Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:And you don't see the difference between an applicant who is older because they have gained life experience and an applicant who is a senior in high school as a 19 year old because their parents didn't think they could hack it in kindergarten?

I don't think colleges will care that much. The fact that a kid is turning 19 senior year, most likely during second semester or in the summer after, is not going to bother colleges that much. There has always been some variation in the age kids are when they apply to college. A couple of decades ago, one of my freshman year roommates was from Hong Kong and turned 20 shortly after the start of our freshman year. My college didn't care that she was a year or two older than most of the other freshmen. She was paying full freight.

The kid who is a little older is likely to be more mature and will probably need less handholding and support. A more mature freshman is less likely to do dumb things and cause the college trouble and cost them money. It's a plus for the college to enroll kids who are a little older.

Many of us went to college 17/18 without doing dumb things or costing money... our parents prepared us for college and taught us how to care for ourselves. They also nurtured us so we knew we could call when we need help. I knew I had 4 years at college then graduate school. I knew how much I could spend and if I needed something high cost beyond books, I'd call and ask. You start teaching this when your kids are young.

Anonymous wrote:
This goes against all recent research about early learning. Check out the Finnish school system. 93% graduation rate from high school, and 100% literacy rate. And their kindergartens are completely play based. “Play is a very efficient way of learning for children,” [said a Finnish kindergarten teacher] “And we can use it in a way that children will learn with joy.” Which means they don't push reading at this stage.

http://www.theatlantic.com/education/archive/2015/10/the-joyful-illiterate-kindergartners-of-finland/408325/

http://stuff4educators.com/index.php?p=1_77_Finland-World-s-Best-Readers

http://www.smithsonianmag.com/innovation/why-are-finlands-schools-successful-49859555/?no-ist

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:And you don't see the difference between an applicant who is older because they have gained life experience and an applicant who is a senior in high school as a 19 year old because their parents didn't think they could hack it in kindergarten?

I don't think colleges will care that much. The fact that a kid is turning 19 senior year, most likely during second semester or in the summer after, is not going to bother colleges that much. There has always been some variation in the age kids are when they apply to college. A couple of decades ago, one of my freshman year roommates was from Hong Kong and turned 20 shortly after the start of our freshman year. My college didn't care that she was a year or two older than most of the other freshmen. She was paying full freight.

The kid who is a little older is likely to be more mature and will probably need less handholding and support. A more mature freshman is less likely to do dumb things and cause the college trouble and cost them money. It's a plus for the college to enroll kids who are a little older.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My daughter is 10 months older than the youngest kids in her class because she has a late-October birthday. It's been a struggle to keep her challenged.

Most of the boys I know who were red-shirted just weren't ready socially/emotionally for kindergarten at age barely-5. they were bright kids, and not small, but I can see why their parents made the choice they did.

So twenty years ago everyone was "socially/emotionally" ready for K and now suddenly we are raising a bunch of immature little kids? Nope. It's the parents who have their issues that are putting them on their poor little kids.

It's pretty well accepted that K has changed a lot in the last 20 years, so it follows that "readiness" would also change... But I guess some people pity children whose parents wait to send them in the hopes of making them healthier and happier...

what has changed? Serious question, people always say this but I think the opposite is true. K is so dumbed down now, what is challenging? I feel sorry for the almost 7 year olds that have to sit in a class reading K level reading books and using the calendar to count, checking the weather calendar...sitting in a circle like 5 year olds. Three kids have gone through and if anything it is EASIER than it has ever been. We did the private school route for one child so he can go "on time" Sept. birthday. Other two are summer bdays and never considered holding back. Even in their correct grade the challenge is very minimal. And PP, if you think holding back is going to make your kid happier and healthier you are a complete dumb ass.

You must have gone to some academic, gt kindergarten. I went to a half-day kindergarten where we sang songs, took a nap, played duck-duck-goose, made art, had lots of unstructured play and recess time, learned our letters and numbers and how to write them. Big emphasis on learning to listen, sit in a circle, and sharing. My kids by contrast, had full-day kindergarten with no naps, only one recess, and homework every night in kindergarten that included reading comprehension (answering questions about what they read) and math problems.

FWIW the only people I hear express regret about their decision with late summer birthdays are those who sent their children on time and think their kids really struggled esp. in middle school and beyond. My SIL and her husband have long regretted not keeping back their August son, who ended up having to take a break between high school and college.

