Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:So much nonsense in this thread. I chose not to send my five year old to kindergarten. Why? It's none of your business. I had a reason and it wasn't to gain a competitive advantage over your kid. We don't approach education as a competition. It's pitiful to see adults worrying about another child having an advantage in kindergarten. What are you afraid is going to happen to your child?
+1
What are YOU afraid is going to happen to YOUR child if they start on time?
+1 I think CA started requiring a Ped's note or possibly from Prek teacher if you want to hold the child back. This should be the norm.
2 years ago NY started requiring permission from the principle for a child to be held back from K.
and we would have had no problem obtaining permission. not every kid was held back for some kind of advantage.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:So much nonsense in this thread. I chose not to send my five year old to kindergarten. Why? It's none of your business. I had a reason and it wasn't to gain a competitive advantage over your kid. We don't approach education as a competition. It's pitiful to see adults worrying about another child having an advantage in kindergarten. What are you afraid is going to happen to your child?
+1
What are YOU afraid is going to happen to YOUR child if they start on time?
+1 I think CA started requiring a Ped's note or possibly from Prek teacher if you want to hold the child back. This should be the norm.
2 years ago NY started requiring permission from the principle for a child to be held back from K.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:So much nonsense in this thread. I chose not to send my five year old to kindergarten. Why? It's none of your business. I had a reason and it wasn't to gain a competitive advantage over your kid. We don't approach education as a competition. It's pitiful to see adults worrying about another child having an advantage in kindergarten. What are you afraid is going to happen to your child?
+1
What are YOU afraid is going to happen to YOUR child if they start on time?
+1 I think CA started requiring a Ped's note or possibly from Prek teacher if you want to hold the child back. This should be the norm.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:So much nonsense in this thread. I chose not to send my five year old to kindergarten. Why? It's none of your business. I had a reason and it wasn't to gain a competitive advantage over your kid. We don't approach education as a competition. It's pitiful to see adults worrying about another child having an advantage in kindergarten. What are you afraid is going to happen to your child?
+1
What are YOU afraid is going to happen to YOUR child if they start on time?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:So much nonsense in this thread. I chose not to send my five year old to kindergarten. Why? It's none of your business. I had a reason and it wasn't to gain a competitive advantage over your kid. We don't approach education as a competition. It's pitiful to see adults worrying about another child having an advantage in kindergarten. What are you afraid is going to happen to your child?
+1
Anonymous wrote:So much nonsense in this thread. I chose not to send my five year old to kindergarten. Why? It's none of your business. I had a reason and it wasn't to gain a competitive advantage over your kid. We don't approach education as a competition. It's pitiful to see adults worrying about another child having an advantage in kindergarten. What are you afraid is going to happen to your child?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:You know why parents do it - to skew things to their kid's advantage. School systems allow it based on the precedent that, in very rare cases especially special needs, it is needed.
Exactly. And there should be documented proof that it's needed (in cases of serious special needs - not because it would marginally benefit the child).
Yes. The school system should require testing to prove a need to hold back.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:People should leave redshirting parents alone. They know better than anyone if their child is incapable of handling a Kindergarten class. I would prefer that when my child goes to Kindergarten they are not in class with a bunch of kids who cannot manage being there.
If your child is in no shape to go to Kindergarten, keep them out for another year.
Cannot "manage" being there? What does that even mean? There will be more mature kids and less mature kids. There will be academically advanced kids, and academically behind kids. There is no way to create a 'fair' system of clones with identical abilities, despite what redshirting parents claim to think.
Most do it to try to get their kid a leg up.
I don't know any family that has ever said that. So my conclusion has always been that although their child is chronologically ready that child is unable to handle being in a Kindergarten class with peers. They often need an extra year in a preschool classroom to get them ready.
Anonymous wrote:Why is it not ok for your kid to experience some discomfort? Adversity builds character. So let your kid be the smallest in class or a bit behind, they will learn from this and become more resilient adults.
Anonymous wrote:I had a kid who was in the sixth percentile for height and weight for years, even though she was academically very bright. There were times in kindergarten, first and second grade that I actually worried that she would get hurt because some of the kids were so much bigger than she was.
I also had kids who were at the extreme ends of the bell curve in terms of maturing late. One daughter got her period when she was 16. I think the humiliation and embarrassment of not having boobs, etc. in tenth grade was probably greater since there were kids getting their periods in fifth grade -- and it wasn't because of hormones in the chicken, etc. but rather because they were 12 years old in fifth grade.
In short, I think that the kids who are really small for their age or who mature late can be somewhat affected by routinely being in classes with kids so much bigger and older than they are. And yes, you could have said we should have held our kids back but 1. we couldn't afford the extra years of daycare and 2. we kept thinking our kids would mature and join the rest of the pack but they never did -- until 11th grade.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:
I think there's too broad a definition of special needs when I hear from my sister, who's a speech pathologist in an elementary school, that nearly every kid come in now with some kind of an IEP. Kind of takes away from the kids with legitimate needs to cater to the kids who just never learned to sit still or follow directions.
Your sister is a speech pathologist. It should not be surprising that most kids who see your sister, the speech pathologist, have an IEP.
Anonymous wrote:It's interesting because the research seems to be showing that it actually doesn't help kids that much and may harm them somewhat in the long run. Yet parents continue to do it because they think their child is getting some kind of mysterious advantage. It seems like a short sighted thing to do.