Redshirting a girl

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Would all this be solved by simply starting K later across the board, like 6? Is this a school readiness issue or a competitive advantage issue?

Kindergarten used to be less academic with more playing, music, and focus on SEL over making sure kids learn to read. That's flipped now because of concerns about academics. K is now essentially what 1st was back in the 80s.

I think we just need to respect the developmental stage of the kids. Don't expect 5 yr to olds (and especially not 4 year olds!) to sit at desks doing worksheets all day. Call it Kindergarten or pre-kindergarten, it doesn't matter, but as long as the focus is in play-based learning until 6, it would be more developmentally appropriate.

Not around here and ever consider if your child is not ready you failed to prepare them. K is school. They go to learn to read, write and more.

That "more" is key, especially in the early years: Does your kid have the social and emotional skills to cope with seven hours in a group setting?

[Anonymous]

Do you see yourself ever moving away from NY to a state with a typical late summer/early fall cutoff? If so, hold back. Reason being if she had started K in a state with the normal cutoff, she would be one grade behind a NYer anyway.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Would all this be solved by simply starting K later across the board, like 6? Is this a school readiness issue or a competitive advantage issue?

I think kids should have to be 5 by the first day of school. Which is how many districts are set already, but not all. Then there are the extreme outliers like NY. There aren’t many kids starting K at 4 anymore.

My 3rd grader has an end-of-August birthday. She started K at 5 just after Labor Day but Virginia replaced the so-called Kings Dominion law and now our public school district starts the 3rd week of August (August 21st this past year) so if she were starting today she'd start K at 4. Not sure that really makes a difference.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP I truly believe that those saying send her want you and your daughter to fail in order to decrease competition for their own kids. Competition is national these days so this level of nuttiness is still nuts but makes a bit of sense. You’re not getting honest answers. All of us would hold back our own in this scenario.

Yes, millions of kids worth of national competition out there for my kid, so I'm trying to winnow the field one-by-one by posting false opinions on an anonymous message board. It may take me and my kind thousands of hours of effort spread out over year to change just enough minds to make a small dent in our DC's cohorts, but it will be worth it, so so very worth it. You've identified our true motives, PP. This all seems far more plausible than some people just legitimately having different opinions than you.

You’re trying to change the view that redshirting is favorable to create a cultural shift away from it. That’s what I see on these threads. It wouldn’t make people so angry if it weren’t a threat. Of course one person doesn’t make a difference but I feel the goal is to generally make people feel that redshirting is immoral and unfair so fewer will do it.

Yeah but the flip side is that so many people are so worried about some potential disadvantage that may or may happen as a result of following the cut offs and sending on time that people like OP feel “everyone” is doing it so they must also hold their kids back or they will be doing harm. The truth is that not everyone is holding their kids, and those of us who sent our cusp kids on time and had no ill effects are welcome to share that perspective and contribute to the dialogue to dispel the myth that the youngest kids in the grade are likely to struggle. I do feel it is important to share this point of view because I personally think rampant redshirting has impacted how kindergarten looks today and it has the potential to get even more developmentally inappropriate, which would be a shame for our youngest learners.

But OP isn’t actually holding her daughter back. She is in an outlier state. In every other county and state in the nation, there wouldn’t even be a question: her daughter would go a year later. People on this thread are being ridiculous and acting like she has a May birthday or something and is considering true redshirting. No. She would be technically redshirting for her district but a totally normal birthday for everywhere else.

I also find the puberty arguments to be a misogynistic red herring. Girls’ minds matter more than their bodies. They don’t magically emotionally and intellectually mature just because they grow breasts. Tall girls with breasts deserve a childhood, too, even if apparently some parents are still living in the 15th century and feel they do not.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP I truly believe that those saying send her want you and your daughter to fail in order to decrease competition for their own kids. Competition is national these days so this level of nuttiness is still nuts but makes a bit of sense. You’re not getting honest answers. All of us would hold back our own in this scenario.

Yes, millions of kids worth of national competition out there for my kid, so I'm trying to winnow the field one-by-one by posting false opinions on an anonymous message board. It may take me and my kind thousands of hours of effort spread out over year to change just enough minds to make a small dent in our DC's cohorts, but it will be worth it, so so very worth it. You've identified our true motives, PP. This all seems far more plausible than some people just legitimately having different opinions than you.