Most five year olds have not napped in 2+ years. If they attended preschool, they should know how to listen, sit in a circle and share. They should know their letters and numbers via preschool. If not, the preschool and parents failed them. Homework is simple in K and 1st. I don't see the complaints in less you don't work with your child at home. Concerned about the lack of recess - put them in activities or take them to the playground before and after school. The school's job is to teach. Kids can play on their own time. My first grader is starting multiplication at home per his request. Sadly, the school will not teach him. I[b]f anything, it needs to go at a faster pace, not slower. And, if kids cannot handle basic K. then yes, they probably should be held back, or better, send them to a preschool that prepares them as clearly the play based is not[/b].

This goes against all recent research about early learning. Check out the Finnish school system. 93% graduation rate from high school, and 100% literacy rate. And their kindergartens are completely play based. “Play is a very efficient way of learning for children,” [said a Finnish kindergarten teacher] “And we can use it in a way that children will learn with joy.” Which means they don't push reading at this stage.

http://www.theatlantic.com/education/archive/2015/10/the-joyful-illiterate-kindergartners-of-finland/408325/

http://stuff4educators.com/index.php?p=1_77_Finland-World-s-Best-Readers

http://www.smithsonianmag.com/innovation/why-are-finlands-schools-successful-49859555/?no-ist

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My daughter is 10 months older than the youngest kids in her class because she has a late-October birthday. It's been a struggle to keep her challenged.

Most of the boys I know who were red-shirted just weren't ready socially/emotionally for kindergarten at age barely-5. they were bright kids, and not small, but I can see why their parents made the choice they did.

So twenty years ago everyone was "socially/emotionally" ready for K and now suddenly we are raising a bunch of immature little kids? Nope. It's the parents who have their issues that are putting them on their poor little kids.

It's pretty well accepted that K has changed a lot in the last 20 years, so it follows that "readiness" would also change... But I guess some people pity children whose parents wait to send them in the hopes of making them healthier and happier...

what has changed? Serious question, people always say this but I think the opposite is true. K is so dumbed down now, what is challenging? I feel sorry for the almost 7 year olds that have to sit in a class reading K level reading books and using the calendar to count, checking the weather calendar...sitting in a circle like 5 year olds. Three kids have gone through and if anything it is EASIER than it has ever been. We did the private school route for one child so he can go "on time" Sept. birthday. Other two are summer bdays and never considered holding back. Even in their correct grade the challenge is very minimal. And PP, if you think holding back is going to make your kid happier and healthier you are a complete dumb ass.

You must have gone to some academic, gt kindergarten. I went to a half-day kindergarten where we sang songs, took a nap, played duck-duck-goose, made art, had lots of unstructured play and recess time, learned our letters and numbers and how to write them. Big emphasis on learning to listen, sit in a circle, and sharing. My kids by contrast, had full-day kindergarten with no naps, only one recess, and homework every night in kindergarten that included reading comprehension (answering questions about what they read) and math problems.

FWIW the only people I hear express regret about their decision with late summer birthdays are those who sent their children on time and think their kids really struggled esp. in middle school and beyond. My SIL and her husband have long regretted not keeping back their August son, who ended up having to take a break between high school and college.

Most five year olds have not napped in 2+ years. If they attended preschool, they should know how to listen, sit in a circle and share. They should know their letters and numbers via preschool. If not, the preschool and parents failed them. Homework is simple in K and 1st. I don't see the complaints in less you don't work with your child at home. Concerned about the lack of recess - put them in activities or take them to the playground before and after school. The school's job is to teach. Kids can play on their own time. My first grader is starting multiplication at home per his request. Sadly, the school will not teach him. I[b]f anything, it needs to go at a faster pace, not slower. And, if kids cannot handle basic K. then yes, they probably should be held back, or better, send them to a preschool that prepares them as clearly the play based is not[/b].

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:And you don't see the difference between an applicant who is older because they have gained life experience and an applicant who is a senior in high school as a 19 year old because their parents didn't think they could hack it in kindergarten?

I don't think colleges will care that much. The fact that a kid is turning 19 senior year, most likely during second semester or in the summer after, is not going to bother colleges that much. There has always been some variation in the age kids are when they apply to college. A couple of decades ago, one of my freshman year roommates was from Hong Kong and turned 20 shortly after the start of our freshman year. My college didn't care that she was a year or two older than most of the other freshmen. She was paying full freight.

The kid who is a little older is likely to be more mature and will probably need less handholding and support. A more mature freshman is less likely to do dumb things and cause the college trouble and cost them money. It's a plus for the college to enroll kids who are a little older.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I have two boys, both late Spring birthdays. Both started school on time. both have classmates that are 17-18 months older (ie February - crazy, right?).

