Since people are now redshirting spring bday kids

[Anonymous]

My kid, who is a March birthday and isn’t redshirted, could definitely have used another year. However, I put that down to the acceleration of the curriculum so that K has become a worksheet factory and they’re pushing algebra in elementary school and to do that they’re barreling through the basic math curriculum. My kid is average, and it’s been a struggle as they never spend enough time on any one thing for him to truly grasp it. The school principal actually told me things are about a year ahead of where they used to be. I asked if my kid could get the 1985 curriculum instead.

[Anonymous]

School is not childcare, our goal was to send them when they are ready. We supplemented with tutoring. One kid waited one didn't.

[Anonymous]

When I was a kid a million years ago, we had a grade called “pre-1st” in the public schools. The schools really wanted everyone in K on time - I grew up in a mostly working-class and diverse area, and public K was a lot of kids’ first exposure to school and there were (at that time, by today’s standard not at all) a lot of kids who didn’t have a lot of exposure to English at home. But some of the kids who were younger, who needed more time to learn to read/write, or who just needed an extra year, were encouraged to do pre-1st before 1st grade. It was a smaller class size and went over more of the fundamentals. K was half day and more play-based at that time, so pre-1st was more like today’s full-day K.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Who cares? Do what you think is best for your kid. You sound really immature.

+1

I honestly wonder how most of DCUMs anti-redshirt posters manage to get through their days. They remind me of anti-vaxxers.

How are people who send their kids to school according to the rules/recommendations similar to those who flout them?

Do you want me to seriously respond? In my experience, DCUMs anti-redshirt posters aren't very rational and I don't really feel like writing up something that asks for critical thought from an anti-redshirt poster.

Yes, you made the statement; I'm simply asking you to defend it. My take is that there seem to be more similarities between parents who redshirt, and anti-vaxxers. Both flout the rules/recommendations for the perceived benefit of their own kids, even if others are disadvantaged as a result (e.g., teachers having to work to differentiate to account for an 18-month spread, kids who started on time may get fewer opportunities to excel in school or sports vs. those that are older).

So again, how specifically do you think parents who don't like rampant redshirting are similar to anti-vaxxers?

Okay, I'll answer you. Here is my serious response as to why I think DCUM's anti-redshirt posters are like anti-vaxxers, based off of years of reading posts from them:

1. DCUM anti-redshirt posters believe in something fervently with little solid scientific evidence to support it. They are convinced of their rightness, but there isn't solid research that's been replicated and meets scientific standards to support that feeling of rightness. This is similar to how anti-vaxxers operate. Both groups have passionate feelings over something without an accompanying body of scientific evidence to support the depth of their feelings.

2. DCUM anti-redshirt posters will twist themselves in knots congratulating themselves on how they "followed the rules." Never mind that these are rules that they've largely decided in their own heads. (Schools set admissions policies, not parents; there are no rules being broken by parents who redshirt when allowed into schools that permit it, by definition.) This is particularly true of the people who rant about private schools and redshirting, which is astonishing to me in the lack of understanding that shows. I think there are posters on DCUM who do not understand how private school admissions work at a basic level. This is reminiscent of anti-vaxxers, who construct an imaginary worldview in their heads and are puzzled when the real world doesn't match the worldview in their heads.

3. Like anti-vaxxers, DCUM's anti-redshirt posters tend not to be very self-reflective. They'll engage with the educational system to advantage themselves and their children but if they think that somebody else has a perceived advantage that they didn't use, they throw a fit. DCUM's anti-redshirt posters are often wealthy parents who are engaging tutors and using private schools. This disadvantages kids who don't have access to those resources (and that is well-documented), but you don't see those posters too worried about that. I'm convinced the majority of DCUM's anti-redshirt posters spend more time ranting about redshirting on DCUM than they've ever spent thinking about educational inequities and how they contribute to those, let alone doing anything about it. There are likely some exceptions to that general rule, but given how many of DCUM's anti-redshirt posters are complaining about private school admissions policies, probably not many. This reminds me of anti-vaxxers in the lack of self-reflection.

4. They are logically inconsistent. They will simultaneously argue that redshirting offers no advantage while at the same time arguing that it's a huge advantage. If it's not an advantage, then it doesn't matter that other people redshirt. If it is an advantage, then the logical answer is to move towards flexible admissions policies, not rigid ones, so that the advantage is more widely available.

5. They talk about how they are nasty to other people's children and how they encourage their children to be nasty. I have seen posts in which they brag about how their kids gossip and laugh about other people's older children, or how they gossip with other parents about those older kids. This is similar to anti-vaxxer behavior: if you lurk in their forums (which I have, God help me), you'll see similarly worded posts saying horrid things about vaccinated children, and how they encourage their kids to mock vaccinated kids.

