Mandatory Kindergarten Increases Redshirting?

[Anonymous]

Does mandatory Kindergarten increase redshirting?

Aside from the people who are concerned about outside-the-norm delays, there are a group of pro-redshirters who want to give their children "the gift of time" or "let them have their childhood." If Kindergarten were not required (as it is in Maryland), would those parents be willing to enter their children in 1st grade with the appropriate age cohort, having kept them out of formal education during their Kindergarten year?

Those children would then have had an "extra" year of childhood, but also still be in the standard class for their birthdate.

[Anonymous]

That is a hypothesis you can test, since as of 2012, the following 44 states did not require kindergarten: Alabama, Alaska, Arizona, California, Colorado, Florida, Georgia, Hawaii, Idaho, Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Kentucky, Maine, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Mississippi, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New York, North Carolina, North Dakota, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Texas, Utah, Vermont, Washington, Wisconsin, Wyoming.

http://nces.ed.gov/programs/statereform/tab5_3.asp

[Anonymous]

^whoops, 34 states do not require kindergarten!

[Anonymous]

I think what they expect kids to learn increases redshirting. I am so thankful my son has a November birthday. I didn't have to make a choice regarding redshirting, but he is older in his class. All the reading, writing, and math he has to learn are definitely a challenge for him.

[Anonymous]

who in the hell doesn't send their children to kindergarten in 2015?

[Anonymous]

Issue is that so much is covered in K that it'd be tough to start in 1st. Especially coming from a play-based preschool. I'm guessing that people who pick academic preschools send on time. Or early if they can.

[Anonymous]

who in the hell doesn't send their children to kindergarten in 2015?

I think almost everyone does--but it is not mandatory. In fact, school is not mandatory in most states until 7, I think.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Does mandatory Kindergarten increase redshirting?

Aside from the people who are concerned about outside-the-norm delays, there are a group of pro-redshirters who want to give their children "the gift of time" or "let them have their childhood." If Kindergarten were not required (as it is in Maryland), would those parents be willing to enter their children in 1st grade with the appropriate age cohort, having kept them out of formal education during their Kindergarten year?

Those children would then have had an "extra" year of childhood, but also still be in the standard class for their birthdate.

From reading the other redshirt thread, it sounded like people who redshirt want their kids to go to kindergarten, but with what they consider to be a more an age appropriate curriculum.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
From reading the other redshirt thread, it sounded like people who redshirt want their kids to go to kindergarten, but with what they consider to be a more an age appropriate curriculum.

If K weren't mandatory, you could keep them in their lovely preschool or at home, or whatever is working for the family, for "Kindergarten" and then start them in First Grade the following year.

I am sympathetic towards the belief that our K curriculum has requirements that are beyond the norms of childhood development. The push for reading, for example, when brain research tells us children will normally learn to read at 4-8, is a mistake and puts pressure on families whose children just aren't developmentally ready for that. But perhaps because of large classes and the institutional devotion to learning through reading, children must be fluent readers by 3rd grade in order to keep up. We are not graduating children from HS who are more thoroughly educated or academically competitive than we were decades ago, so this early push in K trails off. In my experience with my children, first grade duplicated much of what children had learned in K. I believe my children could have skipped K and been successful in first.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Does mandatory Kindergarten increase redshirting?

Aside from the people who are concerned about outside-the-norm delays, there are a group of pro-redshirters who want to give their children "the gift of time" or "let them have their childhood." If Kindergarten were not required (as it is in Maryland), would those parents be willing to enter their children in 1st grade with the appropriate age cohort, having kept them out of formal education during their Kindergarten year?

Those children would then have had an "extra" year of childhood, but also still be in the standard class for their birthdate.

From reading the other redshirt thread, it sounded like people who redshirt want their kids to go to kindergarten, but with what they consider to be a more an age appropriate curriculum.

That is also the same reason that people are against redshirting. If all of the children are the same age in a class, even the ones who are "immature for age," then the class will be taught on an age-appropriate level, including for chidren who are young for age or immature for age. The expectations will be age-appropriate, instead of appropriate for age-eligible and delayed children.

[Anonymous]

I believe my children could have skipped K and been successful in first.

