Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:For those who redshirt, did you have your child tested by someone (i.e., someone not involved with the current preschool, no self-interest)?

Since I am not basing my decision on delays or “academics”, no.

If it is social/emotional, then you think its best to ignore it and wait a year vs. getting an evaluation and services/help for your child to catch up. Sounds like lazy parenting. My child could do the academics with delays and we sent him. Far better to send them and let them get the support then ignore the problem hoping it will go away in a year.

This is my perspective on SNs as well. In many cases the child will be better served by the system in the longrun...

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:For those who redshirt, did you have your child tested by someone (i.e., someone not involved with the current preschool, no self-interest)?

Since I am not basing my decision on delays or “academics”, no.

If it is social/emotional, then you think its best to ignore it and wait a year vs. getting an evaluation and services/help for your child to catch up. Sounds like lazy parenting. My child could do the academics with delays and we sent him. Far better to send them and let them get the support then ignore the problem hoping it will go away in a year.

But sometimes the problem does go away with another year of growing and maturity.

Sometimes, but if your child is having a "problem" you address it vs. ignoring it. What if another year doesn't address it? Do you still ignore it and send them? Keep them back another year? Do the right thing and get them help? More parents prefer to ignore than help and then blame the kids. This is a parenting and preschool failure.

Anonymous wrote:Pretty much all of my friend who teach suggested waiting a year to start kindergarten. They are of the opinion that it has become to academic and does not meet the needs of most kids.

We listened to them, did some research, and decided to enroll DS when he was 5. He was already doing math at home and starting to read. We thought he was academically and socially ready. He has done fine. we also did not want to pay for another year of Preschool and our son is in the 99% for height and weight, he would have really stood out if we waited a year. Bust most importantly, he was ready. We are lucky to have the boy who can be wiggly but can really concentrate and who is not highly impulsive.

But all of my teacher friends told me to wait a year.

Hum...can't use "to" so not sure I believe you.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Fine. I'll bite.
I'm a teacher, I think redshirting is ridiculous. The notion that your kid should be the oldest is absurd. A good teacher is flexible and designs a curriculum that meets the child where he is at. A strong curriculum molds itself to the needs of the children, not the other way around. As a disclaimer, I should add that I teach at a well regarded private school, so I do have the flexibility to do this, but, I feel that private schools are where you see a lot of the redshirting.

If you teach at a well regarded private, you probably don't have the issue of special needs to consider. Many people with children who have special needs find their child is in need of further therapy before being ready for school.

Most of us with SN who are good parents see it very early and do heavy early interventions to give our kids the best possible chance. If you met my child now, you'd never guess how much therapy he was in or what he did. Between us, great therapists and some really good prek-1 teachers, he's doing fantastic. Great teachers make a huge different - the ones who will take that extra minute to help a child even its a burden on them. Kids who are held back and not evaluated and given help are kids whose parents and preschool teachers failed them. If this many kids need to be held back, our preschools and parents are failing their kids. Even SN kids like mine can thrive with the right people to help. The difference is instead of ignoring the problem/holding our kids back, we got them the tools they needed to succeed.

Not every kid is SN. Some are just a little slower to mature. Redshirting an immature child is not a failure of parenting. (And some SNs are not obvious or diagnosed until well into the school years.)

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My teacher spouse believes it creates fake "gifted" kids. They are accelerated in the early years in school because they start ahead of the other kids having gone through preschool twice (and often in a Preschool 1 then Preschool 2 program). They get easily bored in class and are then pushed into the gifted programs or at the very least given different work.

She says it all catches up with them in HS where she's a teacher (9th grade honors science course). Gifted in ES means they get in the advanced classes in MS and usually do okay, however, they flounder when funneled into the advanced/honors and AP tracks in HS.

Says she gets lots of parents who are very "my kid has NEVER had an issue until now so it is clearly not HIM that is the cause" and refuse to see that their kid isn't actually gifted like they thought.

That’s a very interesting point. I’ve been uncomfortable with the whole evaluation for aap in second grade thing, and this articulates why it can be an issue.

The tests are weighted for age. So a child who was red shirted will have to get more correct answers in order to score as high as my late June birthday kid who started on time.

They are but reality is a smart kid is a smart kid. My younger kid does better than many of his older peers. Some of it is just genetics. Some of it is test preparation. Working ahead and supplementing gets test scores higher as kids have knowledge of what is being asked so not all tests are truly accurate and don't account for that.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Fine. I'll bite.
I'm a teacher, I think redshirting is ridiculous. The notion that your kid should be the oldest is absurd. A good teacher is flexible and designs a curriculum that meets the child where he is at. A strong curriculum molds itself to the needs of the children, not the other way around. As a disclaimer, I should add that I teach at a well regarded private school, so I do have the flexibility to do this, but, I feel that private schools are where you see a lot of the redshirting.

If you teach at a well regarded private, you probably don't have the issue of special needs to consider. Many people with children who have special needs find their child is in need of further therapy before being ready for school.

