Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Link with the summary of a study that shows redshirting benefits:

https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/00220671.2014.979909

There are significant advantages but they disappear by the end of elementary school. I would hardly call them massive.

I disagree. The advantage of being the oldest at the beginning sets off a chain reaction that lasts not only through middle and high school, but through college as well. I, for one, don't know anyone who was redshirted who dropped out of college even though many students drop out of college every year. I also don't know one redshirted kid who took longer than 4 years to graduate from college.

The evidence you bring is anecdotal, only a handful of cases, and you don’t control for other variables, like in those scientific studies. Please post a reference on Cambridge/Oxford attendance, I’d like to read it.

DA but

https://www.theguardian.com/education/2011/nov/01/august-babies-top-universities-study

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-21579484

https://ifs.org.uk/docs/born_matters_report.pdf

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Link with the summary of a study that shows redshirting benefits:

https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/00220671.2014.979909

There are significant advantages but they disappear by the end of elementary school. I would hardly call them massive.

I disagree. The advantage of being the oldest at the beginning sets off a chain reaction that lasts not only through middle and high school, but through college as well. I, for one, don't know anyone who was redshirted who dropped out of college even though many students drop out of college every year. I also don't know one redshirted kid who took longer than 4 years to graduate from college.

I don’t know anyone regardless of age who took more than four years. Your post is silly.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Link with the summary of a study that shows redshirting benefits:

https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/00220671.2014.979909

There are significant advantages but they disappear by the end of elementary school. I would hardly call them massive.

I disagree. The advantage of being the oldest at the beginning sets off a chain reaction that lasts not only through middle and high school, but through college as well. I, for one, don't know anyone who was redshirted who dropped out of college even though many students drop out of college every year. I also don't know one redshirted kid who took longer than 4 years to graduate from college.

The evidence you bring is anecdotal, only a handful of cases, and you don’t control for other variables, like in those scientific studies. Please post a reference on Cambridge/Oxford attendance, I’d like to read it.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Link with the summary of a study that shows redshirting benefits:

https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/00220671.2014.979909

There are significant advantages but they disappear by the end of elementary school. I would hardly call them massive.

I disagree. The advantage of being the oldest at the beginning sets off a chain reaction that lasts not only through middle and high school, but through college as well. I, for one, don't know anyone who was redshirted who dropped out of college even though many students drop out of college every year. I also don't know one redshirted kid who took longer than 4 years to graduate from college.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Link with the summary of a study that shows redshirting benefits:

https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/00220671.2014.979909

There are significant advantages but they disappear by the end of elementary school. I would hardly call them massive.

I disagree. The advantage of being the oldest at the beginning sets off a chain reaction that lasts not only through middle and high school, but through college as well. I, for one, don't know anyone who was redshirted who dropped out of college even though many students drop out of college every year. I also don't know one redshirted kid who took longer than 4 years to graduate from college.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Link with the summary of a study that shows redshirting benefits:

https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/00220671.2014.979909

There are significant advantages but they disappear by the end of elementary school. I would hardly call them massive.

I disagree. The advantage of being the oldest at the beginning sets off a chain reaction that lasts not only through middle and high school, but through college as well. I, for one, don't know anyone who was redshirted who dropped out of college even though many students drop out of college every year. I also don't know one redshirted kid who took longer than 4 years to graduate from college.

Anonymous wrote:Link with the summary of a study that shows redshirting benefits:

https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/00220671.2014.979909

There are significant advantages but they disappear by the end of elementary school. I would hardly call them massive.

Anonymous wrote:
Often people see a few redshirted kids that are doing really well and assume that their success is due to redshirting. In fact it may be that other factors are at play, parents that redshirt tend to be more educated, and are more wealthy, both correlating with academic performance. Also, just the act of redshirting means the parent is concerned enough about how the student will do in school that they will take preventive action to address real or perceived disadvantage. Likely that parent will be involved, provide resources and emphasize the child academics so not that surprisingly the student will do well in school along with others kids that have a similar family background but were not redshirted.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
The selfishness on display here is revolting.

A child who is given the advantage of being the oldest and best is pushing another kid to be younger and worse in comparison.

