FWIW, one parent's take on redshirting (sort of) now that DS has started K in MCPS

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Just by observation you probabably wouldn't notice much of a difference; but if you worked with the children academically you might. For instance, if a child was unable to blend and segment phonemes, or couldn't come up with a word that rhymed with "mouse" -- that's not something you would see on a field trip or playdate.

Well, if you know the parents very well, and you sit with the kids and read stories with them, you really do know where they are. And if you spend time in the classroom as an occasional helper, and see the kids in circle time, you can absolutely tell things like rhymes and numbers. And parents compare these things. A kid I know who was held back was the best puzzle solver I've known, better than some of his friends who went forward. And obviously more cognitively developed.

Besides, the parents wondering if the birthday matters so much are talking about "social development," "being the youngest," "being the smallest." Not phonemes. And I don't think you'd find anyone who would say that the skills you mentioned happen on such a tight schedule that a May vs. an August birthday is going to be a good predictor.

And so what if kindergarten is actually hard? School takes effort.

I doubt actually that reading with a child, you would be able to assess a child's phonetic manipulations skills as a classroom volunteer, unless you had been specifically asked by the teacher to assess them. One way to assess is to ask the child to say the word "caps" and then to say it again, but without the /p/ sound... do they say "cas"?

Parents DO talk about holding kids back for social development and for "being the oldest" and I wouldn't advise them to do that, if they asked me. I would advise them to hold summer birthday kids back IF they were of about average intellegence and also were on the later end of average in phonemic manipulation skills... IF the school they were entering planned on teachhing reading to all children without much differentiation in kindergarten.

If it were a great kindergarten with teachers teaching reading but completely up to speed on the importance of kids phonemic manipulation skills in teaching beginning decoding? I woouldn't be so concerned. If the child was off the charts smart, even with poor phonemic skills? I'd say don't hold back -- but be SURE that child gets appropriate instruction. Because the really smart kids who do kindergarten and first grade with poor phonemic skills are so damned smart that they just memorize all the words by sight, instead of learning to sound them out, which they can't do. But the time they finally catch up in phonemic manipulations skills in first grade or whenever, they might be "reading" on a 2nd grade level -- but it's all by just plain sight readin. And it all falls apart by second grade for the smart ones and 3rd grade for the truly gifted ones --and they can't spell at ALL. And then they are so embarassed to have to go back to basics in third grade and learn how to sound out words.

Finally -- no I don't think kindergarten should be "hard" if by "hard" you mean, "developmentally inappropriate"!

[Anonymous]

Yes, I was too. I was referring to the Previous Poster who had a child in preK who had poor physical coordination. She said nothing about his social skills. It is clear that you are inferring poor social skills for some reason... the second part of your statement makes that clear.

My point was not that the poster's child has poor social skills. The poster I was quoting doesn't even mention his/her child, just gives advice to another poster. My point was that worrying about academic skills and determining your child's readiness for K based on academic skills is basing your decision on the wrong thing, at least in many school districts.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I doubt actually that reading with a child, you would be able to assess a child's phonetic manipulations skills as a classroom volunteer, unless you had been specifically asked by the teacher to assess them. One way to assess is to ask the child to say the word "caps" and then to say it again, but without the /p/ sound... do they say "cas"?

Parents DO talk about holding kids back for social development and for "being the oldest" and I wouldn't advise them to do that, if they asked me. I would advise them to hold summer birthday kids back IF they were of about average intellegence and also were on the later end of average in phonemic manipulation skills... IF the school they were entering planned on teachhing reading to all children without much differentiation in kindergarten.

