Genuinely don't get why redshirting in K is allowed

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

I've clarified seven times. Of course there should be exceptions in the case of severe special needs - physically, intellectually, emotionally. But there needs to be a line drawn somewhere. You're being deliberately obtuse. Or are you actually arguing that the current system is fair?

And there is a line drawn somewhere. It's just that you think it should be drawn somewhere else.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

"Redshirting" is a euphemism for holding back children who are delayed and immature. Parents want to blame curriculum and pretend their child is fine so they call it "redshirting."

If a child is not delayed or significantly immature, parents are simply cheating the system and their children's classmates. Of course, if their children were advanced it would never be a question. Redshirted children are not the top of that class.

How are parents cheating the system, let alone their children's classmates, by delaying their children's entry to kindergarten by a year, in a system that allows parents to do so?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

The current "rule" allows basically any parent to redshirt at basically any time. Not much of a rule, is it.

It does? How? Where? In Maryland, any parent is allowed to redshirt a 5-year-old for one year -- which is not what I, personally, consider "at basically any time".

[Anonymous]

My kid is in K now and I only know of 2 kids who were redshirted. One had a special (physical) need and the other it was for parental career comfort. My child's K class doesn't have any.

[Anonymous]

I know several middle-aged adult men who "failed" kindergarten back in the day and repeated. They are all now intelligent, contributing members of society. Red-shirting is simply taking away that year of "failure" by putting off K for a year.

"Redshirting" for sports reasons may be new, but holding kids back for academic or, more likely, social maturity reasons is not.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I know several middle-aged adult men who "failed" kindergarten back in the day and repeated. They are all now intelligent, contributing members of society. Red-shirting is simply taking away that year of "failure" by putting off K for a year.

"Redshirting" for sports reasons may be new, but holding kids back for academic or, more likely, social maturity reasons is not.

I doubt their parents chose it, though. The school probably did.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

The current "rule" allows basically any parent to redshirt at basically any time. Not much of a rule, is it.

It does? How? Where? In Maryland, any parent is allowed to redshirt a 5-year-old for one year -- which is not what I, personally, consider "at basically any time".

Are you this literal in real life or only online? Do you genuinely not see the point of this post? There is redshirting allowed with no documented need other than parental preference.

[Anonymous]

Is there a limit to redshirting within the first year? I don't know of any.

A child who turns six on Sept 2 (and so would naturally be the oldest in the K class in MD) can still redshirt, right? So there is nothing stopping a 7 year old from being in K, is there? Surely we can agree that that's a whacky system, and maybe SOME limits and guidelines should be implemented. We're already starting to get April and May parents asking about redshirting right here on DCUM.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I know several middle-aged adult men who "failed" kindergarten back in the day and repeated. They are all now intelligent, contributing members of society. Red-shirting is simply taking away that year of "failure" by putting off K for a year.

"Redshirting" for sports reasons may be new, but holding kids back for academic or, more likely, social maturity reasons is not.

Those same men now would almost certainly have been identified as ADHD or other LD and received support within the school system at their appropriate grade level. You can argue over which method is better, but it's really not the same situation.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Is there a limit to redshirting within the first year? I don't know of any.

A child who turns six on Sept 2 (and so would naturally be the oldest in the K class in MD) can still redshirt, right? So there is nothing stopping a 7 year old from being in K, is there? Surely we can agree that that's a whacky system, and maybe SOME limits and guidelines should be implemented. We're already starting to get April and May parents asking about redshirting right here on DCUM.

After reading this whole thread I'm pretty convinced that giving parents the discretion to choose when to start school (up to 1 year late) is actually perfectly reasonable. Are all of you anti-redshirters this willing to let the government (state in this case) into other affairs in your home? -signed no dog in this fight

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I know several middle-aged adult men who "failed" kindergarten back in the day and repeated. They are all now intelligent, contributing members of society. Red-shirting is simply taking away that year of "failure" by putting off K for a year.

"Redshirting" for sports reasons may be new, but holding kids back for academic or, more likely, social maturity reasons is not.

Those same men now would almost certainly have been identified as ADHD or other LD and received support within the school system at their appropriate grade level. You can argue over which method is better, but it's really not the same situation.

I can't speak for all who went through this, but the ones I know would never have been identified as ADHD or learning disabled. All have advanced degrees and high-level professional jobs. They just weren't ready for K "on time."

And responding to an earlier PP, their parents held them back. At the recommendation of teachers, sure, but it wasn't a mandate.

I only know of 2 kids who were redshirted. One was especially interesting to me because it was 1 of a pair of twins - you'd better believe the parents thought that through long and hard before putting them in different classes. But it worked for those children. The problem with a hard and fast rule is that sometimes, the things that may cause a child to be held back are intangible - not necessarily a severe disability or anything like that, but even a delay in one area could be enough for a parent to think that holding the child back a year is the right choice.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

The current "rule" allows basically any parent to redshirt at basically any time. Not much of a rule, is it.

It does? How? Where? In Maryland, any parent is allowed to redshirt a 5-year-old for one year -- which is not what I, personally, consider "at basically any time".

Are you this literal in real life or only online? Do you genuinely not see the point of this post? There is redshirting allowed with no documented need other than parental preference.

Yes, there is. Those are the rules. If you don't like the rules, start working to change the rules.

[Anonymous]

I think at least part of the frustration is that school districts make it nearly impossible for a child to start even two months early, but a kid can start up to a year late. So if you have a kid who is ready for K at 4.75 years old, they simply aren't allowed to start early, regardless of how mature and academically prepared they may be.
So on one hand, the school is saying "all that matters is the age - we can educate any child within the same age range" when talking to parents of advanced kids and then in the next breath saying that "age doesn't matter, maturity is what counts" when saying parents can chose to hold their kids back.

So which is it? Can the school adequately educate all children of the same age span in the same classroom (with the notable exception of those kids with severe enough disabilities as to not be mainstreamed)? If so, then why doesn't a kid who is six and being enrolled for the first time go into first grade? If not, then why don't the schools recognize that just as some kids may benefit from being older than normal, others may benefit from being younger than normal?

A little consistency in the policies would be nice.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

The current "rule" allows basically any parent to redshirt at basically any time. Not much of a rule, is it.

It does? How? Where? In Maryland, any parent is allowed to redshirt a 5-year-old for one year -- which is not what I, personally, consider "at basically any time".

Are you this literal in real life or only online? Do you genuinely not see the point of this post? There is redshirting allowed with no documented need other than parental preference.

Yes, there is. Those are the rules. If you don't like the rules, start working to change the rules.

How many times are you going to regurgitate that line without making any point at all? WHAT are the rules? You're not even making sense now.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Is there a limit to redshirting within the first year? I don't know of any.

A child who turns six on Sept 2 (and so would naturally be the oldest in the K class in MD) can still redshirt, right? So there is nothing stopping a 7 year old from being in K, is there? Surely we can agree that that's a whacky system, and maybe SOME limits and guidelines should be implemented. We're already starting to get April and May parents asking about redshirting right here on DCUM.

Yes, this child could. But is it actually happening? And if it is, is it actually happening in meaningful numbers? And if it is actually happening in meaningful numbers, is it causing any problems? Let's answer those questions first, instead of getting upset about hypotheticals.