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

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
The selfishness on display here is revolting.

A child who is given the advantage of being the oldest and best is pushing another kid to be younger and worse in comparison.

Schools are a community where actions have consequences on others .

Why on earth should I lift a finger to help anyone if the world is just full of A-holes ?

DCUM anti-redshirters are SO bizarre. I didn't redshirt, and read these threads because of the entertainment value from the weirdo anti-redshirters. This one is perplexing, though. Is PP also arguing that no kids should have outside supplements? No tutoring? No moving to "good" school districts? All of those have far, far more documented impact on others than redshirting (which is statistically insignificant) but I suspect that PP is one of the hyper competitive parents who does all of that. If you want to call an action selfish, why pick one that is statistically irrelevant and ignore the actions where there are years of data documenting the adverse impact on other kids?

I just can't get over the naked hypocrisy of the anti-redshirters.

Agree with everything, except redshirting is statistically significant, but after you control for many other variables just barely. After 2-3 years it is indeed insignificant. So it’s just a very minor effect lasting for a short time. If you really want to “cheat” read to your child every day till kindergarten, this will have a much stronger effect on their academic success.

For the bizarre anti redshirted, use the time you bash other peoples redshirting choices to do homework with your child. It will be more constructive and helpful for your kid.

I'm pretty sure this weirdo has mentioned before they don't even have kids. They have zero skin in the game and are full of opinions. They are so out of touch they don't even realize schools have moved on from the 12/31 cut off date.

DP. Oh, that little weirdo bad been told plenty of times that 12/31 is an unusual cut off date. She knows schools don't use it. Bit still, she insists that it is "natural law" that the cutoff date is 12/31, and therefore that parents of fall birthday kids who sent their kids on time for their districts are actually redshirting their kids. Yes, you read that correctly.

It's just part of the parade of surreal hypocrisy that is DCUM anti-redshirters.

Pretty sure the weirdo feels like they could have really been someone if it wasn't for those pesky kids a few months older. But for them she was going to be a star. It's all the fault of those few older kids, feeling proud of themselves when they got one over on her back in first grade.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
The selfishness on display here is revolting.

A child who is given the advantage of being the oldest and best is pushing another kid to be younger and worse in comparison.

Schools are a community where actions have consequences on others .

Why on earth should I lift a finger to help anyone if the world is just full of A-holes ?

DCUM anti-redshirters are SO bizarre. I didn't redshirt, and read these threads because of the entertainment value from the weirdo anti-redshirters. This one is perplexing, though. Is PP also arguing that no kids should have outside supplements? No tutoring? No moving to "good" school districts? All of those have far, far more documented impact on others than redshirting (which is statistically insignificant) but I suspect that PP is one of the hyper competitive parents who does all of that. If you want to call an action selfish, why pick one that is statistically irrelevant and ignore the actions where there are years of data documenting the adverse impact on other kids?

I just can't get over the naked hypocrisy of the anti-redshirters.

Agree with everything, except redshirting is statistically significant, but after you control for many other variables just barely. After 2-3 years it is indeed insignificant. So it’s just a very minor effect lasting for a short time. If you really want to “cheat” read to your child every day till kindergarten, this will have a much stronger effect on their academic success.

For the bizarre anti redshirted, use the time you bash other peoples redshirting choices to do homework with your child. It will be more constructive and helpful for your kid.

I'm pretty sure this weirdo has mentioned before they don't even have kids. They have zero skin in the game and are full of opinions. They are so out of touch they don't even realize schools have moved on from the 12/31 cut off date.

DP. Oh, that little weirdo bad been told plenty of times that 12/31 is an unusual cut off date. She knows schools don't use it. Bit still, she insists that it is "natural law" that the cutoff date is 12/31, and therefore that parents of fall birthday kids who sent their kids on time for their districts are actually redshirting their kids. Yes, you read that correctly.

It's just part of the parade of surreal hypocrisy that is DCUM anti-redshirters.

Pretty sure the weirdo feels like they could have really been someone if it wasn't for those pesky kids a few months older. But for them she was going to be a star. It's all the fault of those few older kids, feeling proud of themselves when they got one over on her back in first grade.

