Since people are now redshirting spring bday kids

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Anti-redshirting parents project their own competiveness and obsession with gaining every advantage for their kids only redshirting parents. They view what is an individualized decision taken for the good of the child as some kind of threat to their own child. They see everything through the lens of competition.

Dafuq? How are those saying all kids should go on time an "obsession with gaining every advantage for their kids?" Everyone following the rules is the essence of equal footing.

See? You're doing it again. You're seeing Kindergarten as a sports arena where everyone competes and should have "equal footing." But anyway, thanks for proving my point that you're obsessed with competitiveness in K.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Anti-redshirting parents project their own competiveness and obsession with gaining every advantage for their kids only redshirting parents. They view what is an individualized decision taken for the good of the child as some kind of threat to their own child. They see everything through the lens of competition.

Dafuq? How are those saying all kids should go on time an "obsession with gaining every advantage for their kids?" Everyone following the rules is the essence of equal footing.

See? You're doing it again. You're seeing Kindergarten as a sports arena where everyone competes and should have "equal footing." But anyway, thanks for proving my point that you're obsessed with competitiveness in K.

Actually, no. I'm not making it a competition. I mean that it is best for all to be on equal footing, i.e., the children are developmentally all prepared for the curriculum being delivered.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Anti-redshirting parents project their own competiveness and obsession with gaining every advantage for their kids only redshirting parents. They view what is an individualized decision taken for the good of the child as some kind of threat to their own child. They see everything through the lens of competition.

Dafuq? How are those saying all kids should go on time an "obsession with gaining every advantage for their kids?" Everyone following the rules is the essence of equal footing.

See? You're doing it again. You're seeing Kindergarten as a sports arena where everyone competes and should have "equal footing." But anyway, thanks for proving my point that you're obsessed with competitiveness in K.

Actually, no. I'm not making it a competition. I mean that it is best for all to be on equal footing, i.e., the children are developmentally all prepared for the curriculum being delivered.

Again, competition minded. Kids are always going to be developmentally in different places, and on the margins, it may be better for some to have an extra year. What you really want is for the kids who struggle to be in your kids class, so your kid seems better. That's nice.

[Anonymous]

What's interesting about these recent responses from anti-redshirt posters is that they're demonstrating the points that DCUM anti-redshirt posters don't have much of a grasp on science, statistics, or self-reflection.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Anti-redshirting parents project their own competiveness and obsession with gaining every advantage for their kids only redshirting parents. They view what is an individualized decision taken for the good of the child as some kind of threat to their own child. They see everything through the lens of competition.

Dafuq? How are those saying all kids should go on time an "obsession with gaining every advantage for their kids?" Everyone following the rules is the essence of equal footing.

See? You're doing it again. You're seeing Kindergarten as a sports arena where everyone competes and should have "equal footing." But anyway, thanks for proving my point that you're obsessed with competitiveness in K.

Actually, no. I'm not making it a competition. I mean that it is best for all to be on equal footing, i.e., the children are developmentally all prepared for the curriculum being delivered.

Again, competition minded. Kids are always going to be developmentally in different places, and on the margins, it may be better for some to have an extra year. What you really want is for the kids who struggle to be in your kids class, so your kid seems better. That's nice.

Girl, you nuts. Take a breather.

[Anonymous]

The people I take issue with are those who redshirt in order to give their kid the "advantage" of being the oldest/biggest/most mature/etc kid in class. Those are the people in a race to the bottom, in my opinion.

That's different from the argument that all kids should start K at, say, 6, instead of 5. Assuming you're working within an annual grade framework, you're still always going to have an oldest kid and a youngest kid in class, and all of the challenges associated with having kids nearly a full year apart operating under the same curriculum. But at least you could argue here that even the youngest kid was "ready" to start K at the start of the school year.

One is wanting to redshirt because you want your kid to rule over all of the others; the other is in favor of redshirting everyone for the sake of community.

[Anonymous]

What’s interesting to me is I live in “flyover” now. No one redshirts. Your kid goes to school at age. Ther is no “rowdiness”, any more then there is a rigorous preschool curriculum and education. So anyone saying it’s not competitive (save for certain circumstances) to redshirt is talking our of their behind.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The people I take issue with are those who redshirt in order to give their kid the "advantage" of being the oldest/biggest/most mature/etc kid in class. Those are the people in a race to the bottom, in my opinion.

