Redshirting August boy?

[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:

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.

No, the math is correct. I have a September kid. So, they are either a senior at 17 or 18. How hard is that for you to understand. Your math is wrong. There are often 18 month differences if an April or may kid was held back.

[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:

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.

No, the math is correct. I have a September kid. So, they are either a senior at 17 or 18. How hard is that for you to understand. Your math is wrong. There are often 18 month differences if an April or may kid was held back.

Many people live in a place with a 9/1 cutoff. The kids are 18 all senior year by design.

[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.

They don’t. Your rules don’t apply to most.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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.

So don’t send your kid to the school. I fail to see the issue here.

[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:

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.

They don’t. Your rules don’t apply to most.

We are in this area and yes, they do. You can send your fall kid to a private if you want. We did.

[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:

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.

No, the math is correct. I have a September kid. So, they are either a senior at 17 or 18. How hard is that for you to understand. Your math is wrong. There are often 18 month differences if an April or may kid was held back.

Many people live in a place with a 9/1 cutoff. The kids are 18 all senior year by design.

If kids are 18 all year, they were held back or a fall birthday.

[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:

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.

No, the math is correct. I have a September kid. So, they are either a senior at 17 or 18. How hard is that for you to understand. Your math is wrong. There are often 18 month differences if an April or may kid was held back.

Many people live in a place with a 9/1 cutoff. The kids are 18 all senior year by design.

If kids are 18 all year, they were held back or a fall birthday.

No, moron, because they are in a school with a 9/1 cutoff. But you will never get that through your thick head.

[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:

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.

They don’t. Your rules don’t apply to most.

Income from a country with 5 year of highschool and started college at 19 (and turned 20 at the end of freshman year) in the US. Nobody EVER cared that I was 6 months-1 year older than the other students. I was one ifbb no the best students because even though I was learning English because high school was intense in my home country and we studied a lot. College was easy for me. I was more mature than most American kids (not sure if because of age or life experiences) and it was definitely a good thing.

[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:

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.

They don’t. Your rules don’t apply to most.

Income from a country with 5 year of highschool and started college at 19 (and turned 20 at the end of freshman year) in the US. Nobody EVER cared that I was 6 months-1 year older than the other students. I was one ifbb no the best students because even though I was learning English because high school was intense in my home country and we studied a lot. College was easy for me. I was more mature than most American kids (not sure if because of age or life experiences) and it was definitely a good thing.

Of course. The natural law troll thinks kids say and do things they don’t do. They don’t think twice about age. Many are 18 themselves all senior year. Troll poster lives in a fantasy world where every school is on a calendar year cut off and the kids are all terrible to each other. She can’t wrap her head around the idea that things have changed and she’s working with faulty assumptions.

[Anonymous]

Why can’t there just be rolling entry in to grades through out K-12 with hard line upper and lower age limits?

Just say that you cannot be past your 19th birthday and be in a standard HS senior class but everyone including winter- summer borns can stay for the duration of the time they are 18. So say I was born in April and would normally graduate a couple of weeks after turning 18, in May but now I could wait almost another year. Alternatively I could start senior year after turning 17 if Junior year was getting too easy.

That would allow all kids to move and their own pace, slow down when they hit a difficult part of a subject or speed up when it is easy. They get to pick the classmates that create the best environment for them, not too advanced or too easy.

[Anonymous]

Note: I did not read the comments on this tread. Just sharing that I am an educator, and we redshirted both my DD and DS with Aug & Sept birthdays. It was the absolute best decision, and we have never regretted it.

(They play with their birth year for sports, fwiw)

[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:

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.

They don’t. Your rules don’t apply to most.

Income from a country with 5 year of highschool and started college at 19 (and turned 20 at the end of freshman year) in the US. Nobody EVER cared that I was 6 months-1 year older than the other students. I was one ifbb no the best students because even though I was learning English because high school was intense in my home country and we studied a lot. College was easy for me. I was more mature than most American kids (not sure if because of age or life experiences) and it was definitely a good thing.

You are proving the point that it’s an advantage to be older than your peers. The flip side to that is that your classmates who where 17 likely struggled more from being that much less relatively mature.

[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:

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.

They don’t. Your rules don’t apply to most.

Income from a country with 5 year of highschool and started college at 19 (and turned 20 at the end of freshman year) in the US. Nobody EVER cared that I was 6 months-1 year older than the other students. I was one ifbb no the best students because even though I was learning English because high school was intense in my home country and we studied a lot. College was easy for me. I was more mature than most American kids (not sure if because of age or life experiences) and it was definitely a good thing.

You are proving the point that it’s an advantage to be older than your peers. The flip side to that is that your classmates who where 17 likely struggled more from being that much less relatively mature.

Yes maybe an advantage in maturity. I did not do as many drugs, did not care about getting drunk every weekend, grades were what most mattered to me, etc. but to be honest, I think this is mostly cultural and family related than maturity…. I did not care or noticed that I was older than most freshman students and nobody ever mentioned it to me either.

[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:

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.

No, the math is correct. I have a September kid. So, they are either a senior at 17 or 18. How hard is that for you to understand. Your math is wrong. There are often 18 month differences if an April or may kid was held back.

Many people live in a place with a 9/1 cutoff. The kids are 18 all senior year by design.

If kids are 18 all year, they were held back or a fall birthday.

No, moron, because they are in a school with a 9/1 cutoff. But you will never get that through your thick head.

Why with the name-calling? My child, who was not red-shirted and was sent to a local independent school on time, will not be 18 when they graduate. July birthday. You are wrong.

[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:

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.

No, the math is correct. I have a September kid. So, they are either a senior at 17 or 18. How hard is that for you to understand. Your math is wrong. There are often 18 month differences if an April or may kid was held back.

Many people live in a place with a 9/1 cutoff. The kids are 18 all senior year by design.

If kids are 18 all year, they were held back or a fall birthday.

No, moron, because they are in a school with a 9/1 cutoff. But you will never get that through your thick head.

Why with the name-calling? My child, who was not red-shirted and was sent to a local independent school on time, will not be 18 when they graduate. July birthday. You are wrong.

Because the PP is insisting a September born child can't be 18 all year long unless they are redshirted. That's just wrong. Stop telling lies.