For me, the problem wasn't that my classmates were older than me chronologically, but in terms of brain development. When I was a kid, my brain developed about about two years slower than normal, as did my body. Of course, the ideal solution would've been to hold me back twice, but no school district was going to allow that. Holding back once was difficult enough for my parents, but I was fortunate enough to be able to wait a year, and start Kindergarten a week before my 6th birthday(though mentally and physically, my 4th birthday). Even though I was a year older than my classmates chronologically, I was a year younger than them mentally and physically, so I knew how my youngest classmates felt. This is why I'm so anti-redshirt; because I believe it should only be done in extreme cases like mine. For the vast majority of people, being redshirted would give them a massive advantage that it didn't give me because of my developmentally abnormalities.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
The selfishness on display here is revolting.

A child who is given the advantage of being the oldest and best is pushing another kid to be younger and worse in comparison.

Schools are a community where actions have consequences on others .

Why on earth should I lift a finger to help anyone if the world is just full of A-holes ?

DCUM anti-redshirters are SO bizarre. I didn't redshirt, and read these threads because of the entertainment value from the weirdo anti-redshirters. This one is perplexing, though. Is PP also arguing that no kids should have outside supplements? No tutoring? No moving to "good" school districts? All of those have far, far more documented impact on others than redshirting (which is statistically insignificant) but I suspect that PP is one of the hyper competitive parents who does all of that. If you want to call an action selfish, why pick one that is statistically irrelevant and ignore the actions where there are years of data documenting the adverse impact on other kids?

I just can't get over the naked hypocrisy of the anti-redshirters.

Agree with everything, except redshirting is statistically significant, but after you control for many other variables just barely. After 2-3 years it is indeed insignificant. So it’s just a very minor effect lasting for a short time. If you really want to “cheat” read to your child every day till kindergarten, this will have a much stronger effect on their academic success.

For the bizarre anti redshirted, use the time you bash other peoples redshirting choices to do homework with your child. It will be more constructive and helpful for your kid.

I'm pretty sure this weirdo has mentioned before they don't even have kids. They have zero skin in the game and are full of opinions. They are so out of touch they don't even realize schools have moved on from the 12/31 cut off date.

DP. Oh, that little weirdo bad been told plenty of times that 12/31 is an unusual cut off date. She knows schools don't use it. Bit still, she insists that it is "natural law" that the cutoff date is 12/31, and therefore that parents of fall birthday kids who sent their kids on time for their districts are actually redshirting their kids. Yes, you read that correctly.

It's just part of the parade of surreal hypocrisy that is DCUM anti-redshirters.

Pretty sure the weirdo feels like they could have really been someone if it wasn't for those pesky kids a few months older. But for them she was going to be a star. It's all the fault of those few older kids, feeling proud of themselves when they got one over on her back in first grade.

For me, the problem wasn't that my classmates were older than me chronologically, but in terms of brain development. When I was a kid, my brain developed about about two years slower than normal, as did my body. Of course, the ideal solution would've been to hold me back twice, but no school district was going to allow that. Holding back once was difficult enough for my parents, but I was fortunate enough to be able to wait a year, and start Kindergarten a week before my 6th birthday(though mentally and physically, my 4th birthday). Even though I was a year older than my classmates chronologically, I was a year younger than them mentally and physically, so I knew how my youngest classmates felt. This is why I'm so anti-redshirt; because I believe it should only be done in extreme cases like mine. For the vast majority of people, being redshirted would give them a massive advantage that it didn't give me because of my developmentally abnormalities.

I genuinely feel sorry for you and wish you healing.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
The selfishness on display here is revolting.

A child who is given the advantage of being the oldest and best is pushing another kid to be younger and worse in comparison.

Schools are a community where actions have consequences on others .

Why on earth should I lift a finger to help anyone if the world is just full of A-holes ?

