Redshirting August boy?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I am in London at the moment so yes to the second part.

When in London you don't use US spellings on a US discussion board? Troll.

[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.

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.

Kids absolutely talk about age and birthdays. Don’t kid yourself. They get their parents or the school or both held them back. They younger kids get that the older kids were held back. You can out make kids artificially smarter by being older. And, if sports are your priority your values are messed up. If I held back my kid they would miss out on a year of better academics in stronger subjects. I’d rather pay for graduate school than an extra year of preschool which will help them more in the real world.

Kids definitely talk about age and birthdays. My 6YO second grader was told by some of his classmates that he should be in 1st grade. 😂. He sits next to a little girl who has his exact birthday (November) but was born a year earlier.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote: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)

I am also a teacher and would redshirt my children if they had a late birthday- Aug or Sept. I’d be hesitant (more against it) with birthdays falling in the spring or earlier.

[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:

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.

Kids absolutely talk about age and birthdays. Don’t kid yourself. They get their parents or the school or both held them back. They younger kids get that the older kids were held back. You can out make kids artificially smarter by being older. And, if sports are your priority your values are messed up. If I held back my kid they would miss out on a year of better academics in stronger subjects. I’d rather pay for graduate school than an extra year of preschool which will help them more in the real world.

Okay, don’t send your kid to a school that redshirts. Problem solved.

I’m sorry to hear that either you did not prepare your kids for kindergarten or you did not have the confidence that they could be successful given the opportunity with your support. Guess you prefer the easy parenting choices so you can put the least effort into your kids.

We had no issue getting our kid into a private.

My kid wasn’t redshirted. I’m just hear for the entertainment value that comes from the incessant and entitled whining of the anti-redshirters who are furious they can’t make private schools admissions officers bend to their demands.

I had no problem getting my child in. The problem we had with private was they didn't have the advanced classes and differentiation in MS/HS like publics do. It's funny how people like you have older kids in the grade and the privates start math later and you think that's just good enough for smart kids who enjoy challenges. Sounds like you care more about prestige than your child.

Are you drunk?

[Anonymous]

100% do it -- so many do it now, even in public.

[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:

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.

Kids absolutely talk about age and birthdays. Don’t kid yourself. They get their parents or the school or both held them back. They younger kids get that the older kids were held back. You can out make kids artificially smarter by being older. And, if sports are your priority your values are messed up. If I held back my kid they would miss out on a year of better academics in stronger subjects. I’d rather pay for graduate school than an extra year of preschool which will help them more in the real world.

Okay, don’t send your kid to a school that redshirts. Problem solved.

I’m sorry to hear that either you did not prepare your kids for kindergarten or you did not have the confidence that they could be successful given the opportunity with your support. Guess you prefer the easy parenting choices so you can put the least effort into your kids.

We had no issue getting our kid into a private.

My kid wasn’t redshirted. I’m just hear for the entertainment value that comes from the incessant and entitled whining of the anti-redshirters who are furious they can’t make private schools admissions officers bend to their demands.

I had no problem getting my child in. The problem we had with private was they didn't have the advanced classes and differentiation in MS/HS like publics do. It's funny how people like you have older kids in the grade and the privates start math later and you think that's just good enough for smart kids who enjoy challenges. Sounds like you care more about prestige than your child.

So if I try to tease out the facts in this largely incomprehensible stream-of-consciousness babbling, you don’t have a child attending private school at all but are still freaking out about the admissions policies of private schools your kid doesn’t attend. That’s… well, it’s something, for sure.

Why are DCUM anti-redshirters always so weird?

[Anonymous]

Aug/July bdays are common place in the DC area.

Talk about the Oct/Nov/Dec/Jan holdbacks?? Driving to school w Mom or Dad Freshman year Fall…yikes! If they aren’t the smartest kid in class (and best athlete). I had never heard of a 16 year old Freshman until I moved to this area from Colorado.

I feel bad for the kid. That has to mess with their confidence if/when they are not “above” kids when they are sometimes 18+ months older

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: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)

I am also a teacher and would redshirt my children if they had a late birthday- Aug or Sept. I’d be hesitant (more against it) with birthdays falling in the spring or earlier.

+1

[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:

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.

Kids absolutely talk about age and birthdays. Don’t kid yourself. They get their parents or the school or both held them back. They younger kids get that the older kids were held back. You can out make kids artificially smarter by being older. And, if sports are your priority your values are messed up. If I held back my kid they would miss out on a year of better academics in stronger subjects. I’d rather pay for graduate school than an extra year of preschool which will help them more in the real world.

