Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP, I think DCUMs anti-redshirt contingent largely consists of crazy hypocrites, having seen many of these threads. These are not rational people.

+1

Hateful nut jobs with nothing better to do than worry about what other families are doing.

What's hypocritical about sending your kid on time and wishing that other parents would do the same? I put my money where my mouth is--my kid's birthday is very close to the cutoff, and she went on time. So far as I can tell (based on classroom birthdays), so did her classmates. Which is good--it means that the teacher is dealing with kids within a one-year, not an 18-month, age range, and can have developmentally appropriate expectations for the class in terms of behavior and academic abilities. Seems pretty rational to me.

Eh. Not always so obvious. I have a kid with an August 30 birthday in a district with a September 1 cutoff. She's very emotionally immature, has trouble sitting still, and tracks socially with kids a year younger. I sent her "on time" and she has spent the year as the classroom behavior problem. I suspect the K teacher would have preferred that we hold her back because it would have actually narrowed the maturity gap in the classroom.

Just because your kid is mature enough to succeed in K at newly 5, doesn't mean all kids are.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I wish people HAD to send their kids on time unless the kids are special needs. I have two summer babies and I'd like to send them on time, but not if it means they're the only 5 year olds in a Kindergarten of 7 year olds.

So change the laws.

For now, it's legal and a path that many parents choose to take. Have an issue? Talk to your state representatives and quit bitching about it.

You’re such a nasty piece of work! It’s just stunning. Please find a conscience and don’t be such a goddamned bitch to mothers who are more honest and braver than you. If that bothers you, change your message board habits.

Anonymous wrote:OP, I haven't read the rest of the thread, but I feel like the following PSA should be posted to all redshirting threads on DCUM:

Anyone who says that studies show that redshirting is vastly helpful or harmful to students (either those redshirted or those not redshirted) is wildly exaggerating the available research and their opinions should be disregarded.

For all the ranting and froth the topic causes, there aren't very many good, rigorous, statistically valid studies about redshirting. Often when people say "studies say," you need to ask them for the exact cite, and they usually can't provide it, or when they do, it turns out they're outright wrong about the studies. Ask for cites, if people start babbling about "the studies," and read them yourself.

In general, publications in social science journals are analytically weaker than those in medical journals and don't go through the same level of peer review, so judge them accordingly.

The only large population studies (that I know of) that somewhat concern redshirting have to do with the studies on relative age effect and ADHD diagnosis. To summarize at a very high level, those studies link an increased probability of diagnosis of ADHD and/or prescription of ADHD medications with being younger in the class. The studies occur across populations that both do and do not redshirt. If you want to review the studies yourself, here's a meta-analysis of the studies; you can get to some of the individual studies through this meta-analysis. Not all studies found the same degree of impact, and not all studies were of the same level of rigor, but you can evaluate yourself. Also, to be clear these studies were not about redshirting; however, if you have a concern about ADHD you should consider talking to your pediatrician.

It pains me that this even has to be spelled out, but based on lots of observations of DCUM's redshirt discussions, it does need to be spelled out: private schools can redshirt as much as they want, because they can set their own admissions rules.

A follow-up point to the point above: if you do not like a private school's policy on redshirting, you do not need to apply to that school. To most people this is obvious but years of reading DCUM has taught me it is not obvious to everyone.

Public schools vary in their rules with respect to redshirting; it doesn't make sense to talk in general about "the rules" with respect to public schools because they vary by state and in some cases by districts.

Cutoff dates vary by state. Again, this does seem to be misunderstood on DCUM.

Go to the actual studies cited in popular media rather than the popular media articles themselves; the studies are usually easily available. You can decide for yourself if you want to make a decision based on about a questionable sample of students from a specialized Italian university or not.

Redshirting discussions on DCUM attract a lot of truly crazy people. Evaluate your feedback accordingly.

In the end, you know your child. It's not "not having faith in them" to redshirt. It's not "putting your ego ahead of their needs" to not redshirt. Anyone who says that nonsense (and there are a lot of them on DCUM) should just be ignored as they are likely not great parents themselves.

