What is funny to me is that the people in hysterics about imaginary redshirting harms are also the ones applying to private schools. There is a super easy way to avoid the supposed (truthfully, non-existent) harms of redshirting: don’t go to private schools that engage in the practice. Nobody is entitled to private schools, no matter how many temper tantrums one throws.

But I imagine this is too much reality for the anti-redshirters to bear.

Are you claiming that the abstract states a different conclusion to the main body ? I am not spending money to access the article to clarify but I am 99.99 % doubtful.

Another older study from Hong Kong

https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/13803610903087078

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Reposting this because the poster asking for data conveniently ignored it.

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/604978/0209_CarolineSharp_et_al_RelativeAgeReviewRevised.pdf

THE YOUNGEST KIDS ARE AT A DISADVANTAGE!

The specific harms of redshirting was the data that was requested, and still not provided.

Are you being purposely obtuse? When there are documented differences within 12 month age gaps, what do you think happens when that gap increases to 14/16 months ?

I don’t want your feelings. I want the hard data and studies. Please provide it. Your “feelings” that the gap increases harms are irrelevant to me.

This has been a tempest-in-a-teapot for 50 years. If there is real data showing the harms of redshirting, there should be plenty of studies exactly directed to that point by now. Not “I feel it should be true,” not “I’m gonna stamp my foot until you say I’m right.” Give me the studies directed to the hard data about the long-term harms of redshirting.

Ew

Anonymous wrote:I quoted directly from the abstract. The abstract is an authors summary of their own piece.

Lol okay. Come back when you understand academics.

I didn't initially redshirt my August boy, regretted it, and he ended up repeating 2nd grade. He is now doing great. I was anti-redshirting because I think I was arrogant, basically, Iwas suuuuper young for my grade growing up and did just fine.

Funny that this is called redshirting for kindergarten kids. I do know some parents who held their kids back to be older/bigger for sports. I have an August boy who was on the very shy side. Being youngest in his class would have been a problem, so we waited for him to be older. As we were considering this, we also talked to my neighbor, who worked at a HS. He said in these cases, when he met HS parents, most that had held their kids back were glad they did, and many of those that did not wish they had.

I also heard from my friend something that stuck with me: You are either gaining an extra year of childhood or an extra year of adulthood, and childhood goes fast enough as it is. It was definitely the right choice for us.

I quoted directly from the abstract. The abstract is an authors summary of their own piece.

Anonymous wrote:Here.

https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/09645292.2018.1468873

Redshirting increases racial inequality for boys close to the cut off by up to 30%

That study doesn’t say what you claim it does. Did you read the actual study (I did) or just provide the abstract?

Here.

https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/09645292.2018.1468873

Redshirting increases racial inequality for boys close to the cut off by up to 30%

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Reposting this because the poster asking for data conveniently ignored it.

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/604978/0209_CarolineSharp_et_al_RelativeAgeReviewRevised.pdf

THE YOUNGEST KIDS ARE AT A DISADVANTAGE!

So what will the schools do to make sure NOBODY is ever the youngest?

Reduce the age cohort age range from 12 months to 6 months in the younger school years. Someone will still be the youngest but all the evidence based disadvantages from relative age affect disappear with such a narrow age gap.

Could you provide some data backing the bolded up? That seems like a very strong claim to make, and I’m curious why you are able to make such a strong statement. I am assuming there is a lot of data supporting the assertion?

I’m personally a bit skeptical — that just seems like far too broad a claim to make — but I like to read actual studies on this topic so please link!

I refer you to Malcolm Gladwells work. My suggestion came from him.

https://youtu.be/t5sJRGmyZ3Y

Uh, no. I’m sorry, but Malcolm Gladwell is not a legitimate data source. He’s been debunked and widely criticized on so many different topics at this point that I don’t think academics of any repute will even mention his name.

Do you have cites, studies, essays, or recommendations from actual academics, not ten-year-old videos from debunked pop culture snake oil salesmen? I would genuinely like to read them.

Anonymous wrote: Until then cluster. Group the 4-5 year old greenshirts from the 5-6 redshirts. African-American kids are the most likely group to Greenshirt likely due to the intersection with poverty and parents needing free childcare ASAP.

Currently these kids aren’t even in the same schools.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Reposting this because the poster asking for data conveniently ignored it.

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/604978/0209_CarolineSharp_et_al_RelativeAgeReviewRevised.pdf

THE YOUNGEST KIDS ARE AT A DISADVANTAGE!

The specific harms of redshirting was the data that was requested, and still not provided.

Are you being purposely obtuse? When there are documented differences within 12 month age gaps, what do you think happens when that gap increases to 14/16 months ?

I don’t want your feelings. I want the hard data and studies. Please provide it. Your “feelings” that the gap increases harms are irrelevant to me.

This has been a tempest-in-a-teapot for 50 years. If there is real data showing the harms of redshirting, there should be plenty of studies exactly directed to that point by now. Not “I feel it should be true,” not “I’m gonna stamp my foot until you say I’m right.” Give me the studies directed to the hard data about the long-term harms of redshirting.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Reposting this because the poster asking for data conveniently ignored it.

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/604978/0209_CarolineSharp_et_al_RelativeAgeReviewRevised.pdf

THE YOUNGEST KIDS ARE AT A DISADVANTAGE!

So what will the schools do to make sure NOBODY is ever the youngest?

Reduce the age cohort age range from 12 months to 6 months in the younger school years. Someone will still be the youngest but all the evidence based disadvantages from relative age affect disappear with such a narrow age gap.

Could you provide some data backing the bolded up? That seems like a very strong claim to make, and I’m curious why you are able to make such a strong statement. I am assuming there is a lot of data supporting the assertion?

I’m personally a bit skeptical — that just seems like far too broad a claim to make — but I like to read actual studies on this topic so please link!

I refer you to Malcolm Gladwells work. My suggestion came from him.

https://youtu.be/t5sJRGmyZ3Y

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Reposting this because the poster asking for data conveniently ignored it.

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/604978/0209_CarolineSharp_et_al_RelativeAgeReviewRevised.pdf

THE YOUNGEST KIDS ARE AT A DISADVANTAGE!

The specific harms of redshirting was the data that was requested, and still not provided.

Are you being purposely obtuse? When there are documented differences within 12 month age gaps, what do you think happens when that gap increases to 14/16 months ?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Reposting this because the poster asking for data conveniently ignored it.

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/604978/0209_CarolineSharp_et_al_RelativeAgeReviewRevised.pdf

THE YOUNGEST KIDS ARE AT A DISADVANTAGE!

So what will the schools do to make sure NOBODY is ever the youngest?

Reduce the age cohort age range from 12 months to 6 months in the younger school years. Someone will still be the youngest but all the evidence based disadvantages from relative age affect disappear with such a narrow age gap.

Could you provide some data backing the bolded up? That seems like a very strong claim to make, and I’m curious why you are able to make such a strong statement. I am assuming there is a lot of data supporting the assertion?

I’m personally a bit skeptical — that just seems like far too broad a claim to make — but I like to read actual studies on this topic so please link!