Has anyone “redshirted” a January kid?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So again, how old is too old? If 6y8m isn’t too old to start K, how old is? This is not a rhetorical question - I’d like to hear answers from redshirt supporters.

I am strongly in favor of flexibility because from what I see, most parents have a decent sense of their child's readiness. I guess you could say it's pro-redshirting but what I am really in favor of is flexibility. Some kids strongly benefit by an earlier start, some by a later start. (I think this strict cookie cutter date approach is bananas.) It doesn't surprise me that the only large-scale study of the impact of relative age on ADHD medication/diagnosis where relative age didn't correlate to diagnosis was from the Netherlands, which is very flexible about starting year and allows for a lot of parental discretion. IMO that model is much better. Anti-redshirt DCUM posters are all about crazy slippery slope arguments, but I doubt that would happen in practice.

To answer your specific question, I think having a rule that kids have to be in school by the time they are seven is reasonable. Alternatively I think a two-year age range would be okay: you can elect entry in one of two years. I think in practice this how things work in the Netherlands: kids are given a wide starting age range from 5-7. It seems like a reasonable approach.

My child (not redshirted) was in a class with a child who was redshirted because of SNs, February birth. There were also other redshirted kids. It was fine. I saw literally none of the supposedly horrid impacts that DCUM's stressed-out anti-redshirt posters said would happen. Kids didn't care, parents (at least the sane, normal ones I hung out with) didn't care. Parents made the right choice as far as I could tell. It was NBD.

Way too reasonable.

So MUST be in school by the 7th birthday? Or have the entire year of 7 to start? Ie: could start at 7.5 because that is technically still 7? What if a kid's birthday is in August? They'd have to start by 6 because they'd turn 7 the following August? What if a kid's birthday is in October? They can be 6y11m when they start? At some point you are going to have to make an arbitrary cutoff. At some point you cannot just be "flexible" because some parents are always going to take advantage of that. When my first kids started and I heard of June kids redshirting I thought THAT was bananas. Now OP is talking about January and people are like "cool." So it stands to reason that as each older age becomes normalized, the new reshirting age will just get older and older?

[Anonymous]

your husband is insane. send your kid to school

[Anonymous]

You can hedge your bets and see how things go by putting a deposit down at a private preschool. Yes it sucks to lose money if you decide to go with public K, but it allows you time to make the best decision for your kid based on where he is in the Spring and Summer. I say this as someone who lost a large preschool deposit when my kid got into the public PK grade, but the public school ended up being the best choice for him.

Young kids can change so much in a short time, why pigeonhole yourself in January when you could possibly postpone the decision for some months?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So again, how old is too old? If 6y8m isn’t too old to start K, how old is? This is not a rhetorical question - I’d like to hear answers from redshirt supporters.

I am strongly in favor of flexibility because from what I see, most parents have a decent sense of their child's readiness. I guess you could say it's pro-redshirting but what I am really in favor of is flexibility. Some kids strongly benefit by an earlier start, some by a later start. (I think this strict cookie cutter date approach is bananas.) It doesn't surprise me that the only large-scale study of the impact of relative age on ADHD medication/diagnosis where relative age didn't correlate to diagnosis was from the Netherlands, which is very flexible about starting year and allows for a lot of parental discretion. IMO that model is much better. Anti-redshirt DCUM posters are all about crazy slippery slope arguments, but I doubt that would happen in practice.

To answer your specific question, I think having a rule that kids have to be in school by the time they are seven is reasonable. Alternatively I think a two-year age range would be okay: you can elect entry in one of two years. I think in practice this how things work in the Netherlands: kids are given a wide starting age range from 5-7. It seems like a reasonable approach.

My child (not redshirted) was in a class with a child who was redshirted because of SNs, February birth. There were also other redshirted kids. It was fine. I saw literally none of the supposedly horrid impacts that DCUM's stressed-out anti-redshirt posters said would happen. Kids didn't care, parents (at least the sane, normal ones I hung out with) didn't care. Parents made the right choice as far as I could tell. It was NBD.

Way too reasonable.

So MUST be in school by the 7th birthday? Or have the entire year of 7 to start? Ie: could start at 7.5 because that is technically still 7? What if a kid's birthday is in August? They'd have to start by 6 because they'd turn 7 the following August? What if a kid's birthday is in October? They can be 6y11m when they start? At some point you are going to have to make an arbitrary cutoff. At some point you cannot just be "flexible" because some parents are always going to take advantage of that. When my first kids started and I heard of June kids redshirting I thought THAT was bananas. Now OP is talking about January and people are like "cool." So it stands to reason that as each older age becomes normalized, the new reshirting age will just get older and older?

You sound too irrational to have a discussion with. Sorry.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So again, how old is too old? If 6y8m isn’t too old to start K, how old is? This is not a rhetorical question - I’d like to hear answers from redshirt supporters.

I am strongly in favor of flexibility because from what I see, most parents have a decent sense of their child's readiness. I guess you could say it's pro-redshirting but what I am really in favor of is flexibility. Some kids strongly benefit by an earlier start, some by a later start. (I think this strict cookie cutter date approach is bananas.) It doesn't surprise me that the only large-scale study of the impact of relative age on ADHD medication/diagnosis where relative age didn't correlate to diagnosis was from the Netherlands, which is very flexible about starting year and allows for a lot of parental discretion. IMO that model is much better. Anti-redshirt DCUM posters are all about crazy slippery slope arguments, but I doubt that would happen in practice.

To answer your specific question, I think having a rule that kids have to be in school by the time they are seven is reasonable. Alternatively I think a two-year age range would be okay: you can elect entry in one of two years. I think in practice this how things work in the Netherlands: kids are given a wide starting age range from 5-7. It seems like a reasonable approach.