You’re trying to change the view that redshirting is favorable to create a cultural shift away from it. That’s what I see on these threads. It wouldn’t make people so angry if it weren’t a threat. Of course one person doesn’t make a difference but I feel the goal is to generally make people feel that redshirting is immoral and unfair so fewer will do it.

Yeah but the flip side is that so many people are so worried about some potential disadvantage that may or may happen as a result of following the cut offs and sending on time that people like OP feel “everyone” is doing it so they must also hold their kids back or they will be doing harm. The truth is that not everyone is holding their kids, and those of us who sent our cusp kids on time and had no ill effects are welcome to share that perspective and contribute to the dialogue to dispel the myth that the youngest kids in the grade are likely to struggle. I do feel it is important to share this point of view because I personally think rampant redshirting has impacted how kindergarten looks today and it has the potential to get even more developmentally inappropriate, which would be a shame for our youngest learners.

But OP isn’t actually holding her daughter back. She is in an outlier state. In every other county and state in the nation, there wouldn’t even be a question: her daughter would go a year later. People on this thread are being ridiculous and acting like she has a May birthday or something and is considering true redshirting. No. She would be technically redshirting for her district but a totally normal birthday for everywhere else.

I also find the puberty arguments to be a misogynistic red herring. Girls’ minds matter more than their bodies. They don’t magically emotionally and intellectually mature just because they grow breasts. Tall girls with breasts deserve a childhood, too, even if apparently some parents are still living in the 15th century and feel they do not.

But is OP planning to move to those states? If not, it's not relevant.

I grew up when lots of kids started elementary school a full year early or skipped a grade when it was clear they could handle the academic work. On average, they weren't any more or less socially well adjusted that kids who started on time. And there were a few kids whose parents went abroad during early elementary and put them back a year when they returned because their academic experience in a foreign language was unsatisfactory. Again, they were fine socially.

I think it's ridiculous how much parents worry about how things are going to be for the kid in ten years or more. My kid started on time despite a late summer birthday, and by the time he left for college, he thought it was cool to be leaving before he turned 18. One of his roommates (from NYS) started at 17, too. He's also fine.

I'm a huge planner, but you need to parent the kid in front of you. Can they cope in a kindergarten classroom? Will you be able to work with the teachers to reassure them that you aren't worried about a 4 or 5 YO's academic skills, if you're not? I wasn't, and my kid's K teachers weren't, either. It worked out fine.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Would all this be solved by simply starting K later across the board, like 6? Is this a school readiness issue or a competitive advantage issue?

Kindergarten used to be less academic with more playing, music, and focus on SEL over making sure kids learn to read. That's flipped now because of concerns about academics. K is now essentially what 1st was back in the 80s.

I think we just need to respect the developmental stage of the kids. Don't expect 5 yr to olds (and especially not 4 year olds!) to sit at desks doing worksheets all day. Call it Kindergarten or pre-kindergarten, it doesn't matter, but as long as the focus is in play-based learning until 6, it would be more developmentally appropriate.

Not around here and ever consider if your child is not ready you failed to prepare them. K is school. They go to learn to read, write and more.

That "more" is key, especially in the early years: Does your kid have the social and emotional skills to cope with seven hours in a group setting?

Most kids, especially in this area, go to a full day day care or full day preschool by age four. Yes, of course mine did. They went to a preschool that had a prek program the fully prepared them and was a 9-3 program. So, it sounds like if you are questioning it, you didn't prepare your kids well in the choices you made early on. Mine were also fully reading before K, and that prek program.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP I truly believe that those saying send her want you and your daughter to fail in order to decrease competition for their own kids. Competition is national these days so this level of nuttiness is still nuts but makes a bit of sense. You’re not getting honest answers. All of us would hold back our own in this scenario.

Yes, millions of kids worth of national competition out there for my kid, so I'm trying to winnow the field one-by-one by posting false opinions on an anonymous message board. It may take me and my kind thousands of hours of effort spread out over year to change just enough minds to make a small dent in our DC's cohorts, but it will be worth it, so so very worth it. You've identified our true motives, PP. This all seems far more plausible than some people just legitimately having different opinions than you.

You’re trying to change the view that redshirting is favorable to create a cultural shift away from it. That’s what I see on these threads. It wouldn’t make people so angry if it weren’t a threat. Of course one person doesn’t make a difference but I feel the goal is to generally make people feel that redshirting is immoral and unfair so fewer will do it.