If it were a great kindergarten with teachers teaching reading but completely up to speed on the importance of kids phonemic manipulation skills in teaching beginning decoding? I woouldn't be so concerned. If the child was off the charts smart, even with poor phonemic skills? I'd say don't hold back -- but be SURE that child gets appropriate instruction. Because the really smart kids who do kindergarten and first grade with poor phonemic skills are so damned smart that they just memorize all the words by sight, instead of learning to sound them out, which they can't do. But the time they finally catch up in phonemic manipulations skills in first grade or whenever, they might be "reading" on a 2nd grade level -- but it's all by just plain sight readin. And it all falls apart by second grade for the smart ones and 3rd grade for the truly gifted ones --and they can't spell at ALL. And then they are so embarassed to have to go back to basics in third grade and learn how to sound out words.

Fascinating. I scored in the 99th %tile of every standardized test I took growing up, except for the spelling tests, where I was in the teens and twenties until middle school and in the bottom half until high school. I never knew why I was such a lousy speller. I never received any remedial instruction, I just gradually got better through the years -- I wonder how old I was before I truly learned to read.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

And FWIW, the younger boys were the ones crying and holding onto their parents at drop-off and from what I've heard from some friends with kindergarteners on the younger side they seem to be the ones who come home exhausted and cranky. Of course, such sweeping generalizations need not apply to your child --- just take the comment as my two cents.

Your comment about the younger ones crying is undoubtedly true. The difficulty is when the younger ones are also very smart; for their parents, the tradeoff is between placing them age-appropriately for social reasons and "redshirting" them academically - i.e., having them very far ahead academically given their age. Around here, most people seem to believe that it is better to have them in the right place socially and let them be bored academically. I am not so sure - it is a REAL tradeoff, and parents can make different decisions. We often asked whether it is better to be the bigger, older, dumb one than the smaller, younger, smart one. The big/old/dumb ones often stick out like sore thumbs (and feel badly about themselves) as much as the small/young/smart ones. This is a crass way to put it, but just to make the point clear ...

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

My point was not that the poster's child has poor social skills. The poster I was quoting doesn't even mention his/her child, just gives advice to another poster. My point was that worrying about academic skills and determining your child's readiness for K based on academic skills is basing your decision on the wrong thing, at least in many school districts.

As PP said - the tradeoffs are truly there, so to say one is right and another wrong is, well, presumptuous to say the least.

[Anonymous]

The difficulty is when the younger ones are also very smart; for their parents, the tradeoff is between placing them age-appropriately for social reasons and "redshirting" them academically - i.e., having them very far ahead academically given their age.

This is exactly the decision we needed to make with my older DD. She is young for grade (August in FCPS) and it really shows, but performs very high academically. We agonized over whether to hold her back. She tested into the GT program for 3rd grade and it has made a HUGE difference. Suddenly the behavior problems she was having are gone. She is now busy and engaged all day long at school and is no longer seen as a behavior problem. What a difference! Many of the kids in her class are a year older than her, but she does as well as they do academically, but you can see the emotional difference.

Maybe we will regret it in 10 years, but right now it is the best thing we could have done. Even this year, the switch to GT is HUGE for her. She is no longer getting all the answers right all the time and she has to actually work. These are GREAT things IMO, but if we had waited another year for her in school the transition would be even harder. I don't think it is a good thing for a kid to be tops and to coast all the time in school. I think (based on my own experiences with being afraid to stretch myself later in school) that learning the value of hard work and study skills at a young age is a good thing.

[Anonymous]

I doubt actually that reading with a child, you would be able to assess a child's phonetic manipulations skills as a classroom volunteer, unless you had been specifically asked by the teacher to assess them. One way to assess is to ask the child to say the word "caps" and then to say it again, but without the /p/ sound... do they say "cas"?

And the parents saying "my kid is too short" and "my kid won't socialize" and "no fair, my kid is youngest" can't either. Probably the preschool teachers who say "junior is a little shy and timid" don't either. And the kids held back in public school haven't been tested. And many of the kids held back in private school get 99% on the WPPSI but are young and held back.

Phonetic manipulations sound like a relevant developmental stage/ skill, but that's not the basis of all people's decisions to hold kids back.

Besides-- since when is education about asking kids to do what's already easy? Why wouldn't we want apparently bright kids to have to stretch their little brains a bit?