Okay, don’t send your kid to a school that redshirts. Problem solved.

I’m sorry to hear that either you did not prepare your kids for kindergarten or you did not have the confidence that they could be successful given the opportunity with your support. Guess you prefer the easy parenting choices so you can put the least effort into your kids.

We had no issue getting our kid into a private.

My kid wasn’t redshirted. I’m just hear for the entertainment value that comes from the incessant and entitled whining of the anti-redshirters who are furious they can’t make private schools admissions officers bend to their demands.

I had no problem getting my child in. The problem we had with private was they didn't have the advanced classes and differentiation in MS/HS like publics do. It's funny how people like you have older kids in the grade and the privates start math later and you think that's just good enough for smart kids who enjoy challenges. Sounds like you care more about prestige than your child.

Nailed it. Private school parents just don’t love their kids enough. Good job cracking the code!

[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.

In private schools by the admissions committee/director.

Yes, but how do they decide? We're closing in on finishing our first year and I've been thinking of reaching out to the admissions team. Probably doesnt matter now, but man. I know he's definitely not the youngest, but for him, it's been rough.

[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.

His entire class isn't one year older. I just know of this one child in particular because I know his mother outside of school. His last wasn't play- based, but it doesn't seem like he was prepared at all which is why I'm so curious how it's decided whether to redshirt or not. For the record, I know my friend had zero plans to redshirt until the school pretty much said you can redshirt or be rejected, choice is yours.

[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:

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.

Kids absolutely talk about age and birthdays. Don’t kid yourself. They get their parents or the school or both held them back. They younger kids get that the older kids were held back. You can out make kids artificially smarter by being older. And, if sports are your priority your values are messed up. If I held back my kid they would miss out on a year of better academics in stronger subjects. I’d rather pay for graduate school than an extra year of preschool which will help them more in the real world.

Okay, don’t send your kid to a school that redshirts. Problem solved.

I’m sorry to hear that either you did not prepare your kids for kindergarten or you did not have the confidence that they could be successful given the opportunity with your support. Guess you prefer the easy parenting choices so you can put the least effort into your kids.

We had no issue getting our kid into a private.

My kid wasn’t redshirted. I’m just hear for the entertainment value that comes from the incessant and entitled whining of the anti-redshirters who are furious they can’t make private schools admissions officers bend to their demands.

I had no problem getting my child in. The problem we had with private was they didn't have the advanced classes and differentiation in MS/HS like publics do. It's funny how people like you have older kids in the grade and the privates start math later and you think that's just good enough for smart kids who enjoy challenges. Sounds like you care more about prestige than your child.

So if I try to tease out the facts in this largely incomprehensible stream-of-consciousness babbling, you don’t have a child attending private school at all but are still freaking out about the admissions policies of private schools your kid doesn’t attend. That’s… well, it’s something, for sure.

Why are DCUM anti-redshirters always so weird?

Why do people like you insist on holding their kids back for no good reason. If your kid is smart enough to get into a private, there should be zero need to hold them back.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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.

His entire class isn't one year older. I just know of this one child in particular because I know his mother outside of school. His last wasn't play- based, but it doesn't seem like he was prepared at all which is why I'm so curious how it's decided whether to redshirt or not. For the record, I know my friend had zero plans to redshirt until the school pretty much said you can redshirt or be rejected, choice is yours.

I'd rather be rejected as it's not the right school fit to hold back a child based on its easier for the school vs. putting the time into the child to help them be successful.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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.

His entire class isn't one year older. I just know of this one child in particular because I know his mother outside of school. His last wasn't play- based, but it doesn't seem like he was prepared at all which is why I'm so curious how it's decided whether to redshirt or not. For the record, I know my friend had zero plans to redshirt until the school pretty much said you can redshirt or be rejected, choice is yours.

There is a lot of social and school pressure to hold back kids. It's easier on the schools. My kid was reading very early so holding them back another year made no sense. K is a joke for kids who can read and have other basic academic skills while they wait till the other kids catch up.

[Anonymous]

Folks in my family mature late. Turns out, same was true of my spouse. (We are in our late 40s now but look like we in our late 20s!) My DH noted that being an immature and not yet pubescent boy for more than 50% of high school was awful.

Kids were both late summer bdays so it was a no brainer. Both have flourished.