My son's kindergarten class has several 7 yr olds in it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:My sister came in to visit from another state and went by my child's kindergarten class.

As soon as we got back to the car she gasped "I have never seen such huge kindergartners in my life! What are they feeding these kids? At least a third of them look like they are 8 years old! They make the rest of the kids look like little preschoolers!"

I immediately thought of this post and started to laugh...

Well yes some may be related to red-shirting, but where I live there are a lot of tall people with very tall kids who were not red-shirted. You can usually tell the age by the face though.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Teachers can't help but base their assessments of students on the students they have in their classes. As the male students have averaged older and older, the assessments of the "in grade" children have been impacted. So what you do with your snowflake does impact the other snowflakes. So no, redshirting isn't cost free.

Wait, I'm supposed to make a decision for my snowflake based on your concerns for your snowflake? Not a snowball's chance in hell that'll happen.

I understand most folks will make a decision about their snowflake and not worry about my snow flake. It frustrates me that adminstrators don't protect the normal aged snowflakes from those snowflakes that are way to old to be there.

[Anonymous]

I'm thinking of entering my 10 year old kid into Little League with 8 year olds. He's a little behind and could use the gift of time =>. Hopefully he makes the all star team!!

[Anonymous]

Ah, but Little League won't let you do this, They have rules and stick to them (unless you have a falsified birth certificate from the Dominican Republic)

[Anonymous]

I have not read the underlying study yet, but the Freakonomics summary below seems to confirm what many parents of held-back children report here -- that there are many real social and academic problems that lead parents to hold back some summer-birthday children. What would be interesting follow-up research is to investigate the perceptions of those summer-birthday children who are held back. Do they actually avoid the negative perceptions described in the study, or do the negative perceptions remain? Assuming the negative perceptions are reduced, to what extent (if any) are those negative perceptions transferred to children born in other times of the year? Does holding back even out the negative/positive perceptions to make them more "fair"? Or does some group remain the scapegoat?

Sam2

http://www.freakonomics.com/2011/11/02/the-disadvantages-of-summer-babies/

A new report from the Institute of Fiscal Studies in the U.K. examines the big difference that a few months can make in the student achievement of young children. ... [C]hildren born in summer months generally score lower on standardized tests and are seen as “underachievers;” while children born in September and autumn months are more academically and socially successful. ... Previous research published by the Institute for Fiscal Studies (IFS) has shown that children born at the start of the academic year achieve better exam results, on average, than children born at the end of the academic year. ... The IFS researchers found some other startling statistics: summer babies are between 20 and 30 percentage points (2.5 – 3.5 times) more likely to be considered below average by their teachers by age 7, and are 7 percentage points (2.5 times) more likely to report being always unhappy at school. They are also 6 percentage points (twice as likely) to report bullying, perhaps because of their smaller physical size.

[Anonymous]

A Redshiter's Limerick

There once was a dad who who did not
become a star on the field as he ought
so he said with a smirk, I know I'm a jerk
Let my son be much older not

[Anonymous]

Clearly the parents who held back students for reasons more related to the parents feelings are overly sensitive on this subject...it's unfair to my son's peers when they realize they are the OLDEST in a class by no choice of their own ...parents? get a grip.

[Anonymous]

I was just having a brutally honest conversation with a parent who said that academically he kid was doing fine but the school asked to hold back child because of physical reason, the child was small/weak.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I have not read the underlying study yet, but the Freakonomics summary below seems to confirm what many parents of held-back children report here -- that there are many real social and academic problems that lead parents to hold back some summer-birthday children. What would be interesting follow-up research is to investigate the perceptions of those summer-birthday children who are held back. Do they actually avoid the negative perceptions described in the study, or do the negative perceptions remain? Assuming the negative perceptions are reduced, to what extent (if any) are those negative perceptions transferred to children born in other times of the year? Does holding back even out the negative/positive perceptions to make them more "fair"? Or does some group remain the scapegoat?

Sam2

http://www.freakonomics.com/2011/11/02/the-disadvantages-of-summer-babies/

A new report from the Institute of Fiscal Studies in the U.K. examines the big difference that a few months can make in the student achievement of young children. ... [C]hildren born in summer months generally score lower on standardized tests and are seen as “underachievers;” while children born in September and autumn months are more academically and socially successful. ... Previous research published by the Institute for Fiscal Studies (IFS) has shown that children born at the start of the academic year achieve better exam results, on average, than children born at the end of the academic year. ... The IFS researchers found some other startling statistics: summer babies are between 20 and 30 percentage points (2.5 – 3.5 times) more likely to be considered below average by their teachers by age 7, and are 7 percentage points (2.5 times) more likely to report being always unhappy at school. They are also 6 percentage points (twice as likely) to report bullying, perhaps because of their smaller physical size.