6. They can't do basic math and don't grasp statistics. I can't tell you how many times I've seen posts from anti-redshirt posters that have demonstrated that they can't add, or show a lack of understanding of statistical analysis.

I could go on, but this is long enough. You asked for an answer, and so I'm giving it to you. If you want to know what I think should happen as far as policies go, I think we should have flexible age ranges, and trust parental judgment and preschool/school recommendations with respect to the maturity and kindergarten readiness of children. I think there should be a transitional kindergarten available for "young fives" but at the same time, "young fives" who are ready to go to K should go. Kids develop at different rates, and I think the educational system should adapt to that. I think rigid cutoffs haven't been shown to show much educational benefit and I don't understand why some DCUM posters cling to them. That's a different post, though.

Wow. This is so spot on. I am officially out of these threads. You can’t argue with crazy.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Who cares? Do what you think is best for your kid. You sound really immature.

+1

I honestly wonder how most of DCUMs anti-redshirt posters manage to get through their days. They remind me of anti-vaxxers.

How are people who send their kids to school according to the rules/recommendations similar to those who flout them?

Do you want me to seriously respond? In my experience, DCUMs anti-redshirt posters aren't very rational and I don't really feel like writing up something that asks for critical thought from an anti-redshirt poster.

Yes, you made the statement; I'm simply asking you to defend it. My take is that there seem to be more similarities between parents who redshirt, and anti-vaxxers. Both flout the rules/recommendations for the perceived benefit of their own kids, even if others are disadvantaged as a result (e.g., teachers having to work to differentiate to account for an 18-month spread, kids who started on time may get fewer opportunities to excel in school or sports vs. those that are older).

So again, how specifically do you think parents who don't like rampant redshirting are similar to anti-vaxxers?

Okay, I'll answer you. Here is my serious response as to why I think DCUM's anti-redshirt posters are like anti-vaxxers, based off of years of reading posts from them:

1. DCUM anti-redshirt posters believe in something fervently with little solid scientific evidence to support it. They are convinced of their rightness, but there isn't solid research that's been replicated and meets scientific standards to support that feeling of rightness. This is similar to how anti-vaxxers operate. Both groups have passionate feelings over something without an accompanying body of scientific evidence to support the depth of their feelings.

2. DCUM anti-redshirt posters will twist themselves in knots congratulating themselves on how they "followed the rules." Never mind that these are rules that they've largely decided in their own heads. (Schools set admissions policies, not parents; there are no rules being broken by parents who redshirt when allowed into schools that permit it, by definition.) This is particularly true of the people who rant about private schools and redshirting, which is astonishing to me in the lack of understanding that shows. I think there are posters on DCUM who do not understand how private school admissions work at a basic level. This is reminiscent of anti-vaxxers, who construct an imaginary worldview in their heads and are puzzled when the real world doesn't match the worldview in their heads.

3. Like anti-vaxxers, DCUM's anti-redshirt posters tend not to be very self-reflective. They'll engage with the educational system to advantage themselves and their children but if they think that somebody else has a perceived advantage that they didn't use, they throw a fit. DCUM's anti-redshirt posters are often wealthy parents who are engaging tutors and using private schools. This disadvantages kids who don't have access to those resources (and that is well-documented), but you don't see those posters too worried about that. I'm convinced the majority of DCUM's anti-redshirt posters spend more time ranting about redshirting on DCUM than they've ever spent thinking about educational inequities and how they contribute to those, let alone doing anything about it. There are likely some exceptions to that general rule, but given how many of DCUM's anti-redshirt posters are complaining about private school admissions policies, probably not many. This reminds me of anti-vaxxers in the lack of self-reflection.

4. They are logically inconsistent. They will simultaneously argue that redshirting offers no advantage while at the same time arguing that it's a huge advantage. If it's not an advantage, then it doesn't matter that other people redshirt. If it is an advantage, then the logical answer is to move towards flexible admissions policies, not rigid ones, so that the advantage is more widely available.

5. They talk about how they are nasty to other people's children and how they encourage their children to be nasty. I have seen posts in which they brag about how their kids gossip and laugh about other people's older children, or how they gossip with other parents about those older kids. This is similar to anti-vaxxer behavior: if you lurk in their forums (which I have, God help me), you'll see similarly worded posts saying horrid things about vaccinated children, and how they encourage their kids to mock vaccinated kids.