That's different from the argument that all kids should start K at, say, 6, instead of 5. Assuming you're working within an annual grade framework, you're still always going to have an oldest kid and a youngest kid in class, and all of the challenges associated with having kids nearly a full year apart operating under the same curriculum. But at least you could argue here that even the youngest kid was "ready" to start K at the start of the school year.

One is wanting to redshirt because you want your kid to rule over all of the others; the other is in favor of redshirting everyone for the sake of community.

Thank you! Someone with a brain... finally!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The people I take issue with are those who redshirt in order to give their kid the "advantage" of being the oldest/biggest/most mature/etc kid in class. Those are the people in a race to the bottom, in my opinion.

That's different from the argument that all kids should start K at, say, 6, instead of 5. Assuming you're working within an annual grade framework, you're still always going to have an oldest kid and a youngest kid in class, and all of the challenges associated with having kids nearly a full year apart operating under the same curriculum. But at least you could argue here that even the youngest kid was "ready" to start K at the start of the school year.

One is wanting to redshirt because you want your kid to rule over all of the others; the other is in favor of redshirting everyone for the sake of community.

There are very, very few people who do that. People redshirt because their child is developmentally delayed; lags in social skills; and their teachers or therapists recommend it. Kids repeat K because they're behind on reading and need an extra year. The idea that there's some kind of rampaging sector redshirting in public schools to give their child a leg up is a myth, and it belies that the anti-redshirters are the ones obsessed with the relative status of their own child.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Who cares? Do what you think is best for your kid. You sound really immature.

+1

I honestly wonder how most of DCUMs anti-redshirt posters manage to get through their days. They remind me of anti-vaxxers.

How are people who send their kids to school according to the rules/recommendations similar to those who flout them?

Do you want me to seriously respond? In my experience, DCUMs anti-redshirt posters aren't very rational and I don't really feel like writing up something that asks for critical thought from an anti-redshirt poster.

Yes, you made the statement; I'm simply asking you to defend it. My take is that there seem to be more similarities between parents who redshirt, and anti-vaxxers. Both flout the rules/recommendations for the perceived benefit of their own kids, even if others are disadvantaged as a result (e.g., teachers having to work to differentiate to account for an 18-month spread, kids who started on time may get fewer opportunities to excel in school or sports vs. those that are older).

So again, how specifically do you think parents who don't like rampant redshirting are similar to anti-vaxxers?

Okay, I'll answer you. Here is my serious response as to why I think DCUM's anti-redshirt posters are like anti-vaxxers, based off of years of reading posts from them:

1. DCUM anti-redshirt posters believe in something fervently with little solid scientific evidence to support it. They are convinced of their rightness, but there isn't solid research that's been replicated and meets scientific standards to support that feeling of rightness. This is similar to how anti-vaxxers operate. Both groups have passionate feelings over something without an accompanying body of scientific evidence to support the depth of their feelings.

2. DCUM anti-redshirt posters will twist themselves in knots congratulating themselves on how they "followed the rules." Never mind that these are rules that they've largely decided in their own heads. (Schools set admissions policies, not parents; there are no rules being broken by parents who redshirt when allowed into schools that permit it, by definition.) This is particularly true of the people who rant about private schools and redshirting, which is astonishing to me in the lack of understanding that shows. I think there are posters on DCUM who do not understand how private school admissions work at a basic level. This is reminiscent of anti-vaxxers, who construct an imaginary worldview in their heads and are puzzled when the real world doesn't match the worldview in their heads.

3. Like anti-vaxxers, DCUM's anti-redshirt posters tend not to be very self-reflective. They'll engage with the educational system to advantage themselves and their children but if they think that somebody else has a perceived advantage that they didn't use, they throw a fit. DCUM's anti-redshirt posters are often wealthy parents who are engaging tutors and using private schools. This disadvantages kids who don't have access to those resources (and that is well-documented), but you don't see those posters too worried about that. I'm convinced the majority of DCUM's anti-redshirt posters spend more time ranting about redshirting on DCUM than they've ever spent thinking about educational inequities and how they contribute to those, let alone doing anything about it. There are likely some exceptions to that general rule, but given how many of DCUM's anti-redshirt posters are complaining about private school admissions policies, probably not many. This reminds me of anti-vaxxers in the lack of self-reflection.