My anecdotal observation is that the kids who were redshirted had no apparent social or academic issues and these were basically cosmetic/athletic redshirts at the age of 4 (or 6).

Fast forward, the kids are in middle elementary now and you can see the sports difference and the social maturity difference in terms of interest in the opposite sex and general aggressiveness towards 'action'


In terms of academics, these kids are at worst in the middle of the grade (based on class placement like math that is either accelerated, regular or support) but it does change the dynamic considerably, regardless of whether it is kindergarten (no not Kindy, please) or 7th grade.

In total, as others have said, if your kid is an introvert, being an older introvert won't change anything. If your kid is on the small side, they might always be on the small side, and being older and on the small side won't change that.

Gaming the system is otherwise a fools game and not worth it and ultimately, it makes school a race to the bottom when you have 7 year olds kicking ass in kindergarten or 15 year olds doing great in 8th grade.

Does everyone remember those rare kids who used to skip grades and be super smart? My grandfathers both enrolled in college at 16. Now we have 16 year olds in 9th and 10th grade. It is a total crock and shameful.

Once again: NOBODY is redshirting for athletic advantage or simply because the kid is an introvert. And just like kids used to skip grades, they also used to be held back. I am sorry that the visibility of another child's struggles bothers you so much, but maybe stop and think about what kind of person you are.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It should not be allowed absent proof of special needs such as a learning or social disorder. A cut off should be a cut off. Gaming the system is a disgrace.

how is it gaming the system again? I think you are projecting your own very unhealthy competitiveness.

I'm not that poster but really? It is obvious that some parents take advantage of a loophole designed to help kids with true needs so they can get their own kids ahead.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It should not be allowed absent proof of special needs such as a learning or social disorder. A cut off should be a cut off. Gaming the system is a disgrace.

how is it gaming the system again? I think you are projecting your own very unhealthy competitiveness.

Anonymous wrote:And you don't see the difference between an applicant who is older because they have gained life experience and an applicant who is a senior in high school as a 19 year old because their parents didn't think they could hack it in kindergarten?

Anonymous wrote:
Most five year olds have not napped in 2+ years. If they attended preschool, they should know how to listen, sit in a circle and share. They should know their letters and numbers via preschool. If not, the preschool and parents failed them. Homework is simple in K and 1st. I don't see the complaints in less you don't work with your child at home. Concerned about the lack of recess - put them in activities or take them to the playground before and after school. The school's job is to teach. Kids can play on their own time. My first grader is starting multiplication at home per his request. Sadly, the school will not teach him. If anything, it needs to go at a faster pace, not slower. And, if kids cannot handle basic K. then yes, they probably should be held back, or better, send them to a preschool that prepares them as clearly the play based is not.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My daughter is 10 months older than the youngest kids in her class because she has a late-October birthday. It's been a struggle to keep her challenged.

Most of the boys I know who were red-shirted just weren't ready socially/emotionally for kindergarten at age barely-5. they were bright kids, and not small, but I can see why their parents made the choice they did.

So twenty years ago everyone was "socially/emotionally" ready for K and now suddenly we are raising a bunch of immature little kids? Nope. It's the parents who have their issues that are putting them on their poor little kids.

It's pretty well accepted that K has changed a lot in the last 20 years, so it follows that "readiness" would also change... But I guess some people pity children whose parents wait to send them in the hopes of making them healthier and happier...

what has changed? Serious question, people always say this but I think the opposite is true. K is so dumbed down now, what is challenging? I feel sorry for the almost 7 year olds that have to sit in a class reading K level reading books and using the calendar to count, checking the weather calendar...sitting in a circle like 5 year olds. Three kids have gone through and if anything it is EASIER than it has ever been. We did the private school route for one child so he can go "on time" Sept. birthday. Other two are summer bdays and never considered holding back. Even in their correct grade the challenge is very minimal. And PP, if you think holding back is going to make your kid happier and healthier you are a complete dumb ass.

You must have gone to some academic, gt kindergarten. I went to a half-day kindergarten where we sang songs, took a nap, played duck-duck-goose, made art, had lots of unstructured play and recess time, learned our letters and numbers and how to write them. Big emphasis on learning to listen, sit in a circle, and sharing. My kids by contrast, had full-day kindergarten with no naps, only one recess, and homework every night in kindergarten that included reading comprehension (answering questions about what they read) and math problems.

FWIW the only people I hear express regret about their decision with late summer birthdays are those who sent their children on time and think their kids really struggled esp. in middle school and beyond. My SIL and her husband have long regretted not keeping back their August son, who ended up having to take a break between high school and college.