Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Nobody with a brain wants their kid to be the youngest so this is a game that always has losers.

Many people would prefer this.

Being on the older side:

It makes them more socially mature when can help navigate school situations easier.

All top students end up on accelerated tracks so they just end up at the very highest or beyond accelerated track.

An extra year of AP classes in high school can save a year of college tuition.

Depending on the sport, it can give them an extra year to train and grow before college recruitment.


This idea that kids need to struggle is probably true, however you let them struggle on a highest accelerated track rather than the standard track.

What makes you assume younger kids will not academically achieve? So, you hold the, back, pay an extra year of preschool to pressure them to speed up to skip a year of college. Why skip a year of college?

They aren’t more mature. They are less mature if they are older with younger kids.

Just as an example, my kid was already 2 years ahead academically and then we redshirted and now 3+ years ahead academically. It didn’t slow him down at all because he would always need acceleration. What the class covers would never be helpful.

What, do you have your kid tested? What is with mothers claiming their five year old are 2 years ahead academically? With regard to what exactly ? Then keep a kid back with kids a year younger so he could be the big smart kid ?

“ It’s not what the class covers.” No kidding, it’s kindergarten. Unless he was socially awkward and that might be the case there would be no reason to repeat preschool. If he was in fact two years ahead, and I’m not sure what that means at this age, the preschool would say he needs to move on.

Yes, reading level, math skills, and writing were tested. Those were conservative estimates, reading level is currently 5-6 grade levels ahead. Kid gets pulled out for advanced individual work regardless of the specific grade level work that the other kids are covering.

Who tested and why at such an early age. Many kids can learn to read quickly and test well. That doesn’t mean holding them back a year. It makes no sense.

Reading testing was standard in K at our school. Writing and math were not standard in K but due to observed abilities. They become standard later in our elementary though.

The academics had nothing to do with redshirting in our case. Kid is far ahead in core subjects but everything in elementary and middle school is pretty basic anyway. We are letting our kid have a great childhood and not pushing him into adulthood earlier than needed. Both parents have elite educations and careers and will put this kid on the same path. The academics would be easy with or without redshirting.

Why did you move to this school? Can you just move to another one?

Haven’t read the whole thread. OP, the answer is that only weirdos care about redshirting because it’s a non-issue. I assume this thread is full of the usual sheltered anti-redshirting hysterics, but in real life, this is not an issue.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Whatever you may think of it, the trend in public education in the last few years is towards greater, and not less, parent choice. It’s safe to assume redshirting will continue or increase, and so smart parents will work with their children to make sure they can thrive with peers across several years. Stomping feet and hoping that someone makes it so you can control the choices other families make is unlikely to help.

The future failure to launch adults with parents hovering way too much.

Bizarre response. Wonder why it bothers you so much.

Anonymous wrote:My son graduated high school a year early, his bday is Mid Sept. He started college at 16 and his Masters at 20.
Now THAT is the way to do it.

So did my husband and he would disagree entirely with this. Seems to common for foreign parents to push this

Anonymous wrote:My son graduated high school a year early, his bday is Mid Sept. He started college at 16 and his Masters at 20.
Now THAT is the way to do it.

That seems truly awful.

Anonymous wrote:My son graduated high school a year early, his bday is Mid Sept. He started college at 16 and his Masters at 20.
Now THAT is the way to do it.

Why? Fantastic that it worked out for him, but your personal experience is not universalizable.

The answer as to why schools don’t have a stronger policy: because it’s just not a big deal to anyone except a few batshit DCUM antiredshirters (hi Natural Law Lady!) Nobody else is dying on that hill. It’s fine either way, so use your judgment and do what works for your child and your family.

Anonymous wrote:My son graduated high school a year early, his bday is Mid Sept. He started college at 16 and his Masters at 20.
Now THAT is the way to do it.

All of that is just as possible for a kid who starts at 6.

My son graduated high school a year early, his bday is Mid Sept. He started college at 16 and his Masters at 20.
Now THAT is the way to do it.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Have you all talked with any K teachers? They're thrilled with the redshirted kids, especially boys.