6. They can't do basic math and don't grasp statistics. I can't tell you how many times I've seen posts from anti-redshirt posters that have demonstrated that they can't add, or show a lack of understanding of statistical analysis.

I could go on, but this is long enough. You asked for an answer, and so I'm giving it to you. If you want to know what I think should happen as far as policies go, I think we should have flexible age ranges, and trust parental judgment and preschool/school recommendations with respect to the maturity and kindergarten readiness of children. I think there should be a transitional kindergarten available for "young fives" but at the same time, "young fives" who are ready to go to K should go. Kids develop at different rates, and I think the educational system should adapt to that. I think rigid cutoffs haven't been shown to show much educational benefit and I don't understand why some DCUM posters cling to them. That's a different post, though.

Oh don’t get on your high horse about science. It’s hard proven that pro redshirt is good.

That is not what she was saying. I have never read of a pro redshirter claiming that she is doing because science says it’s best. Pro redshirters usually argue that this is what they (and teachers, educators, etc.) think it’s best for their OWN child. I have never read anywhere that all kids should be redshirted and there are plenty of mfamily that redshirt one child and not another (me!). Holding one child back might (hopefully will) help a more immature, insecure and overall developmentally not ready child do better, but it may be bad for another whom is ready and would just be bored and playing with the older kids.
Personally I am redshirting my late August birthday girl and I wish I could have my youngest skip one year. Neither is dumb or a genious.... this is not about academic at all, but about personalities, insecurities and maturities.

[Anonymous]

I thought the preliminary research shows that sending kids "on time" is good for the immature ones because it raises the standard for behavior? I've also read the theory that it's really good for kids to struggle just a bit because it helps develop grit and perseverance, which are very necessary qualities for success in adulthood.

At least that is what I read in the NYT?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:My March son is the YOUNGEST in his private K class in a suburban Virginia class. It blew my mind when the teacher said that at the parent teacher conference.

At a middle school teacher, I see the negative side of red shirting. A 15 year old 8th grader isn't hanging out with middle schoolers...they're finding high school kids who have high school opportunities to be involved in. Not all, of course, but many get involved dating high schoolers in 8th grade and it's generally not the most upstanding high schoolers.

My January DC is the second youngest in an ES immersion program with 3 (now 2 this year) classes. The youngest has an August bday. I could not believe how skewed the classes were.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I thought the preliminary research shows that sending kids "on time" is good for the immature ones because it raises the standard for behavior? I've also read the theory that it's really good for kids to struggle just a bit because it helps develop grit and perseverance, which are very necessary qualities for success in adulthood.

At least that is what I read in the NYT?

Were these research papers or Opeds?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Who cares? Do what you think is best for your kid. You sound really immature.

+1

I honestly wonder how most of DCUMs anti-redshirt posters manage to get through their days. They remind me of anti-vaxxers.

How are people who send their kids to school according to the rules/recommendations similar to those who flout them?

Do you want me to seriously respond? In my experience, DCUMs anti-redshirt posters aren't very rational and I don't really feel like writing up something that asks for critical thought from an anti-redshirt poster.

Yes, you made the statement; I'm simply asking you to defend it. My take is that there seem to be more similarities between parents who redshirt, and anti-vaxxers. Both flout the rules/recommendations for the perceived benefit of their own kids, even if others are disadvantaged as a result (e.g., teachers having to work to differentiate to account for an 18-month spread, kids who started on time may get fewer opportunities to excel in school or sports vs. those that are older).

So again, how specifically do you think parents who don't like rampant redshirting are similar to anti-vaxxers?

Okay, I'll answer you. Here is my serious response as to why I think DCUM's anti-redshirt posters are like anti-vaxxers, based off of years of reading posts from them:

1. DCUM anti-redshirt posters believe in something fervently with little solid scientific evidence to support it. They are convinced of their rightness, but there isn't solid research that's been replicated and meets scientific standards to support that feeling of rightness. This is similar to how anti-vaxxers operate. Both groups have passionate feelings over something without an accompanying body of scientific evidence to support the depth of their feelings.

2. DCUM anti-redshirt posters will twist themselves in knots congratulating themselves on how they "followed the rules." Never mind that these are rules that they've largely decided in their own heads. (Schools set admissions policies, not parents; there are no rules being broken by parents who redshirt when allowed into schools that permit it, by definition.) This is particularly true of the people who rant about private schools and redshirting, which is astonishing to me in the lack of understanding that shows. I think there are posters on DCUM who do not understand how private school admissions work at a basic level. This is reminiscent of anti-vaxxers, who construct an imaginary worldview in their heads and are puzzled when the real world doesn't match the worldview in their heads.

