My son's kindergarten class has several 7 yr olds in it.

[Anonymous]

DS was born first half of september, and misses the deadline for maryland and for many private schools. So, if we just go ahead with the deadlines, he will be starting K when he is 5 years, 11 months, and 2 weeks. He will be 6 a couple of weeks after starting K, and will be finishing K almost 7. Am I thrilled about it? No. Will I try and get him a year earlier so that he is the smallest, just hitting 5 when others are 5.5 -6? probably not. So, Ds will be in your kids class and will be ALMOST 7 by end of K class, i.e. by June.

[Anonymous]

Almost 6, not 7.

[Anonymous]

Clearly the relative physical size issue is for real. The redshirt supporters in this thread cite it as one of the most defensible reasons for holding a child back. It does seem to follow that parents of children within the stated age range for K would have equally valid concerns about children held back for other reasons who are then much larger than some of their "younger" classmates.

[Anonymous]

I agree with this. My son's birthday is in April. He is starting K in the fall. He went camp at the school in June, and two boys in his camp group will be in his K class. They were already 6 -- in June. I don't know when their birthdays are, so perhaps they turned 6 right before camp. But I am already worried. This is not what I signed up for.

Have you considered red shirting or deferring admission for your child? Taking a gap year may allay your worries.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Get a life!! Our child is a spring baby and was held back due to relatively unique development and maturity issues. He has never had an issue with it, and neither has any of his classmates. He now is in middle school. Get a life!!

Get a life? Really? There's 100 pages of posts and none take issue with redshirting a kid with relative unique development issues as you say your child does. Its the kid who has no issues who is held back people take exception with.

My son has 6 boys in his class born Jan - Jun prior to the Sept 1 cutoff date.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:My son has 6 boys in his class born Jan - Jun prior to the Sept 1 cutoff date.

This school seems to be the outlier. I haven't seen any defense for holding back the normally developing kid with a Jan - March birthday. It does seem extreme, but I don't see it as "pervasive" (aside from this school).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Clearly the relative physical size issue is for real. The redshirt supporters in this thread cite it as one of the most defensible reasons for holding a child back. It does seem to follow that parents of children within the stated age range for K would have equally valid concerns about children held back for other reasons who are then much larger than some of their "younger" classmates.

The "most defensible reason" given here to hold back a child is his physical size? Maybe size + age + maturity. But not size alone.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:DS was born first half of september, and misses the deadline for maryland and for many private schools. So, if we just go ahead with the deadlines, he will be starting K when he is 5 years, 11 months, and 2 weeks. He will be 6 a couple of weeks after starting K, and will be finishing K almost 7. Am I thrilled about it? No. Will I try and get him a year earlier so that he is the smallest, just hitting 5 when others are 5.5 -6? probably not. So, Ds will be in your kids class and will be ALMOST 7 by end of K class, i.e. by June.

No, he won't be ALMOST 7. In June, he still has three months until he turns 7, in September. And that is how it should be -- he will be the oldest. And that means that for my April child, there is a kid 7 months older than him, as it should be. There is supposed to be a TWELVE MONTH RANGE in every class. That is how it has been for years.
By redshirting, hypercompetitive parents are extending this age range to 14, 16 or even 18 months.

And no, in response to a PP, I will not redshirt my April child!! Are you serious?? Luckily, he is also tall and smart and strong -- but what if he wasn't? I would be forced to hold him back so that he wouldn't be classmates with your kid who you held back on purpose so that he could be the best basketball player? I don't think so.

Look, this is more rampant than ever. And that means that something that has gone a bit under the radar is now about to be on alot of people's agenda. My son has two younger siblings. And they may or may not be blessed with his height and intellect. It's too soon to tell. So being with bigger, older kids that should be in the grade above may indeed be damaging to them -- both by skewing the peer group and artificially setting the bar where it shouldn't be. And if I find that redshirting is a problem at his school, I will be speaking up, and strongly encouraging others to do the same. I think we all need to speak up. We are NEVER going to convince these types of parents to look at the big picture. The only hope is with the schools.

[Anonymous]

Why is 12 months sacrosanct and 14-18 outrageous? And is the 18 months still outrageous if the out of sync kid is younger rather than older than the cohort?

To me, the hyper-competitive parents are the ones bitching about red-shirting rather than the ones doing it. God knows what prize they think their child is being deprived of in Kindergarten by being forced to compete with slightly older kids. And how do these older children (who, presumably, are encountered in neighborhoods and even families) suddenly become scary and intimidating in a K classroom?

I suspect that the critics of redshirting also don't consider whether their DC would be better off in a class with 6 younger boys who aren't ready for K (which is the alternative if you eliminate red-shirting). From a classroom management standpoint, that's a much bigger challenge than a slightly broader range of ages but a comparable level of readiness.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:DS was born first half of september, and misses the deadline for maryland and for many private schools. So, if we just go ahead with the deadlines, he will be starting K when he is 5 years, 11 months, and 2 weeks. He will be 6 a couple of weeks after starting K, and will be finishing K almost 7. Am I thrilled about it? No. Will I try and get him a year earlier so that he is the smallest, just hitting 5 when others are 5.5 -6? probably not. So, Ds will be in your kids class and will be ALMOST 7 by end of K class, i.e. by June.