If you encounter someone who is wildly anti-redshirting but sends their child to private school, moves to an expensive school district, hires outside tutors, or who engages in outside academic enrichment, they're probably hypocrites and you should ignore them.

If you encounter someone who is wildly pro-redshirting but who doesn't support the right of kids to enter school early to the same degree as they might delay, they're probably hypocrites and you should ignore them.

Other than citations to studies, you're probably not going to get a lot of use out of these discussions given the crazies that they tend to attract. Evaluate them accordingly.

HTH.

I disagree with some of what you're stating as fact, when there really aren't facts to substantiate your claims. For example, what do you base your claims re: social science journals on? I've published in both social science and medical journals. Medical journals often have a higher impact factor if they are read and cited by a wider audience, but there are also some not very prestigious medical journals. However, I've often found more detailed peer review from social science journals--Ph.D.s educated in statistics and research methods are often sticklers and ask for extensive revisions before a paper is suitable for publications. I still work in research, and review the work of Ph.D.s and M.D.s every day. I don't find social science folks to be less rigorous at all.

I also disagree with your claims about posters who are "crazy" or "not good parents"--this sounds just as extreme as the posters it's meant to criticize.

Anonymous wrote:I wish people HAD to send their kids on time unless the kids are special needs. I have two summer babies and I'd like to send them on time, but not if it means they're the only 5 year olds in a Kindergarten of 7 year olds.

So change the laws.

For now, it's legal and a path that many parents choose to take. Have an issue? Talk to your state representatives and quit bitching about it.

Anonymous wrote:I wish people HAD to send their kids on time unless the kids are special needs. I have two summer babies and I'd like to send them on time, but not if it means they're the only 5 year olds in a Kindergarten of 7 year olds.

AMEN.

I wish people HAD to send their kids on time unless the kids are special needs. I have two summer babies and I'd like to send them on time, but not if it means they're the only 5 year olds in a Kindergarten of 7 year olds.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP, I think DCUMs anti-redshirt contingent largely consists of crazy hypocrites, having seen many of these threads. These are not rational people.

+1

Hateful nut jobs with nothing better to do than worry about what other families are doing.

What's hypocritical about sending your kid on time and wishing that other parents would do the same? I put my money where my mouth is--my kid's birthday is very close to the cutoff, and she went on time. So far as I can tell (based on classroom birthdays), so did her classmates. Which is good--it means that the teacher is dealing with kids within a one-year, not an 18-month, age range, and can have developmentally appropriate expectations for the class in terms of behavior and academic abilities. Seems pretty rational to me.

Exactly. These decisions don't exist in a vacuum. When my kid has an April birthday and is in class with kids born the MAY before - as in almost a year older than he is, and a year and a half older than the non-redshirted August kid - it's crappy (and will embarrass your kids later on).

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This thread is hilarious. Of course preschool teachers want your kid to stay / be held back. $$$$

And the idea that a child is a mature/ a natural leader when theyre a seven-year-old with five-year-olds.

OP here, the preschool thinks she's good to go. This discussion is mostly with the private school administrators who understand that this can be a difficult decision. My daughter turns 5 a week before the cutoff (we're in MD)

There is no guarantee if a private does not want her this year, that they will want her next year. It makes no sense to hold back a child if child is ready and they want to hold back. Its easier to teach older kids as they come in with more knowledge and its easier if you are teaching a child lessons they should have mastered a year before. It is for the school's needs, not for your child's benefit. Take the schools that she did get in or public.

The school thinks she will most likely be fine based on the interview and preschool recommendations, but we did discuss the late birthday and implications for K and longer term. (We also discussed the possibility of her starting K this year, then, depending on how it goes, either moving on to another K class or 1st grade the following year.) They did, however, also say that we may not see any issues with her being the youngest until the middle school years. Ultimately our decision, and we can probably go either way.

I’m redshirting my girl that will be 5 in September. I have agonized over it and asked my people for their opinions. My husband was born in August and was red shirted. He loved being the oldest. I was born in October (but lived in NY where there’s a later cutoff) and started on time. I was fine in elementary school but think I would have benefitted from being older in high school. I have never met anyone that regretted red shirting. Also I don’t see any rush to have my kids leave the house a year earlier than necessary. The counter viewpoint that I think is worth considering is the puberty factor. Being the first girl with breasts or a period does kind of suck. But I was a very late bloomer so hopefully my DD won’t have that problem.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP, I think DCUMs anti-redshirt contingent largely consists of crazy hypocrites, having seen many of these threads. These are not rational people.

