Redshirting August boy?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There should be fluidity to move grades in the child’s later years to self correct with age.

That redshirted 6 year old is going to be completely different at 16. What if he is simply eager to fly the nest and go to college “ on time” at 18 but can’t.

Not everyone goes to college "on time" at 18. Gap years, military service, missions, there are so many reason one may not go "on time".

None of reasons should be outside of the students own wishes and certainly not based on a parents decision made over a decade prior based on factors that have since changed.

You don't get a vote. Sorry.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I don’t send my kids to private schools. The thread isn’t “redshirting in private schools”.

It is literally about redshirting in private schools. That is why it is in the private school forum.

Are you mad that private schools that your kids don’t attend set their own admissions policies? That seems … oddly controlling and a frankly bizarre fixation.

[Anonymous]

It’s not redshirting if your child’s birthday qualifies them for the younger grade. I would always rather have my child be one of the older kids in the grade than one of the youngest. Plenty of child psychology books written about it.

[Anonymous]

I am low-key excited to see the grand re-entrance of Natural Law Anti-Redshirter, ngl.

[Anonymous]

Disruptive and immature children lessen the experience of everyone in the class, not just the immature child. Teachers and admin at a K-12 have decades of experience understanding the maturity composition desired for the entire class to be successful. When they construct classes, they either reject immature kids, often accepting the same child a year later, or with highly desirable families, explain they’d like the child a year later. This usually results in redshirted boys

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Disruptive and immature children lessen the experience of everyone in the class, not just the immature child. Teachers and admin at a K-12 have decades of experience understanding the maturity composition desired for the entire class to be successful. When they construct classes, they either reject immature kids, often accepting the same child a year later, or with highly desirable families, explain they’d like the child a year later. This usually results in redshirted boys

A younger child is not less mature and they are age appropriate. Expecting a younger child to act the same way as a child a year older is not age appropriate for eith child. Privates don’t want younger kids as they are selfish and want what they think is easy. It’s impossible to tell how a 5 year old will do.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It’s not redshirting if your child’s birthday qualifies them for the younger grade. I would always rather have my child be one of the older kids in the grade than one of the youngest. Plenty of child psychology books written about it.

There is a cut off. Just because a school allows it or pushes it does not mean it’s not holding back. I’d the cut off is 9-1 and your child’s birthday is April to August you are holding back. It’s very artificial to say these kids are doing better as they are not with age appropriate peers.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Depending on the school, you won’t have much of a choice. Many of them redshirt kids back to may for K entry.

So how is this decided? My June boy was not redshirted by the school, but my friend's son was. They are 1 year apart and in the same class. Watching the class engage, I feel like my son is too young for K. He's that one kid who doesn't sit still, doesn't listen the first time, is constantly disturbing other children, making poor choices, etc. Hopefully behaviors really do level out as they age.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Reposting this because the poster asking for data conveniently ignored it.

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/604978/0209_CarolineSharp_et_al_RelativeAgeReviewRevised.pdf

THE YOUNGEST KIDS ARE AT A DISADVANTAGE!

So what will the schools do to make sure NOBODY is ever the youngest?

Reduce the age cohort age range from 12 months to 6 months in the younger school years. Someone will still be the youngest but all the evidence based disadvantages from relative age affect disappear with such a narrow age gap.

Could you provide some data backing the bolded up? That seems like a very strong claim to make, and I’m curious why you are able to make such a strong statement. I am assuming there is a lot of data supporting the assertion?

I’m personally a bit skeptical — that just seems like far too broad a claim to make — but I like to read actual studies on this topic so please link!

I refer you to Malcolm Gladwells work. My suggestion came from him.

https://youtu.be/t5sJRGmyZ3Y

Uh, no. I’m sorry, but Malcolm Gladwell is not a legitimate data source. He’s been debunked and widely criticized on so many different topics at this point that I don’t think academics of any repute will even mention his name.

Do you have cites, studies, essays, or recommendations from actual academics, not ten-year-old videos from debunked pop culture snake oil salesmen? I would genuinely like to read them.