Not all children could. K is the old first--and getting more so by the year. Just look at the Common Core objectives.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Does mandatory Kindergarten increase redshirting?

Aside from the people who are concerned about outside-the-norm delays, there are a group of pro-redshirters who want to give their children "the gift of time" or "let them have their childhood." If Kindergarten were not required (as it is in Maryland), would those parents be willing to enter their children in 1st grade with the appropriate age cohort, having kept them out of formal education during their Kindergarten year?

Those children would then have had an "extra" year of childhood, but also still be in the standard class for their birthdate.

From reading the other redshirt thread, it sounded like people who redshirt want their kids to go to kindergarten, but with what they consider to be a more an age appropriate curriculum.

That is also the same reason that people are against redshirting. If all of the children are the same age in a class, even the ones who are "immature for age," then the class will be taught on an age-appropriate level, including for chidren who are young for age or immature for age. The expectations will be age-appropriate, instead of appropriate for age-eligible and delayed children.

I disagree. If kids weren't resshirted, the curriculum would be the same. Set by schools pushing academics earlier in hopes it will improve test scores in later grades once standardized testing starts. I do not believe the curriculum is a function of redshirting, the other way around IMO.

[Anonymous]

My child could easily skip K. He is a September/held back child. We put him in a preschool that has academics so he wouldn't fall completely behind given he was already reading and had strong academics prior to starting there. It makes no sense having 6 year olds starting K. with very young 5s.

Maybe we should go to the universal preschool where we start academics at 4. If parents aren't able/willing to start reading and basic math skills at home, then we have to rely on the schools. If too many kids are coming into school not knowing, then the solution is to provide preschool that provides it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Does mandatory Kindergarten increase redshirting?

Aside from the people who are concerned about outside-the-norm delays, there are a group of pro-redshirters who want to give their children "the gift of time" or "let them have their childhood." If Kindergarten were not required (as it is in Maryland), would those parents be willing to enter their children in 1st grade with the appropriate age cohort, having kept them out of formal education during their Kindergarten year?

Those children would then have had an "extra" year of childhood, but also still be in the standard class for their birthdate.

From reading the other redshirt thread, it sounded like people who redshirt want their kids to go to kindergarten, but with what they consider to be a more an age appropriate curriculum.

That is also the same reason that people are against redshirting. If all of the children are the same age in a class, even the ones who are "immature for age," then the class will be taught on an age-appropriate level, including for chidren who are young for age or immature for age. The expectations will be age-appropriate, instead of appropriate for age-eligible and delayed children.

I disagree. If kids weren't resshirted, the curriculum would be the same. Set by schools pushing academics earlier in hopes it will improve test scores in later grades once standardized testing starts. I do not believe the curriculum is a function of redshirting, the other way around IMO.

+1

But the curriculum is not the hard part. It the amount of it compared to play that is the problem. Too much structure!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Does mandatory Kindergarten increase redshirting?

Aside from the people who are concerned about outside-the-norm delays, there are a group of pro-redshirters who want to give their children "the gift of time" or "let them have their childhood." If Kindergarten were not required (as it is in Maryland), would those parents be willing to enter their children in 1st grade with the appropriate age cohort, having kept them out of formal education during their Kindergarten year?

Those children would then have had an "extra" year of childhood, but also still be in the standard class for their birthdate.

From reading the other redshirt thread, it sounded like people who redshirt want their kids to go to kindergarten, but with what they consider to be a more an age appropriate curriculum.

That is also the same reason that people are against redshirting. If all of the children are the same age in a class, even the ones who are "immature for age," then the class will be taught on an age-appropriate level, including for chidren who are young for age or immature for age. The expectations will be age-appropriate, instead of appropriate for age-eligible and delayed children.

I disagree. If kids weren't resshirted, the curriculum would be the same. Set by schools pushing academics earlier in hopes it will improve test scores in later grades once standardized testing starts. I do not believe the curriculum is a function of redshirting, the other way around IMO.

+1

But the curriculum is not the hard part. It the amount of it compared to play that is the problem. Too much structure!

+1

Even the class parties are structured. It's nuts.

15 min for snack
15 min for craft
15 min for "fun" activity
done!