You got me. I'm not sure.

By the way, how would you suggest a parent find out the age-ranges for classes at a school? If they can't rely on the school for this information, do you suggest they survey the parents asking for birth certificates?

Just ask the school. It's really not too hard. "What age ranges does the Beardsley School usually have in its K classes? Do you strictly follow some age cut-off, or not?"

What's complicated about that?

Easy when you tour the schools with your child and sit in the classrooms you can ask your child to get the ages of all the kids with their birth dates ... or you can go up to the children yourself and seek this information; particularly if your child is not writing yet.

Simple, quick and easy.


08/09/2011 15:03 Subject: Re:My son's kindergarten class has several 7 yr olds in it.
Anonymous



...She could go up to the tall, big and heavier kids and ask their ages on the visit, too. I should have thought of that.


08/09/2011 15:05 Subject: Re:My son's kindergarten class has several 7 yr olds in it.
Anonymous



Send the children a subpoena for a copy of their birth certificates (Heck, subpoena the Director of Admissions for this data).

I hope these suggestions are useful for you if the ages of your child's classmates are so important and critical to you. A bonus is some advance notice of the birthday parties your wonderful child will certainly be invited to.

Send the children a subpoena for a copy of their birth certificates (Heck, subpoena the Director of Admissions for this data).

...She could go up to the tall, big and heavier kids and ask their ages on the visit, too. I should have thought of that.

By the way, how would you suggest a parent find out the age-ranges for classes at a school? If they can't rely on the school for this information, do you suggest they survey the parents asking for birth certificates?

Easy when you tour the schools with your child and sit in the classrooms you can ask your child to get the ages of all the kids with their birth dates ... or you can go up to the children yourself and seek this information; particularly if your child is not writing yet.

Simple, quick and easy.

Please spare us your lectures. We know what parents are for and I can guarantee you that we are not in "big trouble.' It may just be that we expect a bit more honesty and openness from our children's schools than you do. If schools are so open about not-younger-than age cut-offs why should we not know if there is a not-older-than cut-off and why would it require "some mythical authority" to get access to this information.

By the way, how would you suggest a parent find out the age-ranges for classes at a school? If they can't rely on the school for this information, do you suggest they survey the parents asking for birth certificates?

Do you also feel schools should reveal age ranges in their classrooms as well as test performance scores and ranges to help your child decide whether to apply or matriculate?

I have no qualms with releasing such information. It has no baring on my assessment of my children's record, performance, temperment and capability to date. Older children and 99.9 percentile WPSSI scores are irrelevant in that critical thinking process. The height and weight of his classmates would have no influence those decisions either. Those parameters would not be the deal breaker and have me scampering for the valley. Key are the teachers and the rigor, challenge, breadth, depth and variety of the curricula and whether these matched my children's needs. appropriately.

The age, height, and weight of the young classmates are superfluous and meaningless!!

[quote=Anonymous][quote].I understand your predicament in face of ignorance or lack of information.
There are no medals handed out for ignorance. It's your responsibility to find out the information you need to manage your young child's education. Your young child doesn't have the wherewithall to do this. That's why they have parents. If you depend solely on the school, or other parents, or some mythical authority you're in for big trouble.

Parenthood is a learning process, and work, and for me I am tweeking my strategy for the second child having learned with the first.
[/quote]

Please spare us your lectures. We know what parents are for and I can guarantee you that we are not in "big trouble.' It may just be that we expect a bit more honesty and openness from our children's schools than you do. If schools are so open about not-younger-than age cut-offs why should we not know if there is a not-older-than cut-off and why would it require "some mythical authority" to get access to this information.

By the way, how would you suggest a parent find out the age-ranges for classes at a school? If they can't rely on the school for this information, do you suggest they survey the parents asking for birth certificates?

You seem to have common sense. Doesn't require rocket science or quantum mechanics to understand what works for your own child.

Anonymous wrote:[ The allegation older children are somehow sapping or stealing the intellect, leadership, classroom adoration, roster spot on the soccer team, and growth potential of their own child is preposterous.

This!!!! I agree 100%. Unless and until somebody can give me a specific fact based example, I am not buying the premise that older children in the classroom are harmful to the remaining students based soley on their ages. To me, it would be more harmnful for the class to put a 5YO in a K class (just based on age) when that 5YO clearly was not ready for K. That sutedent would clearly require more attention from the teacher. It seems that having a 6.5 YO in K who was acadmenically on par with all the bright 5YO's would be more preferable. But, what do I know/

I guess I am confused. You will get the "wide academic need" issue in any classroom - especially in an age level based classroom. But I thought the purpose of redshirting was to put the kids where there is a closer fit academically. I mean a 6YO 1st grader is going to be taught from the same lesson plans as a 7.5 YO first grader. Am I wrong? Also, as far as athletics go, people in this thread have said that parents have redshirted kids so they are bigger and stronger athletically. If they are not allowed to play at that grade, then why do it? Actually, I thought the opposite was true. Folks were redshirting so that they could have the older kid playing on the grade based team. I know that is the case in MS.

I can understand that there may be social issues. But I also think that folks are overstating the potential impact also. But...oh well.

It depends on whether reasons for redshirting are sound. In some cases they are. In others they are preposterous and unsound. The key issue is not why people redshirt or redtrouser;rather, for your child where the appropriately academically challenging environment is for the the best fit. Reshirting and redtrousering by other parents should have no material impact on your personal and individual decision for your child. I you refuse to have you child in a class with older children then you should by more than happy to explore other schools and options.