+1

Hateful nut jobs with nothing better to do than worry about what other families are doing.

What's hypocritical about sending your kid on time and wishing that other parents would do the same? I put my money where my mouth is--my kid's birthday is very close to the cutoff, and she went on time. So far as I can tell (based on classroom birthdays), so did her classmates. Which is good--it means that the teacher is dealing with kids within a one-year, not an 18-month, age range, and can have developmentally appropriate expectations for the class in terms of behavior and academic abilities. Seems pretty rational to me.

Anonymous wrote:I only would do it if I was sure DC is dumb.

I hate this place.

I only would do it if I was sure DC is dumb.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This thread is hilarious. Of course preschool teachers want your kid to stay / be held back. $$$$

And the idea that a child is a mature/ a natural leader when theyre a seven-year-old with five-year-olds.

OP here, the preschool thinks she's good to go. This discussion is mostly with the private school administrators who understand that this can be a difficult decision. My daughter turns 5 a week before the cutoff (we're in MD)

There is no guarantee if a private does not want her this year, that they will want her next year. It makes no sense to hold back a child if child is ready and they want to hold back. Its easier to teach older kids as they come in with more knowledge and its easier if you are teaching a child lessons they should have mastered a year before. It is for the school's needs, not for your child's benefit. Take the schools that she did get in or public.

You do understand that private schools can do what they want, right?

I am not sure because this basic fact seems lost of a lot of anti-redshirt posters on DCUM and I couldn't tell from your post.

Of course they can, but why would you want to send your kid there when they are doing it for their own good, not the child's.

Anonymous wrote:I think the reason people are less likely to hold back girls is because in general girls tend to do extremely well in elementary school, especially if they are the compliant, rule-following type. Some boys do fine, but a lot of them really struggle with the amount of sitting and focusing. I think some of the kids on ADHD medication in elementary school are on it because school is poorly suited to their activity and focus level, and they might be able to go without meds in a different setting.

So, if your daughter is good at school stuff and likely to be successful, I'd send her and it will probably go fine. If she is more squirmy and seems socially younger than her peers, I'd wait a year.

That is a huge overgeneralization about boys. No wonder girls are surpassing boys right now. What a terrible attitude.

If children are struggling that much, maybe its the school environment. Bad curriculum, large classes, lousy teachers who go by the protocol but put no real effort into it, etc. We went to a small private, mainly younger kids and all the kids were successful. They had a strong prek where reading and other academics were taught so kids were prepared (along with how to sit and function in a classroom), there was real teaching vs. centers and dumping kids on computers, heavy literacy program that taught both phonics and sight words so it got kids who learned either way or both ways, etc. People are so worried about outdoor time, recess that they don't focus on the skills needed for kids to be successful. As parents, if your child needs more play or outdoor time, they do it before or after school, not at school. All the kids we started with, who moved onto other schools as they aged out are doing great. Teachers push ADHD so kids get medicated so they are zombies with flat personalities and will just sit there and comply. That is the mark of a bad teacher.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This thread is hilarious. Of course preschool teachers want your kid to stay / be held back. $$$$

And the idea that a child is a mature/ a natural leader when theyre a seven-year-old with five-year-olds.

OP here, the preschool thinks she's good to go. This discussion is mostly with the private school administrators who understand that this can be a difficult decision. My daughter turns 5 a week before the cutoff (we're in MD)

There is no guarantee if a private does not want her this year, that they will want her next year. It makes no sense to hold back a child if child is ready and they want to hold back. Its easier to teach older kids as they come in with more knowledge and its easier if you are teaching a child lessons they should have mastered a year before. It is for the school's needs, not for your child's benefit. Take the schools that she did get in or public.

You do understand that private schools can do what they want, right?

I am not sure because this basic fact seems lost of a lot of anti-redshirt posters on DCUM and I couldn't tell from your post.