My child (not redshirted) was in a class with a child who was redshirted because of SNs, February birth. There were also other redshirted kids. It was fine. I saw literally none of the supposedly horrid impacts that DCUM's stressed-out anti-redshirt posters said would happen. Kids didn't care, parents (at least the sane, normal ones I hung out with) didn't care. Parents made the right choice as far as I could tell. It was NBD.

Way too reasonable.

Unfortunately the DCUM anti-redshirt posters aren't well known for their reason.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Do I have this right? He will turn five in January 2020, but you want him to start kindergarten in fall 2021 instead, when he will be 6 going on 7? Absolutely not.

+1 isn't this illegal? at a certain point don't parents have to put their kids in school or homeschool?

[Anonymous]

I can’t believe people get so upset over this. I’ve never redshirted a kid but I figure people know their own kids best. Isn’t the limit for a Kindergarten waiver only one year anyway? So no, there aren’t going to be 9 year olds in your kids Kindergarten class. We looked at some Montessori elementary schools that grouped K-2 all day in the same room so would that not be okay with the anti-redshirt parents?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I can’t believe people get so upset over this. I’ve never redshirted a kid but I figure people know their own kids best. Isn’t the limit for a Kindergarten waiver only one year anyway? So no, there aren’t going to be 9 year olds in your kids Kindergarten class. We looked at some Montessori elementary schools that grouped K-2 all day in the same room so would that not be okay with the anti-redshirt parents?

You are obviously too rational for these discussions.

[Anonymous]

I haven't read the entire thread but I do have a boy with a January birthday who is about to turn 15 in 8th grade.

We did send him on time to school (age 5 to kindergarten). He received extensive help for being severely dyslexic at school. Last year we moved and the new school, which is private, put him in 8th grade with his peers. After a few weeks, they called and asked that we move him to 7th grade despite his age. It was a tough blow for DS at the time, which is what I think OP is trying to avoid by redshirting early. However, a year later it has turned out to be a good move. In my DS's case, the dyslexia, plus social and physical immaturity, made the move work. I really think it would have been hard though had he hit puberty on-time or early, and you don't really know those things at age 5.

Also, we were helped by a move -- so his old friends never knew what happened.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Do I have this right? He will turn five in January 2020, but you want him to start kindergarten in fall 2021 instead, when he will be 6 going on 7? Absolutely not.

+1 isn't this illegal? at a certain point don't parents have to put their kids in school or homeschool?

Yes. But it isn’t until they are 6 going on 7.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I would not as that's a huge hold back. You are military. You have tricare. Go to the on base developmental ped and they will help you get what you need - OT, PT, ST and/or ABA. Get your child help vs.holdback. He will be more than 9 months as the cut off is 9/1 in less you test in so kids will be significantly younger. Our experience is that our child acted much younger with younger kids and did better being the youngest vs. the oldest.

Did you post this just to prove your knowledge of Tricare insurances? We have obviously been getting him help.

Wow, OP. PP was just trying to help, but you've proven incredibly ungrateful and I have the feeling you've already decided and you just want people to pat you on the back. You should ask Jeff to delete this thread, it's useless.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:So again, how old is too old? If 6y8m isn’t too old to start K, how old is? This is not a rhetorical question - I’d like to hear answers from redshirt supporters.

Did anyone say they supported holding this kid back? I think that January is too far from the cutoff and I support redshirting in some circumstances.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I would not as that's a huge hold back. You are military. You have tricare. Go to the on base developmental ped and they will help you get what you need - OT, PT, ST and/or ABA. Get your child help vs.holdback. He will be more than 9 months as the cut off is 9/1 in less you test in so kids will be significantly younger. Our experience is that our child acted much younger with younger kids and did better being the youngest vs. the oldest.

Did you post this just to prove your knowledge of Tricare insurances? We have obviously been getting him help.

Wow, OP. PP was just trying to help, but you've proven incredibly ungrateful and I have the feeling you've already decided and you just want people to pat you on the back. You should ask Jeff to delete this thread, it's useless.

I’m not ungrateful just irritated when people post “get him therapy”- like it never occurred to me to get my child help. I’ve been advocating to get him help since he was two years old and could probably give a seminar on it at this point.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:OP whatever you can do to help your DC you should do. If he does badly in public K they won’t let him repeat. No one cares or teases about this.
In my experience they tease the youngest not the oldest.

absolutely not true - I know a couple kids who repeated grades (in MCPS). you just have to advocate strongly for your kid.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I would not as that's a huge hold back. You are military. You have tricare. Go to the on base developmental ped and they will help you get what you need - OT, PT, ST and/or ABA. Get your child help vs.holdback. He will be more than 9 months as the cut off is 9/1 in less you test in so kids will be significantly younger. Our experience is that our child acted much younger with younger kids and did better being the youngest vs. the oldest.

Did you post this just to prove your knowledge of Tricare insurances? We have obviously been getting him help.

Wow, OP. PP was just trying to help, but you've proven incredibly ungrateful and I have the feeling you've already decided and you just want people to pat you on the back. You should ask Jeff to delete this thread, it's useless.

I’m not ungrateful just irritated when people post “get him therapy”- like it never occurred to me to get my child help. I’ve been advocating to get him help since he was two years old and could probably give a seminar on it at this point.

You never said that you were or were not getting your child therapies. A lot of parents don't do therapies outside the school system, even if they have tricare. Tricare and Medicaid are the only two insurances that are very generous with private therapies. It makes no sense to hold back a January child. Some of us have kids with SN and are military and/or faced this as we were close or past the cut off date.

What answer are you looking for? Yes, plan to hold back your child.