No, he won't be ALMOST 7. In June, he still has three months until he turns 7, in September. And that is how it should be -- he will be the oldest. And that means that for my April child, there is a kid 7 months older than him, as it should be. There is supposed to be a TWELVE MONTH RANGE in every class. That is how it has been for years.
By redshirting, hypercompetitive parents are extending this age range to 14, 16 or even 18 months.

And no, in response to a PP, I will not redshirt my April child!! Are you serious?? Luckily, he is also tall and smart and strong -- but what if he wasn't? I would be forced to hold him back so that he wouldn't be classmates with your kid who you held back on purpose so that he could be the best basketball player? I don't think so.

Look, this is more rampant than ever. And that means that something that has gone a bit under the radar is now about to be on alot of people's agenda. My son has two younger siblings. And they may or may not be blessed with his height and intellect. It's too soon to tell. So being with bigger, older kids that should be in the grade above may indeed be damaging to them -- both by skewing the peer group and artificially setting the bar where it shouldn't be. And if I find that redshirting is a problem at his school, I will be speaking up, and strongly encouraging others to do the same. I think we all need to speak up. We are NEVER going to convince these types of parents to look at the big picture. The only hope is with the schools.

Relax. It's not as bad as you perceive. Of course the suggestion that you redshirt was made in jest. You seem hyper-sensitive because your son has an April birthday -- the month that most schools/parents start to think about the redshirting issue. Much of it has to do with the opinion that at this age girls are 6 months more mature than boys. So to level the girl/boy playing field, boys April - Sept could be redshirted. As I've seen it, it's more June - Sept boys being redshirted. Your son is tall and intelligent and born in April. Great, off to K he goes at age 5 turning 6 in April. There will likely be a couple boys in his class with summer birthdays turning 6. Your son is not at risk of being damaged by a K boy 8-10 months older.

[Anonymous]

I was surprised to find out that a child in DD's preschool class (3's class where the kids have to be 3 by September 1st, so there are kids turning 4 starting in September) turned 5 this summer. He is by far the smallest child in the class (the size of an average 2-3 yr old). It looks like his parents have already made the decision to redshirt him based on size. He will be going to pre-K as a 5 yr old and starting K at age 6. I have no idea why they decided to do this other than his size, but I will say this: I did not know that he was a year older than the kids in DD's class. He does not seem more mature or more advanced than the other kids in any way shape or form. I honestly thought he was 3 turning 4 this summer. I'm not upset he is in with my DD who turned 4 over the summer.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

To me, the hyper-competitive parents are the ones bitching about red-shirting rather than the ones doing it. God knows what prize they think their child is being deprived of in Kindergarten by being forced to compete with slightly older kids.

No, it is the hyper-competitive parents who are redshirting their Jan-May kids who are forcing such an age disparity in the classrooms. The rest of the people are reacting to it. At the age of 5, 16-18 months as an upper standard in the classroom is not "slightly older". Sure, when kids are in high school, you have Freshmen trying out for varsity sports and are thus 14-15 year olds competing against 18-19 year olds. But don't you think the ratios outline in this thread are extreme for the ages being discussed?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Why is 12 months sacrosanct and 14-18 outrageous? And is the 18 months still outrageous if the out of sync kid is younger rather than older than the cohort?

To me, the hyper-competitive parents are the ones bitching about red-shirting rather than the ones doing it. God knows what prize they think their child is being deprived of in Kindergarten by being forced to compete with slightly older kids. And how do these older children (who, presumably, are encountered in neighborhoods and even families) suddenly become scary and intimidating in a K classroom?

I suspect that the critics of redshirting also don't consider whether their DC would be better off in a class with 6 younger boys who aren't ready for K (which is the alternative if you eliminate red-shirting). From a classroom management standpoint, that's a much bigger challenge than a slightly broader range of ages but a comparable level of readiness.

Most sensible post on this thread.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote: At the age of 5, 16-18 months as an upper standard in the classroom is not "slightly older". Sure, when kids are in high school, you have Freshmen trying out for varsity sports and are thus 14-15 year olds competing against 18-19 year olds. But don't you think the ratios outline in this thread are extreme for the ages being discussed?

No. It's typical (or narrow) compared to lots of other contexts (families, church, Montessori). And the oldest kids are kids who are behind rather than ahead of their age-mates (which is why they're red-shirted), so the range is narrower developmentally than it is chronologically.

The only reason it freaks people out in this context is that they are assuming the situation (kindergarten, remember) is a competitive one and that an older kid's presence puts their own kid at a disadvantage. That's why I see the anti-redshirters as the hypercompetitive ones.

By contrast, the redshirters want to wait until their kid can handle school's demands. What's at stake for them isn't academic success vs. stellar performance. It's incompetence vs. competence. The school, apparently, agrees with the parents' POV in these cases (we're talking private schools here, so they always have the option of just rejecting the application for admission). Does it make sense to let some third party decide that the older kid should flounder in school just so that their child can be shown to better advantage? That's screwed up.

[Anonymous]

When they do away with traditional brick and mortar education due to the Internet what will anti-redshirters or anti-redtrousers complain off--bandwidth?