Anonymous wrote:I would send a June/July girl on time. Not an August/September girl.
Anonymous wrote:I wish people would stop this nonsense of holding kids who are old enough for school unless there is a significant academic reason to do it. My kid graduated from HS with kids who were 16 months older than he was. These kids really should have been in the grade ahead. It wasn't a problem in HS but it was an issue in elementary school.
Anonymous wrote:
This very thoughtful. Thank you.
Family history might give a hint on whether the girl will develop on the earlier side or not.
Anonymous wrote:Depends on the kid.
Girls need to fit in. It is their biggest social need in K-12 and it becomes more and more critical as they age. It is also better for girls, socially, to be on the late end of the spectrum for physical development than the early end. Whatever benefit your girl gains from being taller/bigger than other girls in school will go away if/when she is the first to go through puberty because you don't want to be the first to go through puberty. You also don't want to be the very last, but it's better to be the last than the first. Ideally you want to be in the middle.
So I would only hold back if she was very physically immature and holding back might get her more in the middle of the pack. If she was physically more developed, I definitely wouldn't hold back. And even if she was physically immature, I probably still wouldn't hold her back if she was also academically advanced, because if you take a kid who is already ahead of peers academically and then old them back a year, you create an academic outlier whose advanced skills will always be blamed on the redshirting and that's an awkward position to be in. I'd just let her be the small but smart kid because that's its own kind of middle ground.
This is also the thinking I'd use for boys, but I know a lot of people like the idea of redshirting a boy specifically to make him an outlier on the taller/bigger/academically advanced front. But I think girls get punished more for being outliers so I'd be very, very cautious about doing that for a girl. Most girls just want to be in the middle of the pack.
I agree that it's an individual decision, but you can't tell at age 4 when a girl will go through puberty.
Anonymous wrote:Depends on the kid.
Girls need to fit in. It is their biggest social need in K-12 and it becomes more and more critical as they age. It is also better for girls, socially, to be on the late end of the spectrum for physical development than the early end. Whatever benefit your girl gains from being taller/bigger than other girls in school will go away if/when she is the first to go through puberty because you don't want to be the first to go through puberty. You also don't want to be the very last, but it's better to be the last than the first. Ideally you want to be in the middle.
So I would only hold back if she was very physically immature and holding back might get her more in the middle of the pack. If she was physically more developed, I definitely wouldn't hold back. And even if she was physically immature, I probably still wouldn't hold her back if she was also academically advanced, because if you take a kid who is already ahead of peers academically and then old them back a year, you create an academic outlier whose advanced skills will always be blamed on the redshirting and that's an awkward position to be in. I'd just let her be the small but smart kid because that's its own kind of middle ground.
This is also the thinking I'd use for boys, but I know a lot of people like the idea of redshirting a boy specifically to make him an outlier on the taller/bigger/academically advanced front. But I think girls get punished more for being outliers so I'd be very, very cautious about doing that for a girl. Most girls just want to be in the middle of the pack.