Yeah but the flip side is that so many people are so worried about some potential disadvantage that may or may happen as a result of following the cut offs and sending on time that people like OP feel “everyone” is doing it so they must also hold their kids back or they will be doing harm. The truth is that not everyone is holding their kids, and those of us who sent our cusp kids on time and had no ill effects are welcome to share that perspective and contribute to the dialogue to dispel the myth that the youngest kids in the grade are likely to struggle. I do feel it is important to share this point of view because I personally think rampant redshirting has impacted how kindergarten looks today and it has the potential to get even more developmentally inappropriate, which would be a shame for our youngest learners.

But OP isn’t actually holding her daughter back. She is in an outlier state. In every other county and state in the nation, there wouldn’t even be a question: her daughter would go a year later. People on this thread are being ridiculous and acting like she has a May birthday or something and is considering true redshirting. No. She would be technically redshirting for her district but a totally normal birthday for everywhere else.

I also find the puberty arguments to be a misogynistic red herring. Girls’ minds matter more than their bodies. They don’t magically emotionally and intellectually mature just because they grow breasts. Tall girls with breasts deserve a childhood, too, even if apparently some parents are still living in the 15th century and feel they do not.

But is OP planning to move to those states? If not, it's not relevant.

I grew up when lots of kids started elementary school a full year early or skipped a grade when it was clear they could handle the academic work. On average, they weren't any more or less socially well adjusted that kids who started on time. And there were a few kids whose parents went abroad during early elementary and put them back a year when they returned because their academic experience in a foreign language was unsatisfactory. Again, they were fine socially.

I think it's ridiculous how much parents worry about how things are going to be for the kid in ten years or more. My kid started on time despite a late summer birthday, and by the time he left for college, he thought it was cool to be leaving before he turned 18. One of his roommates (from NYS) started at 17, too. He's also fine.

I'm a huge planner, but you need to parent the kid in front of you. Can they cope in a kindergarten classroom? Will you be able to work with the teachers to reassure them that you aren't worried about a 4 or 5 YO's academic skills, if you're not? I wasn't, and my kid's K teachers weren't, either. It worked out fine.

If a 5 year old cannot handle K, there is more going on and that child needs an evaluation and help.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote: I had a friend who had enough credits to graduate as a junior in HS but didn’t because she was born in August and didn’t want to go to college at 17 and be 17 for an entire year. Something to think about.

That's a different situation and not what anyone is talking about. The kids turn 5 with a few weeks or so of starting K, so they will only be 17 in college for a few weeks as well.

[Anonymous]

Op, trust your gut. Chances are, 20 years from now, you will look back and be happy with whatever decision you made. You know your child better than anyone else…what do you think will be best for her?

I am a female, with a December birthday, who started K at age 4. Yes, I went to college as a 17 year old…it was not a problem! If I had the chance, I wouldn’t change a thing. But…that’s me. I know it seems like a monumental decision now, but in the grand scheme of life it isn’t. Trust your gut, you really can’t go wrong either way.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Do you see yourself ever moving away from NY to a state with a typical late summer/early fall cutoff? If so, hold back. Reason being if she had started K in a state with the normal cutoff, she would be one grade behind a NYer anyway.

OP a here. I don’t see us leaving NY but I do think it’s possible she will go to a different high school with an earlier cut off.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP I truly believe that those saying send her want you and your daughter to fail in order to decrease competition for their own kids. Competition is national these days so this level of nuttiness is still nuts but makes a bit of sense. You’re not getting honest answers. All of us would hold back our own in this scenario.

Yes, millions of kids worth of national competition out there for my kid, so I'm trying to winnow the field one-by-one by posting false opinions on an anonymous message board. It may take me and my kind thousands of hours of effort spread out over year to change just enough minds to make a small dent in our DC's cohorts, but it will be worth it, so so very worth it. You've identified our true motives, PP. This all seems far more plausible than some people just legitimately having different opinions than you.

You’re trying to change the view that redshirting is favorable to create a cultural shift away from it. That’s what I see on these threads. It wouldn’t make people so angry if it weren’t a threat. Of course one person doesn’t make a difference but I feel the goal is to generally make people feel that redshirting is immoral and unfair so fewer will do it.

