Since this is anonymous, why did you REALLY redshirt your kid?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I know a few people back their tall, mature, academically and athletically gifted 5 year olds with birthdays months before the cut off. WHY?
I know one who made the decision when her kid was one (July birthday)

Is it just so your kid has advantages socially and athletically and breezes through?

I felt it would give them advantages socially and developmentally over their peers. Also, doesn't hurt if you prioritize sports like me over academics.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I know a few people back their tall, mature, academically and athletically gifted 5 year olds with birthdays months before the cut off. WHY?
I know one who made the decision when her kid was one (July birthday)

Is it just so your kid has advantages socially and athletically and breezes through?

I felt it would give them advantages socially and developmentally over their peers. Also, doesn't hurt if you prioritize sports like me over academics.

Are your children also trolls?

[Anonymous]

Doesn’t sport have strict birthday cut offs? An U14 team by definition won’t take kids past their 14th birthday. It doesn’t matter if they are redshirted at school and are older than their classmates on that team.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I know a few people back their tall, mature, academically and athletically gifted 5 year olds with birthdays months before the cut off. WHY?
I know one who made the decision when her kid was one (July birthday)

Is it just so your kid has advantages socially and athletically and breezes through?

I felt it would give them advantages socially and developmentally over their peers. Also, doesn't hurt if you prioritize sports like me over academics.

This is exactly why most people red-shrit.

[Anonymous]

I want a thread about why DCUM antiredshirt posters are so socially stunted and weird.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I want a thread about why DCUM antiredshirt posters are so socially stunted and weird.

Agree. Unless it’s just one crazy person repeatedly posting…..

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I know a few people back their tall, mature, academically and athletically gifted 5 year olds with birthdays months before the cut off. WHY?
I know one who made the decision when her kid was one (July birthday)

Is it just so your kid has advantages socially and athletically and breezes through?

Mine is tall, academically gifted, athletic and also incredibly immature - boy with July birthday. He's that one - the youngest, at least one head taller than everyone else, and disturbing the entire class. Be thankful that we held him back, otherwise the teacher would have spent the entire time trying to get him to listen.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I know a few people back their tall, mature, academically and athletically gifted 5 year olds with birthdays months before the cut off. WHY?
I know one who made the decision when her kid was one (July birthday)

Is it just so your kid has advantages socially and athletically and breezes through?

Mine is tall, academically gifted, athletic and also incredibly immature - boy with July birthday. He's that one - the youngest, at least one head taller than everyone else, and disturbing the entire class. Be thankful that we held him back, otherwise the teacher would have spent the entire time trying to get him to listen.

Okay, look. If you want to give your child every advantage you can, then fine. Some might actually say that that's your job as a parent. But don't act as if you were doing the entire world a favor. I don't think the on-time October-to-December born kids who are having to compete against him(someone 15-to-17 months older) are feeling very thankful.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I want a thread about why DCUM antiredshirt posters are so socially stunted and weird.

Agree. Unless it’s just one crazy person repeatedly posting…..

I think there are a few of them but they are very crazy.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Doesn’t sport have strict birthday cut offs? An U14 team by definition won’t take kids past their 14th birthday. It doesn’t matter if they are redshirted at school and are older than their classmates on that team.

For some sports yes, especially private groups, but not if they play with their high school. Then, it goes by grade.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I know a few people back their tall, mature, academically and athletically gifted 5 year olds with birthdays months before the cut off. WHY?
I know one who made the decision when her kid was one (July birthday)

Is it just so your kid has advantages socially and athletically and breezes through?

Mine is tall, academically gifted, athletic and also incredibly immature - boy with July birthday. He's that one - the youngest, at least one head taller than everyone else, and disturbing the entire class. Be thankful that we held him back, otherwise the teacher would have spent the entire time trying to get him to listen.

I hope you got your child evaluated and into therapy if they were having that many issues.

[Anonymous]

We red-shirted because our local school district (SFUSD) pretty much did not open last year due to Covid and we had no faith they would be able to handle the crush of complex problems that would be showing up in classrooms this year as a result.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I know a few people back their tall, mature, academically and athletically gifted 5 year olds with birthdays months before the cut off. WHY?
I know one who made the decision when her kid was one (July birthday)

Is it just so your kid has advantages socially and athletically and breezes through?

Mine is tall, academically gifted, athletic and also incredibly immature - boy with July birthday. He's that one - the youngest, at least one head taller than everyone else, and disturbing the entire class. Be thankful that we held him back, otherwise the teacher would have spent the entire time trying to get him to listen.