DCUM anti-redshirters are SO bizarre. I didn't redshirt, and read these threads because of the entertainment value from the weirdo anti-redshirters. This one is perplexing, though. Is PP also arguing that no kids should have outside supplements? No tutoring? No moving to "good" school districts? All of those have far, far more documented impact on others than redshirting (which is statistically insignificant) but I suspect that PP is one of the hyper competitive parents who does all of that. If you want to call an action selfish, why pick one that is statistically irrelevant and ignore the actions where there are years of data documenting the adverse impact on other kids?

I just can't get over the naked hypocrisy of the anti-redshirters.

Agree with everything, except redshirting is statistically significant, but after you control for many other variables just barely. After 2-3 years it is indeed insignificant. So it’s just a very minor effect lasting for a short time. If you really want to “cheat” read to your child every day till kindergarten, this will have a much stronger effect on their academic success.

For the bizarre anti redshirted, use the time you bash other peoples redshirting choices to do homework with your child. It will be more constructive and helpful for your kid.

I'm pretty sure this weirdo has mentioned before they don't even have kids. They have zero skin in the game and are full of opinions. They are so out of touch they don't even realize schools have moved on from the 12/31 cut off date.

DP. Oh, that little weirdo bad been told plenty of times that 12/31 is an unusual cut off date. She knows schools don't use it. Bit still, she insists that it is "natural law" that the cutoff date is 12/31, and therefore that parents of fall birthday kids who sent their kids on time for their districts are actually redshirting their kids. Yes, you read that correctly.

It's just part of the parade of surreal hypocrisy that is DCUM anti-redshirters.

Pretty sure the weirdo feels like they could have really been someone if it wasn't for those pesky kids a few months older. But for them she was going to be a star. It's all the fault of those few older kids, feeling proud of themselves when they got one over on her back in first grade.

For me, the problem wasn't that my classmates were older than me chronologically, but in terms of brain development. When I was a kid, my brain developed about about two years slower than normal, as did my body. Of course, the ideal solution would've been to hold me back twice, but no school district was going to allow that. Holding back once was difficult enough for my parents, but I was fortunate enough to be able to wait a year, and start Kindergarten a week before my 6th birthday(though mentally and physically, my 4th birthday). Even though I was a year older than my classmates chronologically, I was a year younger than them mentally and physically, so I knew how my youngest classmates felt. This is why I'm so anti-redshirt; because I believe it should only be done in extreme cases like mine. For the vast majority of people, being redshirted would give them a massive advantage that it didn't give me because of my developmentally abnormalities.

Serious question. What evidence do you have it’s a massive advantage? Most studies find the advantage is minor, only some children benefit, and the effects fade after a few years. If it is indeed massive please post a link, I’d like to read it.
You can easily make the argument about brain development as a reason to redshirt boys. It is well established that brain development is delayed in boys and there is also a well documented achievement gap between genders. Arguably boys are at a disadvantage that can be remedied through redshirting.

[Anonymous]

Link with the summary of a study that shows redshirting benefits:

https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/00220671.2014.979909

There are significant advantages but they disappear by the end of elementary school. I would hardly call them massive.

[Anonymous]

Found another study that said:

The fact that age-of-entry effects were small in magnitude and dwarfed by other aspects of children's family and child care experiences suggests that age at starting school should not be regarded as a major determinant of children's school achievement, but that it may merit consideration in context with other probably more important factors (e.g., child's behavior and abilities).

Anti-redshirter, can you admit you are wrong and apologize to the people you accused of cheating?

Link:
https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/10409280701283460?scroll=top&needAccess=true

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
The selfishness on display here is revolting.

A child who is given the advantage of being the oldest and best is pushing another kid to be younger and worse in comparison.

Schools are a community where actions have consequences on others .

Why on earth should I lift a finger to help anyone if the world is just full of A-holes ?

DCUM anti-redshirters are SO bizarre. I didn't redshirt, and read these threads because of the entertainment value from the weirdo anti-redshirters. This one is perplexing, though. Is PP also arguing that no kids should have outside supplements? No tutoring? No moving to "good" school districts? All of those have far, far more documented impact on others than redshirting (which is statistically insignificant) but I suspect that PP is one of the hyper competitive parents who does all of that. If you want to call an action selfish, why pick one that is statistically irrelevant and ignore the actions where there are years of data documenting the adverse impact on other kids?