But all that does is move when this "disadvantage" manifests itself.

[Anonymous]

I don't follow you, PP. The study suggests that summer-born children (the youngest in their class) are more likely than others to be perceived as underachievers, score lower on tests, and suffer bullying. It doesn't say what happens when those summer-birthday children are shifted to a lower grade.

Are you guessing that the held-back summer birthdays will still face these disadvantages, even when they're the oldest in the class? Or are you guessing that if some of the summer birthdays move, then the spring birthdays (now the youngest in the class) will begin to suffer all those same disadvantages?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

White Americans are the greatest advocates of redshirting, and no they do not call it holding back or redshirting. It is a tradition that schools, both public and private, are forcing on people who do not support the concept. Private and public schools advocate it all over Montgomery County. I have personally visited 26 of them to find a school for my son to attend in the Fall of 2012. All except 4 of the schools recommended redshirting as the best thing for boy children.

Many of the redshirters send the boys to private schools for multiple years of preschool including formal Kindergarden programs, then send them to public schools after they have already completed Kindergarden once or twice. The reasons they tell you they do it are the boys get a chance to grow larger and stronger to have a competitive advantage to play sports. The other reasons they say it is a good idea is they want to prevent their boys from being bullied, by letting them grow bigger and older; and they want the boys to be more "mature". The funny thing is - the redshirted boys I know are still being bullied in MoCo Kindergarden classes. Also, it is not surprising they do well academically in Kindergarden, afterall, they are repeating the same class 2 and 3 years.

I am not judging anyone, just sharing what I am being told by redshirters' parents in Montgomery County. I can't really say if I think it is right, wrong, or really matters if they are happy with it. I do believe the tradition is quite mainstream, though.

OMG, you're so full of it. It's hard to know where to begin

A nifty and more expensive way to prep private school kids for WPPSI without the homeschooling $800 workbook.
.

You are right about the WPPSI prep. Hilarious......!!!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I don't follow you, PP. The study suggests that summer-born children (the youngest in their class) are more likely than others to be perceived as underachievers, score lower on tests, and suffer bullying. It doesn't say what happens when those summer-birthday children are shifted to a lower grade.

Are you guessing that the held-back summer birthdays will still face these disadvantages, even when they're the oldest in the class? Or are you guessing that if some of the summer birthdays move, then the spring birthdays (now the youngest in the class) will begin to suffer all those same disadvantages?

I maintain that if summer birthdays move, then spring birthdays in the younger grade will suffer.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The study suggests that summer-born children (the youngest in their class) are more likely than others to be perceived as underachievers, score lower on tests, and suffer bullying. It doesn't say what happens when those summer-birthday children are shifted to a lower grade.

Are you guessing that the held-back summer birthdays will still face these disadvantages, even when they're the oldest in the class? Or are you guessing that if some of the summer birthdays move, then the spring birthdays (now the youngest in the class) will begin to suffer all those same disadvantages?

I maintain that if summer birthdays move, then spring birthdays in the younger grade will suffer.

Can we unpack the reasoning behind your hypothesis? Why do you think the spring birthdays will suffer? It seems like you're positing that the youngest children in any class will always be disadvantaged, no matter what, but I don't want to put words in your mouth. Do you think all spring birthday children will suffer, or just some? And what do you think will be the result if just some of the summer birthday children move, but not all (presumably the ones whose parents saw age struggles)? Will the spring birthdays still suffer if only some of the summer birthdays move?

[Anonymous]

My son is June birthday and is understandably one of the youngest in his class. What aggravates me is the students in his class that were born in April, May, June and July the YEAR BEFORE my son. I guess I do not fault the parents of the older kids for doing what they think is best for their kid but I fault the administrators who allow these insecure redshirt parents to harm other children like mine

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:My son is June birthday and is understandably one of the youngest in his class. What aggravates me is the students in his class that were born in April, May, June and July the YEAR BEFORE my son. I guess I do not fault the parents of the older kids for doing what they think is best for their kid but I fault the administrators who allow these insecure redshirt parents to harm other children like mine

How has your summer birthday son been harmed by being one of the youngest in his class? More specifically, how has your son been harmed by those April-July birthday children who were held back to be in his class?