Okay, look. If you want to give your child every advantage you can, then fine. Some might actually say that that's your job as a parent. But don't act as if you were doing the entire world a favor. I don't think the on-time October-to-December born kids who are having to compete against him(someone 15-to-17 months older) are feeling very thankful.

Of course they are. As a June baby, myself, I was generally one of the youngest in my class. In retrospect, maybe I should have been redshirted. However, given the choice, I think the kids who were too immature for class and caused constant interruptions, should have been redshirted, even if it meant they were nearly 2 years ahead of me. If an “on-time” child is struggling, they will not be grateful for anything that makes it harder to learn.

When I started K (which was more academic than most for the 70’s), I was at the bottom of the class. If any children were redshirted, I didn’t know and didn’t care. It wasn’t a competition that I resented someone else for winning by “cheating” (as the anti-redshirters claim). The issue was that I had trouble keeping up and learning how to read. It eventually clicked the following summer (I suspect a large part of my struggle was that I wasn’t developmentally ready for it). Then we moved and the new school system was using the same curriculum in 1st that I’d had in K. I went from the bottom of the K class to the top of the 1st class. That seems like more of a “competitive advantage” (although I hated it), than simply being older (I was still one of the youngest). I wonder if the anti-redshirters be okay with that, or would they think that in the interest of fairness, I should have been grade-skipped, putting me in a second grade class where compared to a young first-grader, everyone would have been older, essentially putting me in a “redshirted”class, (on-time everybody else with young me, vs redshirted kids with on-time students).

As a mother, I would much prefer that if kids aren’t ready to behave appropriately in a situation, the parents keep them at home until they are. If a younger child is causing a disruption, my children don’t gloat smugly about how they’re superior to the child in some imaginary competition. Rather, they get upset that somebody is interrupting the teacher, or personally bothering them, or messing with their stuff, etc.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:We red-shirted because our local school district (SFUSD) pretty much did not open last year due to Covid and we had no faith they would be able to handle the crush of complex problems that would be showing up in classrooms this year as a result.

This makes zero sense.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I know a few people back their tall, mature, academically and athletically gifted 5 year olds with birthdays months before the cut off. WHY?
I know one who made the decision when her kid was one (July birthday)

Is it just so your kid has advantages socially and athletically and breezes through?

Mine is tall, academically gifted, athletic and also incredibly immature - boy with July birthday. He's that one - the youngest, at least one head taller than everyone else, and disturbing the entire class. Be thankful that we held him back, otherwise the teacher would have spent the entire time trying to get him to listen.

Okay, look. If you want to give your child every advantage you can, then fine. Some might actually say that that's your job as a parent. But don't act as if you were doing the entire world a favor. I don't think the on-time October-to-December born kids who are having to compete against him(someone 15-to-17 months older) are feeling very thankful.

Of course they are. As a June baby, myself, I was generally one of the youngest in my class. In retrospect, maybe I should have been redshirted. However, given the choice, I think the kids who were too immature for class and caused constant interruptions, should have been redshirted, even if it meant they were nearly 2 years ahead of me. If an “on-time” child is struggling, they will not be grateful for anything that makes it harder to learn.

When I started K (which was more academic than most for the 70’s), I was at the bottom of the class. If any children were redshirted, I didn’t know and didn’t care. It wasn’t a competition that I resented someone else for winning by “cheating” (as the anti-redshirters claim). The issue was that I had trouble keeping up and learning how to read. It eventually clicked the following summer (I suspect a large part of my struggle was that I wasn’t developmentally ready for it). Then we moved and the new school system was using the same curriculum in 1st that I’d had in K. I went from the bottom of the K class to the top of the 1st class. That seems like more of a “competitive advantage” (although I hated it), than simply being older (I was still one of the youngest). I wonder if the anti-redshirters be okay with that, or would they think that in the interest of fairness, I should have been grade-skipped, putting me in a second grade class where compared to a young first-grader, everyone would have been older, essentially putting me in a “redshirted”class, (on-time everybody else with young me, vs redshirted kids with on-time students).

As a mother, I would much prefer that if kids aren’t ready to behave appropriately in a situation, the parents keep them at home until they are. If a younger child is causing a disruption, my children don’t gloat smugly about how they’re superior to the child in some imaginary competition. Rather, they get upset that somebody is interrupting the teacher, or personally bothering them, or messing with their stuff, etc.

Kids of any age can struggle at school. If you are getting your child help, it might help to hold them back, but otherwise you are better off sending them and letting the school help since you aren't willing. If you are unwilling to get your child help, then it cannot be that serious and you are just lazy.