I just can't get over the naked hypocrisy of the anti-redshirters.

Agree with everything, except redshirting is statistically significant, but after you control for many other variables just barely. After 2-3 years it is indeed insignificant. So it’s just a very minor effect lasting for a short time. If you really want to “cheat” read to your child every day till kindergarten, this will have a much stronger effect on their academic success.

For the bizarre anti redshirted, use the time you bash other peoples redshirting choices to do homework with your child. It will be more constructive and helpful for your kid.

I'm pretty sure this weirdo has mentioned before they don't even have kids. They have zero skin in the game and are full of opinions. They are so out of touch they don't even realize schools have moved on from the 12/31 cut off date.

DP. Oh, that little weirdo bad been told plenty of times that 12/31 is an unusual cut off date. She knows schools don't use it. Bit still, she insists that it is "natural law" that the cutoff date is 12/31, and therefore that parents of fall birthday kids who sent their kids on time for their districts are actually redshirting their kids. Yes, you read that correctly.

It's just part of the parade of surreal hypocrisy that is DCUM anti-redshirters.

Pretty sure the weirdo feels like they could have really been someone if it wasn't for those pesky kids a few months older. But for them she was going to be a star. It's all the fault of those few older kids, feeling proud of themselves when they got one over on her back in first grade.

For me, the problem wasn't that my classmates were older than me chronologically, but in terms of brain development. When I was a kid, my brain developed about about two years slower than normal, as did my body. Of course, the ideal solution would've been to hold me back twice, but no school district was going to allow that. Holding back once was difficult enough for my parents, but I was fortunate enough to be able to wait a year, and start Kindergarten a week before my 6th birthday(though mentally and physically, my 4th birthday). Even though I was a year older than my classmates chronologically, I was a year younger than them mentally and physically, so I knew how my youngest classmates felt. This is why I'm so anti-redshirt; because I believe it should only be done in extreme cases like mine. For the vast majority of people, being redshirted would give them a massive advantage that it didn't give me because of my developmentally abnormalities.

Good thing nobody made you the arbiter of who can and can't redshirt. It's really none of your business what decisions other families make. Your experience of 1 means diddly squat. And guaranteed you have no kids and therefore no skin in this game but want to tell other people what they should do again and again? And just so you know, the Dec 31 cut off isn't a thing in most places anymore. You should perhaps be better informed about causes you feel so passionate about it if you want to be taken seriously.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
Often people see a few redshirted kids that are doing really well and assume that their success is due to redshirting. In fact it may be that other factors are at play, parents that redshirt tend to be more educated, and are more wealthy, both correlating with academic performance. Also, just the act of redshirting means the parent is concerned enough about how the student will do in school that they will take preventive action to address real or perceived disadvantage. Likely that parent will be involved, provide resources and emphasize the child academics so not that surprisingly the student will do well in school along with others kids that have a similar family background but were not redshirted.

In UK, kids aren't either held back or accelerated, but kids born between September and November(cut-off is August 31st in the UK) and far more likely to go to Oxford/Cambridge than kids born between June and August. Also, in American families, kids who are old for their grade do better than any siblings they might have who are young for their grade.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Link with the summary of a study that shows redshirting benefits:

https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/00220671.2014.979909

There are significant advantages but they disappear by the end of elementary school. I would hardly call them massive.

I disagree. The advantage of being the oldest at the beginning sets off a chain reaction that lasts not only through middle and high school, but through college as well. I, for one, don't know anyone who was redshirted who dropped out of college even though many students drop out of college every year. I also don't know one redshirted kid who took longer than 4 years to graduate from college.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Link with the summary of a study that shows redshirting benefits:

https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/00220671.2014.979909

There are significant advantages but they disappear by the end of elementary school. I would hardly call them massive.

I disagree. The advantage of being the oldest at the beginning sets off a chain reaction that lasts not only through middle and high school, but through college as well. I, for one, don't know anyone who was redshirted who dropped out of college even though many students drop out of college every year. I also don't know one redshirted kid who took longer than 4 years to graduate from college.