Most of us with SN who are good parents see it very early and do heavy early interventions to give our kids the best possible chance. If you met my child now, you'd never guess how much therapy he was in or what he did. Between us, great therapists and some really good prek-1 teachers, he's doing fantastic. Great teachers make a huge different - the ones who will take that extra minute to help a child even its a burden on them. Kids who are held back and not evaluated and given help are kids whose parents and preschool teachers failed them. If this many kids need to be held back, our preschools and parents are failing their kids. Even SN kids like mine can thrive with the right people to help. The difference is instead of ignoring the problem/holding our kids back, we got them the tools they needed to succeed.

Anonymous wrote:a lot of early ed teachers like retention because older kids are easier **for them**.

The anti-teacher sentiment on DCUM is really something.

I’m a former elementary teacher and I would say that the reason you don’t hear teachers weighing in on redshirting is because it’s not something they care about. Redshirting is not problematic for the schools. As a pp said, someone has to be the youngest or oldest, which is true so why would the schools really care? Redshirting is a big topic among parents, but I don’t ever recall hearing any teachers discussing. In fact, I would guess most teachers don’t even know when their students’ birthdays are. I had a chart with the kids birthdays in my classroom and would give them a little present, but I never made a mental note of it, such as oh this kid’s an older one. That being said, I never taught below 2nd grade so it’s quite possible that kindergarten teachers might know and give significance to when the kid’s birthdays are, but again I don’t ever recall hearing it discussed.

Anonymous wrote:Fine. I'll bite.
I'm a teacher, I think redshirting is ridiculous. The notion that your kid should be the oldest is absurd. A good teacher is flexible and designs a curriculum that meets the child where he is at. A strong curriculum molds itself to the needs of the children, not the other way around. As a disclaimer, I should add that I teach at a well regarded private school, so I do have the flexibility to do this, but, I feel that private schools are where you see a lot of the redshirting.

If you teach at a well regarded private, you probably don't have the issue of special needs to consider. Many people with children who have special needs find their child is in need of further therapy before being ready for school.

a lot of early ed teachers like retention because older kids are easier **for them**.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My teacher spouse believes it creates fake "gifted" kids. They are accelerated in the early years in school because they start ahead of the other kids having gone through preschool twice (and often in a Preschool 1 then Preschool 2 program). They get easily bored in class and are then pushed into the gifted programs or at the very least given different work.

She says it all catches up with them in HS where she's a teacher (9th grade honors science course). Gifted in ES means they get in the advanced classes in MS and usually do okay, however, they flounder when funneled into the advanced/honors and AP tracks in HS.

Says she gets lots of parents who are very "my kid has NEVER had an issue until now so it is clearly not HIM that is the cause" and refuse to see that their kid isn't actually gifted like they thought.

That’s a very interesting point. I’ve been uncomfortable with the whole evaluation for aap in second grade thing, and this articulates why it can be an issue.

The tests are weighted for age. So a child who was red shirted will have to get more correct answers in order to score as high as my late June birthday kid who started on time.

It’s not about being the oldest or youngest kid in the class, it’s about each child being mature enough for the school situation. Kids mature at different rates, so it makes sense that there be a little flexibility at the edges of the age guidelines for each grade.

Teachers are always going to have a youngest kid in their class, whether it’s yours or someone else’s.

I have a September bday kid. When we had my child in preschool, the teacher proclaimed with a great deal of attitude that there is no way that she would recommend my child to start K at 5yrs old. Her biggest complaint was not academic abilities, or following the rules, or social behavior. It was that my child wasn't compliant with her orders. We moved for work and she started K in Fairfax at 5yrs old. My child still isn't always compliant, but doing fine otherwise. Its annoying behavior, but nothing worth sending her to the principal's office. Its a part of who she is as a person. Every teacher wants the easy kid. I get that. But is the only answer for kids like mine to have them wait a year? They don't qualify for services. If it were up to most teachers, kids like mine would end being stuck with the much younger kids and not being challenged, which leads to idle hands, and that's never a good thing.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My teacher spouse believes it creates fake "gifted" kids. They are accelerated in the early years in school because they start ahead of the other kids having gone through preschool twice (and often in a Preschool 1 then Preschool 2 program). They get easily bored in class and are then pushed into the gifted programs or at the very least given different work.

She says it all catches up with them in HS where she's a teacher (9th grade honors science course). Gifted in ES means they get in the advanced classes in MS and usually do okay, however, they flounder when funneled into the advanced/honors and AP tracks in HS.

Says she gets lots of parents who are very "my kid has NEVER had an issue until now so it is clearly not HIM that is the cause" and refuse to see that their kid isn't actually gifted like they thought.

That’s a very interesting point. I’ve been uncomfortable with the whole evaluation for aap in second grade thing, and this articulates why it can be an issue.

Not really. Being redshirted doesn't improve a child's chances to be admitted to aap.