Schools are a community where actions have consequences on others .

Why on earth should I lift a finger to help anyone if the world is just full of A-holes ?

DCUM anti-redshirters are SO bizarre. I didn't redshirt, and read these threads because of the entertainment value from the weirdo anti-redshirters. This one is perplexing, though. Is PP also arguing that no kids should have outside supplements? No tutoring? No moving to "good" school districts? All of those have far, far more documented impact on others than redshirting (which is statistically insignificant) but I suspect that PP is one of the hyper competitive parents who does all of that. If you want to call an action selfish, why pick one that is statistically irrelevant and ignore the actions where there are years of data documenting the adverse impact on other kids?

I just can't get over the naked hypocrisy of the anti-redshirters.

Agree with everything, except redshirting is statistically significant, but after you control for many other variables just barely. After 2-3 years it is indeed insignificant. So it’s just a very minor effect lasting for a short time. If you really want to “cheat” read to your child every day till kindergarten, this will have a much stronger effect on their academic success.

For the bizarre anti redshirted, use the time you bash other peoples redshirting choices to do homework with your child. It will be more constructive and helpful for your kid.

I'm pretty sure this weirdo has mentioned before they don't even have kids. They have zero skin in the game and are full of opinions. They are so out of touch they don't even realize schools have moved on from the 12/31 cut off date.

DP. Oh, that little weirdo bad been told plenty of times that 12/31 is an unusual cut off date. She knows schools don't use it. Bit still, she insists that it is "natural law" that the cutoff date is 12/31, and therefore that parents of fall birthday kids who sent their kids on time for their districts are actually redshirting their kids. Yes, you read that correctly.

It's just part of the parade of surreal hypocrisy that is DCUM anti-redshirters.

Pretty sure the weirdo feels like they could have really been someone if it wasn't for those pesky kids a few months older. But for them she was going to be a star. It's all the fault of those few older kids, feeling proud of themselves when they got one over on her back in first grade.

For me, the problem wasn't that my classmates were older than me chronologically, but in terms of brain development. When I was a kid, my brain developed about about two years slower than normal, as did my body. Of course, the ideal solution would've been to hold me back twice, but no school district was going to allow that. Holding back once was difficult enough for my parents, but I was fortunate enough to be able to wait a year, and start Kindergarten a week before my 6th birthday(though mentally and physically, my 4th birthday). Even though I was a year older than my classmates chronologically, I was a year younger than them mentally and physically, so I knew how my youngest classmates felt. This is why I'm so anti-redshirt; because I believe it should only be done in extreme cases like mine. For the vast majority of people, being redshirted would give them a massive advantage that it didn't give me because of my developmentally abnormalities.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
The selfishness on display here is revolting.

A child who is given the advantage of being the oldest and best is pushing another kid to be younger and worse in comparison.

Schools are a community where actions have consequences on others .

Why on earth should I lift a finger to help anyone if the world is just full of A-holes ?

DCUM anti-redshirters are SO bizarre. I didn't redshirt, and read these threads because of the entertainment value from the weirdo anti-redshirters. This one is perplexing, though. Is PP also arguing that no kids should have outside supplements? No tutoring? No moving to "good" school districts? All of those have far, far more documented impact on others than redshirting (which is statistically insignificant) but I suspect that PP is one of the hyper competitive parents who does all of that. If you want to call an action selfish, why pick one that is statistically irrelevant and ignore the actions where there are years of data documenting the adverse impact on other kids?

I just can't get over the naked hypocrisy of the anti-redshirters.

Agree with everything, except redshirting is statistically significant, but after you control for many other variables just barely. After 2-3 years it is indeed insignificant. So it’s just a very minor effect lasting for a short time. If you really want to “cheat” read to your child every day till kindergarten, this will have a much stronger effect on their academic success.

For the bizarre anti redshirted, use the time you bash other peoples redshirting choices to do homework with your child. It will be more constructive and helpful for your kid.

I'm pretty sure this weirdo has mentioned before they don't even have kids. They have zero skin in the game and are full of opinions. They are so out of touch they don't even realize schools have moved on from the 12/31 cut off date.