The claim was we accelerated kids a generation or two ago and now we don't so school curricula have been dumbed down. The response was we've accelerated the curriculum itself/everybody since then, so no, the trend isn't toward dumbing things down. Basically, one size never fits all and when you set the bar low, you promote and when you set the bar high, you redshirt.

???

A generation ago most 5-year-olds could not read. The few that could were accelerated or grade skipped.

Today many kids in K can read. Therefore, the 6 or 7-year-old that can't read may be held back or red shirted since they may not keep up with the 5-year-old peers in the class. Why should young readers be forced to sit in a classroom for 6 hours with others learning the alphabet and playing with phonics. The solution is not punishing 5-year-olds because with time and evolution many are now beginning to read and are advanced in mathematics. And if the 6 or 7 year-old is not ready for K in a particular school because of the advanced curriculum then the parents need to find a more appropriate school (perhaps one in which the K curriculum is not advanced) for their child. Conversely, if the school will not put a 5-year-old that is reading and advanced in arithmetic into their advanced K curriculum then a parent should have enough sense to know what will be a fit for their child.

Many I know rejected the advice of some school systems because it was deemed an inappropriate fit for their child and moved on the other schools.

If a parent decided not to enroll their child in school for whatever reason; that's their prerogative. Some people homeschool for periods of time then put kids back in school (back and forth). Parents uproot and move and this may cause children to move in and out of schools for periods of time. The private school and parent will decide the best fit. If the parent is not satisfied ... move to another school. If the parent is satisfied with placement (no one cares about motivation --- red shirt or red trouser) then matriculate.

Another parent with an Excel spreadsheet of birth dates is clueless about circumstances of individual boys and girls in the classroom with their child. These neurotic women should be simply ignored by school administrators or told to head for the private school exit door if they don't like it. The allegation older children are somehow sapping or stealing the intellect, leadership, classroom adoration, roster spot on the soccer team, and growth potential of their own child is preposterous.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

My point is this. How can a system be dumbed down when it is "accelerated" to begin with? In our day, kids skipped a grade, but the curriculum was more "age-appropriate" in my opinion. Today in this area, pre K is more akin to K in our day and K is more akin to 1st grade in our generation. So the curriculum already starts the kids off on an accelerated track. All I am saying is that perfectly capable kids are not ready for an accelerated curriculum at 5. So, if schools are not going to change the curriculum, why not put kids where they fit best academically?

While it sounds reasonable, in practice, it impacts the social and other aspects of the classroom. Teachers are stretched to meet the wide academic and social needs of the students. Also, for example, the kids who are red-shirted cannot participate on the grade-wide soccer teams, baseball teams, etc because they don't meet the league cut-offs. It isolates the kids and also hampers the right age kids from being able to field full teams.

I guess I am confused. You will get the "wide academic need" issue in any classroom - especially in an age level based classroom. But I thought the purpose of redshirting was to put the kids where there is a closer fit academically. I mean a 6YO 1st grader is going to be taught from the same lesson plans as a 7.5 YO first grader. Am I wrong? Also, as far as athletics go, people in this thread have said that parents have redshirted kids so they are bigger and stronger athletically. If they are not allowed to play at that grade, then why do it? Actually, I thought the opposite was true. Folks were redshirting so that they could have the older kid playing on the grade based team. I know that is the case in MS.

I can understand that there may be social issues. But I also think that folks are overstating the potential impact also. But...oh well.

Sounds like the extracurricular activities/system needs to adapt to the curricular activities and not the other way around!

Given the amount of exploding knowledge needing mastering in this 21st century called the information age, employment tends in the new global economy and the increasing life span of man; I think children will be spending more time in school (or learning) and not less. With technology and social advances more 5-year-old children will be reading in K (not less) in the developed world. Thus, if your 6 or 7 year-old child can't read by this time he or she may be held back, redshirted (call it whatever you want to call it) or put in an appropriate class for their intellectual development.

At the end of the day, in education, it is far more important to ensure each child gets a stimulating and challenging education commensurate with their ability, aptitude, achievement and performance and NOT a guarantee of being in a classroom of individuals with the same birthdate.

To accomplish this end, there will naturally be a spread of ages in a classroom to account for the variability in maturation and development in early childhood.

One educational or classroom size does not fit all.

Anonymous wrote:For those who believe in evolution why should the intellectual standard today be the same as 50 years ago or 100 years ago?

The rate of change and doubling of knowledge is mind boggling. It makes perfect sense why Algebra may have been the endpoint a hundred years ago in high school and today this end point is reached in middle school. It also makes perfect sense why general biology may have been a high school endpoint generations ago and today it's genetics and molecular biology.

The academic and intellectual goal posts slowly move over time ... just as the sprint times have slowly lowered over time.

There is nothing heretic about 5-year-olds reading today when they barely knew the alphabet a 100 years ago. Think of the technological advances since that time which makes all this possible (telephones, TVs, computers, books, libraries, more time for parents and their surrogates to spend time with little children rather than hunting for food for the next meal).

If parents don't adapt with the time there children may be left behind.

In some regards, this is already slowly but surely happening with the shifting of the global sands and academic performance.

The claim was we accelerated kids a generation or two ago and now we don't so school curricula have been dumbed down. The response was we've accelerated the curriculum itself/everybody since then, so no, the trend isn't toward dumbing things down. Basically, one size never fits all and when you set the bar low, you promote and when you set the bar high, you redshirt.