4. They are logically inconsistent. They will simultaneously argue that redshirting offers no advantage while at the same time arguing that it's a huge advantage. If it's not an advantage, then it doesn't matter that other people redshirt. If it is an advantage, then the logical answer is to move towards flexible admissions policies, not rigid ones, so that the advantage is more widely available.

5. They talk about how they are nasty to other people's children and how they encourage their children to be nasty. I have seen posts in which they brag about how their kids gossip and laugh about other people's older children, or how they gossip with other parents about those older kids. This is similar to anti-vaxxer behavior: if you lurk in their forums (which I have, God help me), you'll see similarly worded posts saying horrid things about vaccinated children, and how they encourage their kids to mock vaccinated kids.

6. They can't do basic math and don't grasp statistics. I can't tell you how many times I've seen posts from anti-redshirt posters that have demonstrated that they can't add, or show a lack of understanding of statistical analysis.

I could go on, but this is long enough. You asked for an answer, and so I'm giving it to you. If you want to know what I think should happen as far as policies go, I think we should have flexible age ranges, and trust parental judgment and preschool/school recommendations with respect to the maturity and kindergarten readiness of children. I think there should be a transitional kindergarten available for "young fives" but at the same time, "young fives" who are ready to go to K should go. Kids develop at different rates, and I think the educational system should adapt to that. I think rigid cutoffs haven't been shown to show much educational benefit and I don't understand why some DCUM posters cling to them. That's a different post, though.

Wow. This is so spot on. I am officially out of these threads. You can’t argue with crazy.

Talking to DCUM's anti-redshirt posters is generally futile, it's true. You have to do math for them, too.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The people I take issue with are those who redshirt in order to give their kid the "advantage" of being the oldest/biggest/most mature/etc kid in class. Those are the people in a race to the bottom, in my opinion.

That's different from the argument that all kids should start K at, say, 6, instead of 5. Assuming you're working within an annual grade framework, you're still always going to have an oldest kid and a youngest kid in class, and all of the challenges associated with having kids nearly a full year apart operating under the same curriculum. But at least you could argue here that even the youngest kid was "ready" to start K at the start of the school year.

One is wanting to redshirt because you want your kid to rule over all of the others; the other is in favor of redshirting everyone for the sake of community.

What is your issue with the first family? They want their kid to be the most mature in the class. So? What does it have to do with you or your kid?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The people I take issue with are those who redshirt in order to give their kid the "advantage" of being the oldest/biggest/most mature/etc kid in class. Those are the people in a race to the bottom, in my opinion.

That's different from the argument that all kids should start K at, say, 6, instead of 5. Assuming you're working within an annual grade framework, you're still always going to have an oldest kid and a youngest kid in class, and all of the challenges associated with having kids nearly a full year apart operating under the same curriculum. But at least you could argue here that even the youngest kid was "ready" to start K at the start of the school year.

One is wanting to redshirt because you want your kid to rule over all of the others; the other is in favor of redshirting everyone for the sake of community.

There are very, very few people who do that. People redshirt because their child is developmentally delayed; lags in social skills; and their teachers or therapists recommend it. Kids repeat K because they're behind on reading and need an extra year. The idea that there's some kind of rampaging sector redshirting in public schools to give their child a leg up is a myth, and it belies that the anti-redshirters are the ones obsessed with the relative status of their own child.

Not a myth! I am living this now. There are almost 7 yo in my DS K class reading at 3rd grade level. Surely they were not held back for any kind of delay. My summer birthday child is at the bottom of the class despite being bright. He has to work extra hard to keep up with kids almost 2 years older, how is this fair?