Yeah but the flip side is that so many people are so worried about some potential disadvantage that may or may happen as a result of following the cut offs and sending on time that people like OP feel “everyone” is doing it so they must also hold their kids back or they will be doing harm. The truth is that not everyone is holding their kids, and those of us who sent our cusp kids on time and had no ill effects are welcome to share that perspective and contribute to the dialogue to dispel the myth that the youngest kids in the grade are likely to struggle. I do feel it is important to share this point of view because I personally think rampant redshirting has impacted how kindergarten looks today and it has the potential to get even more developmentally inappropriate, which would be a shame for our youngest learners.

But OP isn’t actually holding her daughter back. She is in an outlier state. In every other county and state in the nation, there wouldn’t even be a question: her daughter would go a year later. People on this thread are being ridiculous and acting like she has a May birthday or something and is considering true redshirting. No. She would be technically redshirting for her district but a totally normal birthday for everywhere else.

I also find the puberty arguments to be a misogynistic red herring. Girls’ minds matter more than their bodies. They don’t magically emotionally and intellectually mature just because they grow breasts. Tall girls with breasts deserve a childhood, too, even if apparently some parents are still living in the 15th century and feel they do not.

OP here. As of now I think my daughter would be fine either way, but I do prefer to give her an extra year of childhood before entering a very structured academic environment since her birthday is only a few short weeks shy of our January cutoff. Not sure what we’ll do.

I hear your point on the misogyny of the physical aspect. If I had any concern over her academic readiness (too young to read, but at this point I don’t particularly) I would hold her. My concern with the physical element has more to do with mental health and confidence. However misogynistic, it can be alienating to go through puberty before your peers. I got my period at close to 12 but I felt early and it embarrassed me. I think there’s an element of desired control we wish to have over our children’s childhoods to protect them from difficulty as much as possible, but obviously it’s impossible to actually have that.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Would all this be solved by simply starting K later across the board, like 6? Is this a school readiness issue or a competitive advantage issue?

Kindergarten used to be less academic with more playing, music, and focus on SEL over making sure kids learn to read. That's flipped now because of concerns about academics. K is now essentially what 1st was back in the 80s.

I think we just need to respect the developmental stage of the kids. Don't expect 5 yr to olds (and especially not 4 year olds!) to sit at desks doing worksheets all day. Call it Kindergarten or pre-kindergarten, it doesn't matter, but as long as the focus is in play-based learning until 6, it would be more developmentally appropriate.

Not around here and ever consider if your child is not ready you failed to prepare them. K is school. They go to learn to read, write and more.

That "more" is key, especially in the early years: Does your kid have the social and emotional skills to cope with seven hours in a group setting?

Most kids, especially in this area, go to a full day day care or full day preschool by age four. Yes, of course mine did. They went to a preschool that had a prek program the fully prepared them and was a 9-3 program. So, it sounds like if you are questioning it, you didn't prepare your kids well in the choices you made early on. Mine were also fully reading before K, and that prek program.

Oh look, another DCUM Bingo! Post. If your kid struggles with adjusting to a long day at kindergarten, it’s because you didn’t prepare them correctly, and not because they’re 5!!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Would all this be solved by simply starting K later across the board, like 6? Is this a school readiness issue or a competitive advantage issue?

Kindergarten used to be less academic with more playing, music, and focus on SEL over making sure kids learn to read. That's flipped now because of concerns about academics. K is now essentially what 1st was back in the 80s.

I think we just need to respect the developmental stage of the kids. Don't expect 5 yr to olds (and especially not 4 year olds!) to sit at desks doing worksheets all day. Call it Kindergarten or pre-kindergarten, it doesn't matter, but as long as the focus is in play-based learning until 6, it would be more developmentally appropriate.

Not around here and ever consider if your child is not ready you failed to prepare them. K is school. They go to learn to read, write and more.

Whatever, my kid knew how to read and write (early stages but still) before K started, and I still think kindergarten should be more play-based. If anything, she was extra bored because all the academic focus was for the kids who needed more help getting up to speed on reading and math -- she got tired of worksheets that focused on cvc words (which she mastered at 4) or letter/number identification when she was ready for complex work.

I'd rather kids get 4-5 hours of SEL, music, play, and then 1-2 hours focused academic teaching, in K. I think making them sit at tables and do worksheets all day kills their enthusiasm for education.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Do you see yourself ever moving away from NY to a state with a typical late summer/early fall cutoff? If so, hold back. Reason being if she had started K in a state with the normal cutoff, she would be one grade behind a NYer anyway.

