Anonymous wrote:

That's fine as long as other people's decisions about their children have no impact on my children. Which is a big part of why redshirting is something that people talk about or hold opinions about -- because it affects the child in question and also the dynamics of the entire classroom.

Anonymous wrote:Academic is only part of the equation. Confidence and sent awareness are also very important. Older = better as long as you are able to challenge them is they get bored

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What do you "win" if you cheat by red shirting?

I don't really get the question.

More to the point, how does redshirting constitute cheating? Does kicking a field goal also constitute cheating, because you should have tried to run the ball in for a touchdown?

Uh, that's not an apt comparison at all..

Anonymous wrote:DS turns 5 on September 27th and in our state, any kid who turns 5 by September 30th is eligible to go to Kindergarten. His preschool teachers have me advising us to redshirt him though. However, I feel like this would be morally wrong. I feel like redshirting him would would be cheating and giving an unfair advantage over his classmates. In our family, playing by the rules is heavily valued. Even though I know he will probably do better if we wait a year, I'd much rather he learn the value of hard work and fair play. In general, I would a lot better if he did okay in school, playing by the rules, than if he excelled in school by cheating. I also don't want criticism from other parents for gaming the system.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why is education a competition? I would be less concerned that a redshirted child might edge out my child in acceptance at college, 13 years later, than an immature child might disrupt my child's education now.

Any cutoff date is by definition arbitrary. Regardless of the date that might be set, there will always be kids who qualify for Kindergarten who need an extra year and kids who aren't old enough to start, but are ready for it.

My child had severe speech problems requiring therapy. We redshirted DC. Do you consider this cheating? Does it make a difference that the school was in the process of moving the cutoff because they felt it should be set earlier in the year? In other words, the year DC should have entered kindergarten she was redshirted, but if DC was entering K now, the cutoff would dictate waiting another year because the school system decided kids in general should be older before starting K.

I think rather than worrying about "cheating", you should do what's best for your child, which as other posters have discussed, is not necessarily redshirting. If you feel your child isn't ready for Kindergarten, then by all means hold him back. On the other hand, if he is ready, then go ahead and start him. Holding a child who is otherwise ready is not doing them any favors. Only people who know your child can advise you. There are many factors to consider, but age should be the least of these.

Yes, the entitlement. Studies are showing pretty clearly that redshirting ends up being a disadvantage, so who is to determine whats actually "best"?

Actually the literature shows the opposite. Our head of school (with a PhD is early education) believes that being older is generally better.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why is education a competition? I would be less concerned that a redshirted child might edge out my child in acceptance at college, 13 years later, than an immature child might disrupt my child's education now.

Any cutoff date is by definition arbitrary. Regardless of the date that might be set, there will always be kids who qualify for Kindergarten who need an extra year and kids who aren't old enough to start, but are ready for it.

My child had severe speech problems requiring therapy. We redshirted DC. Do you consider this cheating? Does it make a difference that the school was in the process of moving the cutoff because they felt it should be set earlier in the year? In other words, the year DC should have entered kindergarten she was redshirted, but if DC was entering K now, the cutoff would dictate waiting another year because the school system decided kids in general should be older before starting K.

I think rather than worrying about "cheating", you should do what's best for your child, which as other posters have discussed, is not necessarily redshirting. If you feel your child isn't ready for Kindergarten, then by all means hold him back. On the other hand, if he is ready, then go ahead and start him. Holding a child who is otherwise ready is not doing them any favors. Only people who know your child can advise you. There are many factors to consider, but age should be the least of these.

Yes, the entitlement. Studies are showing pretty clearly that redshirting ends up being a disadvantage, so who is to determine whats actually "best"?

Actually the literature shows the opposite. Our head of school (with a PhD is early education) believes that being older is generally better.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why is education a competition? I would be less concerned that a redshirted child might edge out my child in acceptance at college, 13 years later, than an immature child might disrupt my child's education now.

Any cutoff date is by definition arbitrary. Regardless of the date that might be set, there will always be kids who qualify for Kindergarten who need an extra year and kids who aren't old enough to start, but are ready for it.

My child had severe speech problems requiring therapy. We redshirted DC. Do you consider this cheating? Does it make a difference that the school was in the process of moving the cutoff because they felt it should be set earlier in the year? In other words, the year DC should have entered kindergarten she was redshirted, but if DC was entering K now, the cutoff would dictate waiting another year because the school system decided kids in general should be older before starting K.

I think rather than worrying about "cheating", you should do what's best for your child, which as other posters have discussed, is not necessarily redshirting. If you feel your child isn't ready for Kindergarten, then by all means hold him back. On the other hand, if he is ready, then go ahead and start him. Holding a child who is otherwise ready is not doing them any favors. Only people who know your child can advise you. There are many factors to consider, but age should be the least of these.

Yes, the entitlement. Studies are showing pretty clearly that redshirting ends up being a disadvantage, so who is to determine whats actually "best"?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What do you "win" if you cheat by red shirting?

I don't really get the question.

Everyone thinks your kids dumb and you’re subsidizing their lack of intelligence right from the start (let’s face it paying for another year of childcare vs free school is subsidizing their deficiencies). Other than that and the risk you’re not great at reading actual child development and your older kid is bored, gets in trouble and is labeled a dumb troublemaker.

That’s it.

No, everyone doesn't. Maybe you do. I don't. I don't care one way or another.

Anonymous wrote:In some cases it is evening the playing field. I wouldn't consider redshirting cheating. People want every advantage for their child. Anyone can redshirt. It comes down to personal choice and your child's need.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What do you "win" if you cheat by red shirting?

I don't really get the question.

More to the point, how does redshirting constitute cheating? Does kicking a field goal also constitute cheating, because you should have tried to run the ball in for a touchdown?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Many or maybe most kindergarten students from affluent families find school very easy and are not challenged, whether or not they were held back.

Come back and talk to me when they are in middle and high school. A young-for-his-grade boy is highly likely to struggle, which creates a host of other issues in addition to the academic ones.

How do you define "young for his grade"? The youngest 25%? The youngest 10%? By definition, 25%/10%/whatever% of boys are going to be young for their grade. (Girls, too.)

Meeting the cutoff by three days is young for his grade.

OK, so let's move all boys within 3 days before the cut-off to the next year. Then what happens? Then it's the boys who are within 3 days of 3 days before the cut-off who are young for their grade.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Many or maybe most kindergarten students from affluent families find school very easy and are not challenged, whether or not they were held back.

Come back and talk to me when they are in middle and high school. A young-for-his-grade boy is highly likely to struggle, which creates a host of other issues in addition to the academic ones.

How do you define "young for his grade"? The youngest 25%? The youngest 10%? By definition, 25%/10%/whatever% of boys are going to be young for their grade. (Girls, too.)

Meeting the cutoff by three days is young for his grade.

OK, so let's move all boys within 3 days before the cut-off to the next year. Then what happens? Then it's the boys who are within 3 days of 3 days before the cut-off who are young for their grade.

No one is making a decision for all of the boys. Or girls. People make decisions for their own children, based on preschool teachers' assessments and their own knowledge of their DC's capabilities.

And on vague generalities, like "A young-for-his-grade boy is highly likely to struggle, which creates a host of other issues in addition to the academic ones."

Here's a thought: You do you. No need for you to concern yourself with other people's children and the decisions their parents make for them.