Reply to On whether to redshirt...

Forum Index » Schools and Education General Discussion

Reply to "On whether to redshirt... "

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote]
There's mixed evidence about redshirting's short term value but studies that have examined the effect of redshirting by the time kids have become teenagers show that it is, on average, counterproductive. Kids have greater social problems and are more likely to get into trouble, possibly from boredom.[/quote]

You start off by saying there is "mixed evidence" and then  you deny it.

As a teacher, I can tell you that there is such a thing as "immaturity"........and the kids who have it benefit greatly from another year.  I have seen this too many times.  Among friends kids, as well.  One of my friends who chose not to redshirt and sent a very young girl, later said "Why didn't somebody tell me about high school when I made that decision"  The child was great academically--until high school when the social immaturity outweighed the other.

FWIW, I think I speak objectively as I did not redshirt my two.  One was Winter and one was Early Spring.

Once more, it depends on the kid.  But, no, they do not have greater social problems.
 
  
 
[/quote]

No, I didn't say there is mixed evidence and then deny it. I said the evidence is mixed for short term benefit and tends to suggest that it is negative over the long term.[/quote]

Not really. And I have read and kept up with this field for years. [/quote]

I love that y'all are saying that a claim that some evidence is mixed and other evidence tends to support a view are categorical and extreme statements. [/quote]

Nobody said anything about extreme. But what PP wrote about the supposed negative trend of the evidence is inaccurate, and the even more broad statement in the original post about it being counterproductive is even more so. It's significantly overstating the research.

You should be able to make your points without exaggerating the research.[/quote]

OK, before I respond to whether I exaggerated the research, let's start with why I made the point I did: OP seemed concerned that even though she doesn't think her child needed to be redshirted now, redshirting might benefit her child farther down the line, and she did not want her child to miss out on that benefit. The reason I brought up empirical evidence was not to have a flame war about the value of redshirting, but in an attempt to reassure OP that there isn't any substantial body of evidence suggesting there is a down-the-line benefit for her child to miss out on. Do you disagree with any aspect of that claim? Do you think that there is any meaningful empirical research suggesting that a kid who would not benefit from redshirting in the short term might benefit from it significantly more when he or she gets older? If so, could you please point me to that research, because I have never seen it.

Regarding whether I exaggerated the research, I made two claims:

First, that the evidence of redshirting having a short term benefit is mixed. I assume (hope?) you don't have that much bone to pick with that tepid and general of a claim, so let me just cite to a secondary source on the point:

"Research on the effects of redshirting on children has shown mixed results. It is difficult to establish a direct link between being redshirted and doing well or poorly in kindergarten and beyond. Some older studies related to redshirting suggested that redshirted children were likely to achieve at a comparable rate to age peers who entered on time. According to some of the older studies, social outcomes for oldest and youngest children in a class were similar; however, other research suggested that older children showed more behavior problems (Graue & DiPerna, 2000, pp. 512-513). One Wisconsin study in 2000 examined 8,000 students’ school records to discern patterns related to school entry age, promotion/retention, receipt of special services, and achievement in school. The authors reported that redshirted children in the younger half of their age cohort (that is, those with spring or summer birthdays) were more likely to receive special education services than peers who were typically promoted (Graue & DiPerna, 2000, p. 527). Another study of 116 kindergartners and first-graders in California found few entrance-age-related differences in self-reports of school adjustment, loneliness, perceptions of competence, or maternal and peer acceptance (Spitzer, Cupp, & Parke, 1995, p. 433)."

http://illinoisearlylearning.org/faqs/redshirting.htm

I should point out that this was an intentionally neutral statement on my part, since I wasn't intending to criticize redshirting, but it seems like some people are annoyed even by the suggestion that the evidence of its effectiveness is mixed, which seems plainly true. I think a slightly stronger claim would be to point out that The National Association of Early Childhood Specialists and the National Association for the Education of Young Children both strongly oppose the practice, and do not believe that it is pedagogically appropriate.

Second, I claimed that, to the extent the question of redshirting’s effect on older kids has been studied, those studies have tended to “show that it is, on average, counterproductive.” You’re right that my language was inartful in one respect: What I meant was that the average study addressing this question shows that redshirting does not produce positive outcomes, and may be associated with negative outcomes. In retrospect, that language could also be read to say that the evidence establishes that the median redshirted student experiences a bad outcome from redshirting. I didn’t mean to suggest that latter claim, which I think is one that’s not particularly amendable to empirical research.

I am, however, comfortable standing by the claim I intended, which is that the majority of studies addressing this question has not shown benefits from redshirting, and have in fact suggested redshirting may produce negative outcomes. For example, the 2006 UT Austin study had a relatively limited stated finding in the abstract (“delaying kindergarten does not create any long-term advantages for students.”), but its findings in the text included that redshirted students performed worse on 10th grade tests, redshirted students had a higher drop-out rate, and that they were less likely to graduate from college. The 2009 Journal of Educational Psychology Study found that when controlling for demographic effects, linear age within grade does not have a significant effect on performance, but that older-for-cohort students experienced some academic disadvantage in motivation, engagement, and performance. The American Educational Research Journal reported in 2000 that boys who were delayed entry because their birthday fell shortly before the academic cutoff were more likely to receive special education services later in their academic careers. Deming (2008) found that entering school later is associated with decreased educational attainment and reduced lifetime earnings, primarily because of increased dropout rates. Black (2008) finds a small positive effect on IQ from starting school earlier (though the primary conclusion of the study is that the differences in outcomes are too small to support either holding children out of school or timing births to influence starting age). The only studies I’ve seen suggesting any potential long term positives from redshirting are the UT Austin study, which suggests redshirting is associated with a slight increase in the odds a kid makes a varsity sports team, and Black, which find that later starting school age may be associated with slightly decreased odds of becoming pregnant while still a teenager (presumably because you stop being a teenager sooner after graduation than non-redshirted kids). I think the most cautious possible reading of this literature is that there’s scant to no evidence suggesting that redshirting produces a long-term benefit, which I think was the main thing OP needed to know if she didn’t want to second guess her choice not to redshirt. But I think its reasonable to make the stronger claim that what evidence does exist tends to suggest the long term effect is more likely negative than positive.
[/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