OP a here. I don’t see us leaving NY but I do think it’s possible she will go to a different high school with an earlier cut off.

In NY, there's still a decent chance that there will be other peers in her grade, especially if there are a lot of outside privates transferring in. The downside for your child is that they'll be the only one without a license, assuming you're outside of NYC.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Honestly, all of this redshirting everywhere has gotten out of hand. It’s crazy to me that OP has zero concerns about kindergarten readiness but is considering holding her daughter back since she feels as though sending her on time as one of the youngest may, at some future point, make her have some unknown discomfort or adversity not otherwise specified, and she’d rather put her at an advantage over the other children as the oldest. That is, in my opinion, quite weak-sauce and we’ve lost sight of accommodating true outlier kids who are not ready and are instead accommodating anxious parents trying to game-ify their not-struggling children’s successes over others. The fact that OP even feels like she has an existential decision to make is silly to me. The default should be send on time unless there is a compelling reason not to. I’m not seeing one here.

OP here. It is out of hand, but partially so because there are no uniform dates across the country. I don’t want my child going to college at 17 with kids who have just turned 19 or are about to. There’s a big difference. I also know what’s expected of kids in kindergarten now and I just don’t feel it’s developmentally appropriate for a 4 year old. 2/3 of the kids in her class would be turning 6 by March. I don’t care about putting her at an advantage as much as I don’t want her to be at disadvantage. I never said it’s an existential decision, but this is a parenting forum. If we can talk about what to serve at a birthday party I can certainly ask other parents for their experiences on their daughters being the very youngest vs close to the oldest of their grade.

Fwiw I have a March birthday and was on the older side of my grade. In hindsight many of the girls I knew with late fall birthdays were immature and really could not keep up socially. But I was also fairly tall until middle school and that was a little awkward for me. I’m average build- not a tiny petite person and doubt my daughter will be either, so that is also a consideration, however asinine you may find it.

It is YOUR JOB AS A PARENT to prepare her for this! Are you saying you are not up for the task? or that you are a crap parent who will fail in this regard?

Also, in Europe 4 year olds are expected to read, which is K/1st here, so ‘developmentally appropriate’ is a sliding scale.

It sounds like you’ve already made up your mind, OP. So, why ask on this forum if you are going to get so defensive? Just hold her back and deal with he consequences of doing that. It’s not my kid, so I don’t really care. I didn’t hold mine back - she’s in 8th grade and young - just turned 13. She’s thriving! I’ve always been on top of it with being a sounding board for the social scene and she’s navigated this quite well. Now I’m shifting my focus to being a sounding board for the dating/college scene. My role is support, advice, and guidance - DD calls the shots. So far, I’ve been impressed with her choices. Regardless of their relative age in the class, you have to guide them to make good decisions - it is your job!

Not in Finland (part of Europe...) 7 years is the norm there.
https://www.theatlantic.com/education/archive/2015/10/the-joyful-illiterate-kindergartners-of-finland/408325/?utm_source=copy-link&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=share

Also in Germany kids learn reading later as well. https://www.parentmap.com/article/kindergarten-america-germany

I think OP you can do what you think is best for your daughter - she'll probably be fine either way but I think it is reasonable to think that today's US kindergarten is not developmentally appropriate for a 4 year old and ok to wait until your daughter is five. My daughter has a May birthday so I have no skin in this game.

This isn't necessarily best and their school curriculum is very different than ours.

Of course K is developmentally appropriate for a 5 year old or a child just turning 5. Saying it is not developmentally appropriate makes no sense.

Finland's having issues with their school system. https://www.helsinkitimes.fi/finland/finland-news/politics/22366-slide-in-finland-s-education-level-sparks-concerns-among-lawmakers.html

]

your article on Finland has absolutely nothing to do with when kids start school. There is evidence that 4 year old in very academic programs do worse in the long run than in play based programs. So yes depending on what the K is like it can be developmentally inappropriate. https://www.edsurge.com/news/2020-02-04-play-is-disappearing-from-kindergarten-it-s-hurting-kids

The kindergarten of today is not the kindergarten I attended way back when and the changes in general are not good for kids. https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf/10.1177/2332858415616358

I would not rush to have my kid sitting at a desk all day if the alternative was a strong play based preschool program. (admittedly financial constraints may compel that choice)