Reply to Why is redshirting so rare if it's so advantageous?

Forum Index » Schools and Education General Discussion

Reply to "Why is redshirting so rare if it's so advantageous?"

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]#1 My June baby was ready for kindergarten. So we put her in kindergarten[/quote]

#2 I was asking about kids with Fall birthdays. It wouldn't really make sense to hold back someone with a June birthday seeing as how they're already on the older half by default.[/quote]

#3 I assume pp means her child turned 5 in June and they sent her to k at age 5. [b]Therefore, she is on the younger side for the class[/b].

Op, it's already been said, but most kids will turn 6 in Kindergarten. Redshirting a fall birthday child means they would already be 6 when they enter K, and turn 7 right at the beginning of the school year. That seems like a significant difference--your 7 year old would be in class with 5 year olds. You're asking why people don't do that? Because it's not how we do school here. 7 year olds will have a hard time making friends with 5 year olds, or their maturity level will be brought down to the 5yo level. [/quote]
#4 Literally what are you even talking about, and what school did you attend that apparently did not teach you basic mathematics? [/quote]

#5 Uhh... the pp was correct.  June BDs generally should have about ~75% of class being older than they are (those born from the prior Oct through May)... the only younger students are those who were born in July-Sep.[/quote]

#6 Uhh no. The PP is not smart and says the June birthdays are the older half. Someone is presuming the classroom is on a calendar year with a 12/31 cut off. If the cutoff is in the fall they are younger. Her default is not really anyone’s default.[/quote]

No, that's not what the PP (#3) said. #4 appeared to be confused and disagreed, so I (#5) was trying to clarify why #3 was correct.  I believe you (#6) are referring to #2 as PP instead. In short, we agree.[/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics