Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:OP again- Red shirting spring birthdays in our area is becoming increasingly common- or at least it seems to me.
The mom that caused me to write the OP is "looking" now at gifted programs for her son because our school isn't challenging him. She's very quick to point out that her son has a genius IQ.
Could you imagine the poor teachers who have to deal with this obnoxious person? Red-shirting parents are the worst combo of helicoptering and tiger.
You know what's obnoxious? Judging and imaging that you know what's going on with this kid and this family. You don't like the mom and how she talks, I get it. You're inordinately threatened by a kid who has a higher IQ than your kid and might outperform them on tests, I get it. What you are NOT seeing is the concerns about focus, social-emotional skills, developmental issues perhaps due to prematurity, that can all lead to redshirting even when the child has excellent cognitive skills. Often times developmental issues are almost defined by radical uneveness in skill developments -- like advanced language and cognition, but very delayed motor skills and poor impulse control. Is redshirting the right solution for these kinds of kids in the long term? I don't pretend to know. But I can hardly blame parents for redshirting at a young age, when success in the classroom is so heavily defined these days by social skills, behavioral control, and fine-motor skills, as opposed to pure cognitive and language skills.
Most of those things will not improve repeating another year of standard preschool with younger peers. The problem is most families do not let their kids climb, play, and socialize (and make mistakes) on their own. They follow them around the playground, initiate and control playdates, decisions and step in on any possible fights. They give tablets more often than fine motor toys. You might want to read up on Peter Gray and the Freedom to Learn. Most parents, not just those that redshirt, need to wake-up and realize that they are ruining their kid's fine motor, social and behavioral skills. It starts as early as infants being propped up in chairs and saucers instead of on their bellies.
I just can't even ... this is possibly the dumbest post in this thread.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I do not understand holding a child back for social reasons. If you hold a child back and keep him or her with kids 1-2 years younger, you cannot complain they are immature as you are keeping them with kids who are far younger and do not have the social skills that can help them advance. Your chid will always be behind age/socially as they haven't been given the opportunity to mature and be with peers who may be what others consider more "mature."
You're right, you don't understand. Full stop.
+100 - It's ridiculous to assume that parents are making these decisions only for competitive reasons. We deliberated for 2 years and finally decided to red shirt our DS with a June birthday. It was an agonizing decision but the better option for us. I suspect that those of you complaining about the red shirted kid are also complaining about the disruptive, immature kid in the class and your school's inability to effectively manage him.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I do not understand holding a child back for social reasons. If you hold a child back and keep him or her with kids 1-2 years younger, you cannot complain they are immature as you are keeping them with kids who are far younger and do not have the social skills that can help them advance. Your chid will always be behind age/socially as they haven't been given the opportunity to mature and be with peers who may be what others consider more "mature."
You're right, you don't understand. Full stop.
+100 - It's ridiculous to assume that parents are making these decisions only for competitive reasons. We deliberated for 2 years and finally decided to red shirt our DS with a June birthday. It was an agonizing decision but the better option for us. I suspect that those of you complaining about the red shirted kid are also complaining about the disruptive, immature kid in the class and your school's inability to effectively manage him.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Yep. April was the oldest in my sons class. Plus, I personally know of other kids in different grades who are April/May. My friend- her son was *tiny tiny* with some speech problems- was an April/May too and she held him back. Although I could honestly see it in her situation.
How big of you to give your stamp of approval to the redshirting that you approve of![]()
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:OP again- Red shirting spring birthdays in our area is becoming increasingly common- or at least it seems to me.
The mom that caused me to write the OP is "looking" now at gifted programs for her son because our school isn't challenging him. She's very quick to point out that her son has a genius IQ.
Could you imagine the poor teachers who have to deal with this obnoxious person? Red-shirting parents are the worst combo of helicoptering and tiger.
You know what's obnoxious? Judging and imaging that you know what's going on with this kid and this family. You don't like the mom and how she talks, I get it. You're inordinately threatened by a kid who has a higher IQ than your kid and might outperform them on tests, I get it. What you are NOT seeing is the concerns about focus, social-emotional skills, developmental issues perhaps due to prematurity, that can all lead to redshirting even when the child has excellent cognitive skills. Often times developmental issues are almost defined by radical uneveness in skill developments -- like advanced language and cognition, but very delayed motor skills and poor impulse control. Is redshirting the right solution for these kinds of kids in the long term? I don't pretend to know. But I can hardly blame parents for redshirting at a young age, when success in the classroom is so heavily defined these days by social skills, behavioral control, and fine-motor skills, as opposed to pure cognitive and language skills.
Most of those things will not improve repeating another year of standard preschool with younger peers. The problem is most families do not let their kids climb, play, and socialize (and make mistakes) on their own. They follow them around the playground, initiate and control playdates, decisions and step in on any possible fights. They give tablets more often than fine motor toys. You might want to read up on Peter Gray and the Freedom to Learn. Most parents, not just those that redshirt, need to wake-up and realize that they are ruining their kid's fine motor, social and behavioral skills. It starts as early as infants being propped up in chairs and saucers instead of on their bellies.
I just can't even ... this is possibly the dumbest post in this thread.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I do not understand holding a child back for social reasons. If you hold a child back and keep him or her with kids 1-2 years younger, you cannot complain they are immature as you are keeping them with kids who are far younger and do not have the social skills that can help them advance. Your chid will always be behind age/socially as they haven't been given the opportunity to mature and be with peers who may be what others consider more "mature."
You're right, you don't understand. Full stop.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Here is a great article that smashes all these ADHD issues and rationalizations of red-shirting.
http://www.newyorker.com/tech/elements/youngest-kid-smartest-kid
Well, the article also says "younger students benefit from having older peers" so not sure why everyone is freaking out.
Not peers that are 1.5 and 2 years older than them. Peers that are a "couple of months" older than them.
Vast majority of redshirted kids are late summer birthdays, meaning that the natural age range is increased from 12 months to maybe a max of 15 months. 2 years older is a very rare child, and most likely due to a diagnosed developmental issue.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:OP again- Red shirting spring birthdays in our area is becoming increasingly common- or at least it seems to me.
The mom that caused me to write the OP is "looking" now at gifted programs for her son because our school isn't challenging him. She's very quick to point out that her son has a genius IQ.
Could you imagine the poor teachers who have to deal with this obnoxious person? Red-shirting parents are the worst combo of helicoptering and tiger.
You know what's obnoxious? Judging and imaging that you know what's going on with this kid and this family. You don't like the mom and how she talks, I get it. You're inordinately threatened by a kid who has a higher IQ than your kid and might outperform them on tests, I get it. What you are NOT seeing is the concerns about focus, social-emotional skills, developmental issues perhaps due to prematurity, that can all lead to redshirting even when the child has excellent cognitive skills. Often times developmental issues are almost defined by radical uneveness in skill developments -- like advanced language and cognition, but very delayed motor skills and poor impulse control. Is redshirting the right solution for these kinds of kids in the long term? I don't pretend to know. But I can hardly blame parents for redshirting at a young age, when success in the classroom is so heavily defined these days by social skills, behavioral control, and fine-motor skills, as opposed to pure cognitive and language skills.
Most of those things will not improve repeating another year of standard preschool with younger peers. The problem is most families do not let their kids climb, play, and socialize (and make mistakes) on their own. They follow them around the playground, initiate and control playdates, decisions and step in on any possible fights. They give tablets more often than fine motor toys. You might want to read up on Peter Gray and the Freedom to Learn. Most parents, not just those that redshirt, need to wake-up and realize that they are ruining their kid's fine motor, social and behavioral skills. It starts as early as infants being propped up in chairs and saucers instead of on their bellies.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:OP again- Red shirting spring birthdays in our area is becoming increasingly common- or at least it seems to me.
The mom that caused me to write the OP is "looking" now at gifted programs for her son because our school isn't challenging him. She's very quick to point out that her son has a genius IQ.
Could you imagine the poor teachers who have to deal with this obnoxious person? Red-shirting parents are the worst combo of helicoptering and tiger.
You know what's obnoxious? Judging and imaging that you know what's going on with this kid and this family. You don't like the mom and how she talks, I get it. You're inordinately threatened by a kid who has a higher IQ than your kid and might outperform them on tests, I get it. What you are NOT seeing is the concerns about focus, social-emotional skills, developmental issues perhaps due to prematurity, that can all lead to redshirting even when the child has excellent cognitive skills. Often times developmental issues are almost defined by radical uneveness in skill developments -- like advanced language and cognition, but very delayed motor skills and poor impulse control. Is redshirting the right solution for these kinds of kids in the long term? I don't pretend to know. But I can hardly blame parents for redshirting at a young age, when success in the classroom is so heavily defined these days by social skills, behavioral control, and fine-motor skills, as opposed to pure cognitive and language skills.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Here is a great article that smashes all these ADHD issues and rationalizations of red-shirting.
http://www.newyorker.com/tech/elements/youngest-kid-smartest-kid
Well, the article also says "younger students benefit from having older peers" so not sure why everyone is freaking out.
Not peers that are 1.5 and 2 years older than them. Peers that are a "couple of months" older than them.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Here is a great article that smashes all these ADHD issues and rationalizations of red-shirting.
http://www.newyorker.com/tech/elements/youngest-kid-smartest-kid
Well, the article also says "younger students benefit from having older peers" so not sure why everyone is freaking out.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Here is a great article that smashes all these ADHD issues and rationalizations of red-shirting.
http://www.newyorker.com/tech/elements/youngest-kid-smartest-kid
Well, the article also says "younger students benefit from having older peers" so not sure why everyone is freaking out.
Not peers that are 1.5 and 2 years older than them. Peers that are a "couple of months" older than them.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Here is a great article that smashes all these ADHD issues and rationalizations of red-shirting.
http://www.newyorker.com/tech/elements/youngest-kid-smartest-kid
Well, the article also says "younger students benefit from having older peers" so not sure why everyone is freaking out.