perfect! As for cheating let that be in the eye of the beholder. If you call holding back or accelerating a child cheating ... so be it if you are happy. It is immaterial. You and your child will not be punished either way (holding back or accelerating). There is no jail time. Your academic records and birthdates are transparent so outsiders can make their own judgement.

[Anonymous]

If you held your child back why do you think he will be at the top of the pack intellectually, academically, physically, socially etc?
Do you have any evidence?

My just turned 5 year-old in Kindergarten is at the top of the pack in his class intellectually and I would not have predicated this on the basis of chronological age! Evidence (teacher reports, working with long division and fractions at home, reading independently)

I am certainly not crying and mourning because there are boys and girls 2 years older than him in his class. Imagine how he would feel if a bitched and moaned because he was the youngest kid on the block. By his teacher's account he is not bullied ... in fact his classmates follow his lead.

I am much more concerned with mentoring and guiding him than calculating to beyond the second decimal place how much younger he is than his other classmates. What a waste of valuable time.

[Anonymous]

I agree. I'm not quite sure why people complain about children that are not the same ages as other kids in a classroom whether the discrepancy is even greater than 2 years in either direction. Do WPPSI, WISC, Raven, Terra Nova, ERB, SSAT, SAT, ACT, PSAT, GRE, MCAT, LSAT and the like give a hoot about whether you are younger or older than any of your classmates?

Do people that administer the AP exams care whether you are 12 or 20 years old when you get your score of 4 or 5?

[Anonymous]

Even if all the kids in a classroom were exactly the same age there would be some at the head and tail end of the pack! I'm sure the complainers will concoct another excuse.

[Anonymous]

I'm sure this is an obvious point that has been made elsewhere, but it seems to me more likely that schools are recommending "redshirting" these kids for reasons other than because the child is not "ready" for K (or whatever class s/he is being considered for). Don't schools do this because it (1) makes more money for the school (i.e., another year of tuition), and (2) may be more convenient from an admissions perspective? While I am not an early childhood educator, I am 100% sure that I know whether my DC is ready for K better than an admissions staff that evaluated him for two hours at a playdate. If your child's current preschool teachers are saying he's not "kindergarten ready," well than that's another story.



Again, you are not understanding that, in many cases, it is the school making the recommendation that the summer birthday children be held back and go to another year of Pre-K instead. The parents might disagree, and then the school will simply just reject the child. In the end, we chose to trust the judgment of the educators, who know a whole lot more about early childhood education and kindergarten readiness than we do.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Redshirting = cheating

Again, you are not understanding that, in many cases, it is the school making the recommendation that the summer birthday children be held back and go to another year of Pre-K instead. The parents might disagree, and then the school will simply just reject the child. In the end, we chose to trust the judgment of the educators, who know a whole lot more about early childhood education and kindergarten readiness than we do.

I'm sure this is an obvious point that has been made elsewhere, but it seems to me more likely that schools are recommending "redshirting" these kids for reasons other than because the child is not "ready" for K (or whatever class s/he is being considered for). Don't schools do this because it (1) makes more money for the school (i.e., another year of tuition), and (2) may be more convenient from an admissions perspective? While I am not an early childhood educator, I am 100% sure that I know whether my DC is ready for K better than an admissions staff that evaluated him for two hours at a playdate. If your child's current preschool teachers are saying he's not "kindergarten ready," well than that's another story.

[Anonymous]

You're absolutely correct. There's an inherent conflict of interest here when the enterprise making the recommendations, tacitly or unconscoiusly, stand a financial gain. This is the other side of the issue that cannot be ignored. This is a private institution. The Heads typically make high 6 figure incomes. Similarly, schools advertise their list of favored psychological testers (WPPSI, WISC etc). At $300 to $500 a pop, I'm not sure that all potential conflicts are disclosed to the public. I'm not against this practise, but do feel it is important to disclose potential conflicts of interest up front in these matters. The perverse incentives here encourage more testing (not less, despite the well known limitations) and holding back children (despite the well known adverse effects). A similar analogy is our health care system where similar perverse incentives encourage doctors to perform more procedures, do more imaging, prescribe more drugs and admit more patients into hospital beds; despite evidence for outcomes not commensurate with dollars spent. All stakeholders are rewarded -- in their pocket books.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Redshirting = cheating

Again, you are not understanding that, in many cases, it is the school making the recommendation that the summer birthday children be held back and go to another year of Pre-K instead. The parents might disagree, and then the school will simply just reject the child. In the end, we chose to trust the judgment of the educators, who know a whole lot more about early childhood education and kindergarten readiness than we do.

I'm sure this is an obvious point that has been made elsewhere, but it seems to me more likely that schools are recommending "redshirting" these kids for reasons other than because the child is not "ready" for K (or whatever class s/he is being considered for). Don't schools do this because it (1) makes more money for the school (i.e., another year of tuition), and (2) may be more convenient from an admissions perspective? While I am not an early childhood educator, I am 100% sure that I know whether my DC is ready for K better than an admissions staff that evaluated him for two hours at a playdate. If your child's current preschool teachers are saying he's not "kindergarten ready," well than that's another story.

Yes, in our case, the preschool teachers joined the parade, recommending that DC and several classmates wait a year before beginning kindergarten. And before the cynics weigh in, note that it was not so the preschool could get another year of money out of us. It was clear to all that the preschool program had ended for these kids, and that we were all going on to other, more formal Pre-K/JK programs.

[Anonymous]

If you are redshirting your child, then you have displayed absolutely no maturity at all...

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Actually, my child and I would BOTH be cheating...that was my point. And of course, he would be at the top of the pack--he would be older than everybody else. You're already cheating by holding your child back one year, why should you care if I hold my child back three years? After all, cheating is cheating.

Goodness, I hope your child shows more maturity and comprehension than you do.

[Anonymous]

Wow...there are kids in your DC's class who are 2 years older than everyone else? That's absolutely ridiculous!

Anonymous wrote:If you held your child back why do you think he will be at the top of the pack intellectually, academically, physically, socially etc?
Do you have any evidence?

My just turned 5 year-old in Kindergarten is at the top of the pack in his class intellectually and I would not have predicated this on the basis of chronological age! Evidence (teacher reports, working with long division and fractions at home, reading independently)

I am certainly not crying and mourning because there are boys and girls 2 years older than him in his class. Imagine how he would feel if a bitched and moaned because he was the youngest kid on the block. By his teacher's account he is not bullied ... in fact his classmates follow his lead.

I am much more concerned with mentoring and guiding him than calculating to beyond the second decimal place how much younger he is than his other classmates. What a waste of valuable time.

[Anonymous]

No it's not.

[Anonymous]

There are also kids in his class with disabilities. Do you think this is ridiculous too?