Reply to Redshirting consequences at Lafayette

Forum Index » DC Public and Public Charter Schools

Reply to "Redshirting consequences at Lafayette"

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]I don’t know why I should penalize my kid for the sake of other kids if I felt they (it’s always a boy though) needed to mature a year before kindergarten, and I don’t see why it’s a problem for other people to do it as well. I can see an argument for limiting it to a year, but frankly we’re probably moving to a world where we’re going to hold boys back more anyway- they just mature much more slowly than girls do.

As for “others can’t do it so you shouldn’t get to” that’s just silly. I can’t fly private so I fly commercial, but I don’t care if others do. It’s not obviously going to create a better world- and there’s not a hint of evidence that holding kids back is bad- limiting my ability to hold my kid back because other parents don’t have their act together. [/quote]

I agree that parents, teachers, and principals working together should be able to make this call as needed, and think that parents should not be able to make the call unilaterally.  But my biggest issue is that the latter is not equally available to everyone in DCPS.  Our school is a universal "no" to red-shirting, and I've heard of parents at many other schools with the same experience.  It is completely unfair for this to be a secret option for just some parents at some schools.  One way or another, whatever policy they are enforcing should be uniform within DCPS.[/quote]
As the author of the post you’re replying to, I fully agree. People should advocate for change at the system level and stop trying to bend the rules 
[/quote]

Well the problem is there are no “rules” as you’re purporting. The language is vague which I’m assuming was actually intentional to give flexibility.

For the anti-redshirters to be correct, the language would need to say that at 5 by 9/30 you need to be enrolled in kindergarten and at 6 by 9/30 you must be enrolled in 1st grade.

This is not what the ‘policy’ says[/quote]

lol the policy is actually very clear. [/quote]

Ok does it say when a child is 6 before 9/30 they must go to 1st grade?

Can you point to where that is? It’s possible I’m not seeing it[/quote]

They don't give an age for every grade through 12th because you just follow along from the starting age.[/quote]

They actually do give an age for 1st in the regulations, the handbook, and the 2022 FAQ on this subject (all already linked in this thread), but PP has been arguing that it's written in a way that you could interpret it as a "must be at least this age" rule and not a "must be exactly this age" rule. Actual intent is quite obvious, but in any case at the very least these parents should have sought clarification before the start of this school year.[/quote]

What the parents should have done is sent their kids to K then asked to repeat the year, which is actually what the regs and policy allow. But they are too good to follow the rules and think their kids need special treatment … but not TOO special because of course they are not one of those SPED kids who have to repeat K. [/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