[Anonymous]

I think something a bit different. I guess there might be out there some parents that redshirt for academics and sports advantages. This, in my opinion, is cheating (even if it does not break any law) because your child is better and stronger because older than most/all. Same way as an early October kid running faster and jumping higher than an early August kid that went on time... 10 month at 5 and 6 are a big difference and it’s very possible that 10 months later the August birthday kid would be faster and jump higher than his class mate with an October birthday.
I am redshirting my late August birthday girl, but it has nothing to do with trying to give her an advantage in school. By the time it matters (high school) I doubt 10 months would make a difference. In my experience (different country) the best student in our class was a girl that was 10 months you get than me and that skipped a year. She always got the best grades! The worst student was one that never studied and repeated a year in high school so was 1 year older than everyone (and possibly 2 years older than our best student).
Perhaps what I am guilty of is babying my DD too much. I see her as sentisitive, insecure and victim of the meaner girls in her class... ALWAYS. I think that being a little older will just help her being happier and better adjusted. Another mom would have said:”we’ll... tough luck Lucy... life is difficult, better get used to it now”. I in the other hand, want to protect my DD from the heart aches I have witnessed over and over. My DD is the sweetest girl you will ever meet. I keep teli g her that she doesn’t need to be friends with everyone and that other kids have the right to not play with her all the time. She will toughen up eventually I hope, but for now, if being a little older will make her social life a little easier (and I believe it will), I will hold her back.
Being “smarter” and running faster was never something I thought about because I agree that if my DD ends up reading better and sooner than a classmate that is 10 months you get is NOT because she is smarter or I am a great parent, but only because she is 10 months older

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The people I take issue with are those who redshirt in order to give their kid the "advantage" of being the oldest/biggest/most mature/etc kid in class. Those are the people in a race to the bottom, in my opinion.

That's different from the argument that all kids should start K at, say, 6, instead of 5. Assuming you're working within an annual grade framework, you're still always going to have an oldest kid and a youngest kid in class, and all of the challenges associated with having kids nearly a full year apart operating under the same curriculum. But at least you could argue here that even the youngest kid was "ready" to start K at the start of the school year.

One is wanting to redshirt because you want your kid to rule over all of the others; the other is in favor of redshirting everyone for the sake of community.

There are very, very few people who do that. People redshirt because their child is developmentally delayed; lags in social skills; and their teachers or therapists recommend it. Kids repeat K because they're behind on reading and need an extra year. The idea that there's some kind of rampaging sector redshirting in public schools to give their child a leg up is a myth, and it belies that the anti-redshirters are the ones obsessed with the relative status of their own child.

Not a myth! I am living this now. There are almost 7 yo in my DS K class reading at 3rd grade level. Surely they were not held back for any kind of delay. My summer birthday child is at the bottom of the class despite being bright. He has to work extra hard to keep up with kids almost 2 years older, how is this fair?

Surely you have no actual idea of why the kid was redshirted. We came very close to redshirting my kid due to social concerns -- we didn't, but probably should have. Clearly, you see your child's education as a competition, which is your problem, not the other kids.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The people I take issue with are those who redshirt in order to give their kid the "advantage" of being the oldest/biggest/most mature/etc kid in class. Those are the people in a race to the bottom, in my opinion.

That's different from the argument that all kids should start K at, say, 6, instead of 5. Assuming you're working within an annual grade framework, you're still always going to have an oldest kid and a youngest kid in class, and all of the challenges associated with having kids nearly a full year apart operating under the same curriculum. But at least you could argue here that even the youngest kid was "ready" to start K at the start of the school year.

One is wanting to redshirt because you want your kid to rule over all of the others; the other is in favor of redshirting everyone for the sake of community.

There are very, very few people who do that. People redshirt because their child is developmentally delayed; lags in social skills; and their teachers or therapists recommend it. Kids repeat K because they're behind on reading and need an extra year. The idea that there's some kind of rampaging sector redshirting in public schools to give their child a leg up is a myth, and it belies that the anti-redshirters are the ones obsessed with the relative status of their own child.

Not a myth! I am living this now. There are almost 7 yo in my DS K class reading at 3rd grade level. Surely they were not held back for any kind of delay. My summer birthday child is at the bottom of the class despite being bright. He has to work extra hard to keep up with kids almost 2 years older, how is this fair?

Funny how you manage to live in such a remarkable statistical outlier of a location, and simultaneously have such a terrible teacher that she doesn't teach to state standards.