At a tony private where the kids are redshirted due to pressure to conform? Maybe.

Not true at a public where most redshirting is done as a quick "fix" for maturity issues. Redshirting without addressing the real issues just leads to more classroom chaos.

Which schools are suffering from chaos from redshirters with unaddressed issues? Never heard of that. I would think the opposite is true in most public schools. Parents are dumping their feral kids off as soon as legally possible and letting the schools figure out the rest.

That’s not fair— parents who don’t have resources to properly feed their kids, parents who need the social and educational resources in school, should not be shamed for sending kids at four. But, that doesn’t mean it should be legal requirement for anyone else to do so.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Have you all talked with any K teachers? They're thrilled with the redshirted kids, especially boys.

At a tony private where the kids are redshirted due to pressure to conform? Maybe.

Not true at a public where most redshirting is done as a quick "fix" for maturity issues. Redshirting without addressing the real issues just leads to more classroom chaos.

Which schools are suffering from chaos from redshirters with unaddressed issues? Never heard of that. I would think the opposite is true in most public schools. Parents are dumping their feral kids off as soon as legally possible and letting the schools figure out the rest.

Anonymous wrote:Whatever you may think of it, the trend in public education in the last few years is towards greater, and not less, parent choice. It’s safe to assume redshirting will continue or increase, and so smart parents will work with their children to make sure they can thrive with peers across several years. Stomping feet and hoping that someone makes it so you can control the choices other families make is unlikely to help.

The future failure to launch adults with parents hovering way too much.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Nobody with a brain wants their kid to be the youngest so this is a game that always has losers.

Many people would prefer this.

Being on the older side:

It makes them more socially mature when can help navigate school situations easier.

All top students end up on accelerated tracks so they just end up at the very highest or beyond accelerated track.

An extra year of AP classes in high school can save a year of college tuition.

Depending on the sport, it can give them an extra year to train and grow before college recruitment.


This idea that kids need to struggle is probably true, however you let them struggle on a highest accelerated track rather than the standard track.

What makes you assume younger kids will not academically achieve? So, you hold the, back, pay an extra year of preschool to pressure them to speed up to skip a year of college. Why skip a year of college?

They aren’t more mature. They are less mature if they are older with younger kids.

Just as an example, my kid was already 2 years ahead academically and then we redshirted and now 3+ years ahead academically. It didn’t slow him down at all because he would always need acceleration. What the class covers would never be helpful.

What, do you have your kid tested? What is with mothers claiming their five year old are 2 years ahead academically? With regard to what exactly ? Then keep a kid back with kids a year younger so he could be the big smart kid ?

“ It’s not what the class covers.” No kidding, it’s kindergarten. Unless he was socially awkward and that might be the case there would be no reason to repeat preschool. If he was in fact two years ahead, and I’m not sure what that means at this age, the preschool would say he needs to move on.

Yes, reading level, math skills, and writing were tested. Those were conservative estimates, reading level is currently 5-6 grade levels ahead. Kid gets pulled out for advanced individual work regardless of the specific grade level work that the other kids are covering.

Who tested and why at such an early age. Many kids can learn to read quickly and test well. That doesn’t mean holding them back a year. It makes no sense.

Anonymous wrote:Have you all talked with any K teachers? They're thrilled with the redshirted kids, especially boys.

At a tony private where the kids are redshirted due to pressure to conform? Maybe.

Not true at a public where most redshirting is done as a quick "fix" for maturity issues. Redshirting without addressing the real issues just leads to more classroom chaos.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Whatever you may think of it, the trend in public education in the last few years is towards greater, and not less, parent choice. It’s safe to assume redshirting will continue or increase, and so smart parents will work with their children to make sure they can thrive with peers across several years. Stomping feet and hoping that someone makes it so you can control the choices other families make is unlikely to help.

DC just did the opposite. They are now enforcing rules against redshirting.

Not to say that there isn't wisdom in your advice...

Because Mayor Bowser specifically said that was about equity, and because of the perception that Red Shirting helps address gender imbalance in favor of boys, I do not expect that this will stand up to a legal challenge.