Emily Oster covered this in depth as well in her new book, the family firm. Google it. Among other factors, the research showed that those who were the youngest in their grade were more likely to be diagnosed with adhd by age seven or so, and this was even more pronounced among boys who were the youngest in their classes. Overall the data showed disadvantage towards being the youngest. In my case, I’m not looking for an advantage for my kids, but I am lookingm to minimize disadvantage to them where I can.

Please for the love of God stop embarrassing yourself. Emily Oster and Malcolm Gladwell are your source material? I don’t even know how to respond to scientific illiteracy this profound.

Just scrolling because I’m bored.

I’m going to quote a friend who has counseled 100’s if not thousands of kids and families. He’s been doing this for about 40 years. He’s never met a parent who regretted keeping their summer child back, but he knows plenty who regretted not doing it.

I regretted it and child ended up skipping a grade to make up for it. People like your friend gave us very very bad advice. Now, kid is in all advanced classes despite being young for their age. Child is clear they wouldn't have wanted to be held back.

Right. You post this on DCUM all the time. So there is you, and nobody else with regrets. Noted.

The above PP is a liar. There's no way a young kid could be doing well. Doesn't he know he has been disadvantaged by the mere presence of kids a few months older? And as an aside it was a pretty easy fix to advance the kid a year. Making them repeat a grade is far more disastrous. You got very good advice and even if it did not work out, you were able to quickly fix it. We should all be so lucky.

I graduated HS at 17 in honors and as an extreme case had a friend who had a BA at 19. There are plenty of people this works out for and it’s a massive gift of an additional year of life.

Did this somehow extend your life expectancy? That's a dubious claim if I've ever read one.

I graduated college at 21 which meant that I completed grad school earlier and entered the workforce earlier. If I make it to average life expectancy then the ROI of that additional year of income is huge.

"I wish I had another year to work" said no one ever on their death bed.

You think kids are saying, yea, my parents didn't think I'd do well in school so they held me back so I get to be a 19 year old senior vs. an 18 year old college student.

Sorry your math skills are so weak.

If I held back my child they would turn 18 one week into their senior year. They be 18 the entire school year. That means they start college at 19. My math is not off. Instead my child will be 17 all of senior year and for a week of college be 17.

You don’t think kids talk.

[Anonymous]

I remembered seeing this and if the OP is reading still, please turn off DCUM and do what your heart knows is right for your child. I should have done this for my child, but learned that redshirting was somehow not cool. Your parental intuition knows best.

[Anonymous]

I did not read this whole thread. DS is September birthday. He was academically ready and socially ready to start kindergarten, but a lot of his friends are a grade below because they are actually his age and were redshirted. And he’s a great athlete but he’s smallest in his class because he’s youngest being at the cutoff, and then being with kids almost another whole year ahead of that. I wasn’t going to hold him back to be bored, and wish everyone proceeded according to the guidelines, because he seems small/immature sometimes because others redshirted.

If your kid is not socially ready, that’s one thing. But do what’ll keep them interested in school. If I had held DS back he’d be so bored, but with friends his own size.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It’s not redshirting if your child’s birthday qualifies them for the younger grade. I would always rather have my child be one of the older kids in the grade than one of the youngest. Plenty of child psychology books written about it.

There is a cut off. Just because a school allows it or pushes it does not mean it’s not holding back. I’d the cut off is 9-1 and your child’s birthday is April to August you are holding back. It’s very artificial to say these kids are doing better as they are not with age appropriate peers.

So don’t send your kid to a private school that does this and your problem is solved. I don’t get your extreme sense of entitlement. Your child is not entitled to a private school education and you are not entitled to dictate admissions terms to the school.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Reposting this because the poster asking for data conveniently ignored it.

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/604978/0209_CarolineSharp_et_al_RelativeAgeReviewRevised.pdf

THE YOUNGEST KIDS ARE AT A DISADVANTAGE!

So what will the schools do to make sure NOBODY is ever the youngest?

Reduce the age cohort age range from 12 months to 6 months in the younger school years. Someone will still be the youngest but all the evidence based disadvantages from relative age affect disappear with such a narrow age gap.