The evidence you bring is anecdotal, only a handful of cases, and you don’t control for other variables, like in those scientific studies. Please post a reference on Cambridge/Oxford attendance, I’d like to read it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Link with the summary of a study that shows redshirting benefits:

https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/00220671.2014.979909

There are significant advantages but they disappear by the end of elementary school. I would hardly call them massive.

I disagree. The advantage of being the oldest at the beginning sets off a chain reaction that lasts not only through middle and high school, but through college as well. I, for one, don't know anyone who was redshirted who dropped out of college even though many students drop out of college every year. I also don't know one redshirted kid who took longer than 4 years to graduate from college.

I don’t know anyone regardless of age who took more than four years. Your post is silly.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Link with the summary of a study that shows redshirting benefits:

https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/00220671.2014.979909

There are significant advantages but they disappear by the end of elementary school. I would hardly call them massive.

I disagree. The advantage of being the oldest at the beginning sets off a chain reaction that lasts not only through middle and high school, but through college as well. I, for one, don't know anyone who was redshirted who dropped out of college even though many students drop out of college every year. I also don't know one redshirted kid who took longer than 4 years to graduate from college.

The available studies on this out there do not support this conclusion.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Link with the summary of a study that shows redshirting benefits:

https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/00220671.2014.979909

There are significant advantages but they disappear by the end of elementary school. I would hardly call them massive.

I disagree. The advantage of being the oldest at the beginning sets off a chain reaction that lasts not only through middle and high school, but through college as well. I, for one, don't know anyone who was redshirted who dropped out of college even though many students drop out of college every year. I also don't know one redshirted kid who took longer than 4 years to graduate from college.

The evidence you bring is anecdotal, only a handful of cases, and you don’t control for other variables, like in those scientific studies. Please post a reference on Cambridge/Oxford attendance, I’d like to read it.

DA but

https://www.theguardian.com/education/2011/nov/01/august-babies-top-universities-study

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-21579484

https://ifs.org.uk/docs/born_matters_report.pdf

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Link with the summary of a study that shows redshirting benefits:

https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/00220671.2014.979909

There are significant advantages but they disappear by the end of elementary school. I would hardly call them massive.

I disagree. The advantage of being the oldest at the beginning sets off a chain reaction that lasts not only through middle and high school, but through college as well. I, for one, don't know anyone who was redshirted who dropped out of college even though many students drop out of college every year. I also don't know one redshirted kid who took longer than 4 years to graduate from college.

I don’t know anyone regardless of age who took more than four years. Your post is silly.

So if college wasn't a struggle for them, why did their parents have regrets about not redshirting?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Link with the summary of a study that shows redshirting benefits:

https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/00220671.2014.979909

There are significant advantages but they disappear by the end of elementary school. I would hardly call them massive.

I disagree. The advantage of being the oldest at the beginning sets off a chain reaction that lasts not only through middle and high school, but through college as well. I, for one, don't know anyone who was redshirted who dropped out of college even though many students drop out of college every year. I also don't know one redshirted kid who took longer than 4 years to graduate from college.

The evidence you bring is anecdotal, only a handful of cases, and you don’t control for other variables, like in those scientific studies. Please post a reference on Cambridge/Oxford attendance, I’d like to read it.

DA but

https://www.theguardian.com/education/2011/nov/01/august-babies-top-universities-study

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-21579484

https://ifs.org.uk/docs/born_matters_report.pdf

I would not put much stock in the guardian or bbc articles, they are sensationalist click bait papers. The last one you show us not a peer reviewed paper so some of the claims may not have a strong data backing.

I looked for a peer reviewed version of their work here:

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4282424/#!po=0.602410

Read on your own if you have the time, but what I get is that in UK August children perform worse than September born ones, but the effects are small and fade over time. They even cute a study that this effect is not observed in US, likely because of red shirting. So the redshirting takes out of the pool of August babies the ones that are less prepared and then there’s not much of a difference with September ones.

To me the conclusion still stays, redshirting provides small advantage that decrease in time, and it is beneficial only to a small subset of children.