3. Like anti-vaxxers, DCUM's anti-redshirt posters tend not to be very self-reflective. They'll engage with the educational system to advantage themselves and their children but if they think that somebody else has a perceived advantage that they didn't use, they throw a fit. DCUM's anti-redshirt posters are often wealthy parents who are engaging tutors and using private schools. This disadvantages kids who don't have access to those resources (and that is well-documented), but you don't see those posters too worried about that. I'm convinced the majority of DCUM's anti-redshirt posters spend more time ranting about redshirting on DCUM than they've ever spent thinking about educational inequities and how they contribute to those, let alone doing anything about it. There are likely some exceptions to that general rule, but given how many of DCUM's anti-redshirt posters are complaining about private school admissions policies, probably not many. This reminds me of anti-vaxxers in the lack of self-reflection.

4. They are logically inconsistent. They will simultaneously argue that redshirting offers no advantage while at the same time arguing that it's a huge advantage. If it's not an advantage, then it doesn't matter that other people redshirt. If it is an advantage, then the logical answer is to move towards flexible admissions policies, not rigid ones, so that the advantage is more widely available.

5. They talk about how they are nasty to other people's children and how they encourage their children to be nasty. I have seen posts in which they brag about how their kids gossip and laugh about other people's older children, or how they gossip with other parents about those older kids. This is similar to anti-vaxxer behavior: if you lurk in their forums (which I have, God help me), you'll see similarly worded posts saying horrid things about vaccinated children, and how they encourage their kids to mock vaccinated kids.

6. They can't do basic math and don't grasp statistics. I can't tell you how many times I've seen posts from anti-redshirt posters that have demonstrated that they can't add, or show a lack of understanding of statistical analysis.

I could go on, but this is long enough. You asked for an answer, and so I'm giving it to you. If you want to know what I think should happen as far as policies go, I think we should have flexible age ranges, and trust parental judgment and preschool/school recommendations with respect to the maturity and kindergarten readiness of children. I think there should be a transitional kindergarten available for "young fives" but at the same time, "young fives" who are ready to go to K should go. Kids develop at different rates, and I think the educational system should adapt to that. I think rigid cutoffs haven't been shown to show much educational benefit and I don't understand why some DCUM posters cling to them. That's a different post, though.

Oh don’t get on your high horse about science. It’s hard proven that pro redshirt is good.

No, it certainly isn’t. One huge difference between the vaccine debate and the redshirt debate is that the science is clear on the vaccine debate and very murky on the redshirt debate. There is clear evidence that retention is an awful thing in almost every circumstance and some evidence that maybe affluent redshirted kids are an exception.

[Anonymous]

When so many people redshirt, and so many complaining about how much harder K Is getting - isn’t that cause and effect? When you’re consistently having to endu are kids a year older, of course the curriculum will start to follow the needs of those children vs the “on time” kids. People are consistently pushing the age range up.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I thought the preliminary research shows that sending kids "on time" is good for the immature ones because it raises the standard for behavior? I've also read the theory that it's really good for kids to struggle just a bit because it helps develop grit and perseverance, which are very necessary qualities for success in adulthood.

At least that is what I read in the NYT?

Were these research papers or Opeds?

both

articles on the research just delivering the results (favorable to sending on time) and Opeds based on them

[Anonymous]

So here's my question.

If people with spring and winter bday kids start redshirting in greater numbers, are the people with fall bday kids going to red shirt for TWO years to make up the difference?

Do you see the problem here? The absurdity this is going to produce?

7 year olds starting kindergarten?

[Anonymous]

Some poster went crazy pants defensive! And their arguments didn’t make sense and/or were entirely made up. Now I’m off to “encourage the children to be nasty”...

[Anonymous]

There are so many valid arguments to follow the age line but people will always defer to their personal situation and apprehensions. It will surprise many to know that kids who don’t redshirt aren’t selectively more mature by any means. They are all very young kids who don’t always follow directions or sit still. I don’t personally care when people redshirt except for those with clearly advanced kids they want to make “leaders”. Those kids have no business in a class with some of the little ones.

[Anonymous]

I am so glad we didn't do it! Two July kids here. Both are on the younger side of their classes, but they both have younger classmates. Both are doing very well.

I thought about doing it to my DS because we were applying out and there were more spots on the younger class (3rd grade). I talked to his teachers at the old school and the admission people at the future school (and that people talked to the teacher who tested him there). Everyone said: "Don't do it, he is doing fine in the correct grade." He got angry when he found out we were considering to do it. We decided not to do it. He is very happy at his new school!