Could you provide some data backing the bolded up? That seems like a very strong claim to make, and I’m curious why you are able to make such a strong statement. I am assuming there is a lot of data supporting the assertion?

I’m personally a bit skeptical — that just seems like far too broad a claim to make — but I like to read actual studies on this topic so please link!

I refer you to Malcolm Gladwells work. My suggestion came from him.

https://youtu.be/t5sJRGmyZ3Y

Uh, no. I’m sorry, but Malcolm Gladwell is not a legitimate data source. He’s been debunked and widely criticized on so many different topics at this point that I don’t think academics of any repute will even mention his name.

Do you have cites, studies, essays, or recommendations from actual academics, not ten-year-old videos from debunked pop culture snake oil salesmen? I would genuinely like to read them.

Emily Oster covered this in depth as well in her new book, the family firm. Google it. Among other factors, the research showed that those who were the youngest in their grade were more likely to be diagnosed with adhd by age seven or so, and this was even more pronounced among boys who were the youngest in their classes. Overall the data showed disadvantage towards being the youngest. In my case, I’m not looking for an advantage for my kids, but I am lookingm to minimize disadvantage to them where I can.

Please for the love of God stop embarrassing yourself. Emily Oster and Malcolm Gladwell are your source material? I don’t even know how to respond to scientific illiteracy this profound.

Just scrolling because I’m bored.

I’m going to quote a friend who has counseled 100’s if not thousands of kids and families. He’s been doing this for about 40 years. He’s never met a parent who regretted keeping their summer child back, but he knows plenty who regretted not doing it.

I regretted it and child ended up skipping a grade to make up for it. People like your friend gave us very very bad advice. Now, kid is in all advanced classes despite being young for their age. Child is clear they wouldn't have wanted to be held back.

Right. You post this on DCUM all the time. So there is you, and nobody else with regrets. Noted.

The above PP is a liar. There's no way a young kid could be doing well. Doesn't he know he has been disadvantaged by the mere presence of kids a few months older? And as an aside it was a pretty easy fix to advance the kid a year. Making them repeat a grade is far more disastrous. You got very good advice and even if it did not work out, you were able to quickly fix it. We should all be so lucky.

I graduated HS at 17 in honors and as an extreme case had a friend who had a BA at 19. There are plenty of people this works out for and it’s a massive gift of an additional year of life.

Did this somehow extend your life expectancy? That's a dubious claim if I've ever read one.

I graduated college at 21 which meant that I completed grad school earlier and entered the workforce earlier. If I make it to average life expectancy then the ROI of that additional year of income is huge.

"I wish I had another year to work" said no one ever on their death bed.

You think kids are saying, yea, my parents didn't think I'd do well in school so they held me back so I get to be a 19 year old senior vs. an 18 year old college student.

Sorry your math skills are so weak.

If I held back my child they would turn 18 one week into their senior year. They be 18 the entire school year. That means they start college at 19. My math is not off. Instead my child will be 17 all of senior year and for a week of college be 17.

You don’t think kids talk.

Wow. Shockingly poor math. I’m so sorry.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Depending on the school, you won’t have much of a choice. Many of them redshirt kids back to may for K entry.

So how is this decided? My June boy was not redshirted by the school, but my friend's son was. They are 1 year apart and in the same class. Watching the class engage, I feel like my son is too young for K. He's that one kid who doesn't sit still, doesn't listen the first time, is constantly disturbing other children, making poor choices, etc. Hopefully behaviors really do level out as they age.

In private schools by the admissions committee/director.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Depending on the school, you won’t have much of a choice. Many of them redshirt kids back to may for K entry.

So how is this decided? My June boy was not redshirted by the school, but my friend's son was. They are 1 year apart and in the same class. Watching the class engage, I feel like my son is too young for K. He's that one kid who doesn't sit still, doesn't listen the first time, is constantly disturbing other children, making poor choices, etc. Hopefully behaviors really do level out as they age.

He’s a year younger. These are not his true peers. Maybe his last preschool did not prepare him, especially if it was play based.