DP. Oh, that little weirdo bad been told plenty of times that 12/31 is an unusual cut off date. She knows schools don't use it. Bit still, she insists that it is "natural law" that the cutoff date is 12/31, and therefore that parents of fall birthday kids who sent their kids on time for their districts are actually redshirting their kids. Yes, you read that correctly.

It's just part of the parade of surreal hypocrisy that is DCUM anti-redshirters.

Pretty sure the weirdo feels like they could have really been someone if it wasn't for those pesky kids a few months older. But for them she was going to be a star. It's all the fault of those few older kids, feeling proud of themselves when they got one over on her back in first grade.

For me, the problem wasn't that my classmates were older than me chronologically, but in terms of brain development. When I was a kid, my brain developed about about two years slower than normal, as did my body. Of course, the ideal solution would've been to hold me back twice, but no school district was going to allow that. Holding back once was difficult enough for my parents, but I was fortunate enough to be able to wait a year, and start Kindergarten a week before my 6th birthday(though mentally and physically, my 4th birthday). Even though I was a year older than my classmates chronologically, I was a year younger than them mentally and physically, so I knew how my youngest classmates felt. This is why I'm so anti-redshirt; because I believe it should only be done in extreme cases like mine. For the vast majority of people, being redshirted would give them a massive advantage that it didn't give me because of my developmentally abnormalities.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
The selfishness on display here is revolting.

A child who is given the advantage of being the oldest and best is pushing another kid to be younger and worse in comparison.

Schools are a community where actions have consequences on others .

Why on earth should I lift a finger to help anyone if the world is just full of A-holes ?

DCUM anti-redshirters are SO bizarre. I didn't redshirt, and read these threads because of the entertainment value from the weirdo anti-redshirters. This one is perplexing, though. Is PP also arguing that no kids should have outside supplements? No tutoring? No moving to "good" school districts? All of those have far, far more documented impact on others than redshirting (which is statistically insignificant) but I suspect that PP is one of the hyper competitive parents who does all of that. If you want to call an action selfish, why pick one that is statistically irrelevant and ignore the actions where there are years of data documenting the adverse impact on other kids?

I just can't get over the naked hypocrisy of the anti-redshirters.

Agree with everything, except redshirting is statistically significant, but after you control for many other variables just barely. After 2-3 years it is indeed insignificant. So it’s just a very minor effect lasting for a short time. If you really want to “cheat” read to your child every day till kindergarten, this will have a much stronger effect on their academic success.

For the bizarre anti redshirted, use the time you bash other peoples redshirting choices to do homework with your child. It will be more constructive and helpful for your kid.

I'm pretty sure this weirdo has mentioned before they don't even have kids. They have zero skin in the game and are full of opinions. They are so out of touch they don't even realize schools have moved on from the 12/31 cut off date.

DP. Oh, that little weirdo bad been told plenty of times that 12/31 is an unusual cut off date. She knows schools don't use it. Bit still, she insists that it is "natural law" that the cutoff date is 12/31, and therefore that parents of fall birthday kids who sent their kids on time for their districts are actually redshirting their kids. Yes, you read that correctly.

It's just part of the parade of surreal hypocrisy that is DCUM anti-redshirters.

Pretty sure the weirdo feels like they could have really been someone if it wasn't for those pesky kids a few months older. But for them she was going to be a star. It's all the fault of those few older kids, feeling proud of themselves when they got one over on her back in first grade.

For me, the problem wasn't that my classmates were older than me chronologically, but in terms of brain development. When I was a kid, my brain developed about about two years slower than normal, as did my body. Of course, the ideal solution would've been to hold me back twice, but no school district was going to allow that. Holding back once was difficult enough for my parents, but I was fortunate enough to be able to wait a year, and start Kindergarten a week before my 6th birthday(though mentally and physically, my 4th birthday). Even though I was a year older than my classmates chronologically, I was a year younger than them mentally and physically, so I knew how my youngest classmates felt. This is why I'm so anti-redshirt; because I believe it should only be done in extreme cases like mine. For the vast majority of people, being redshirted would give them a massive advantage that it didn't give me because of my developmentally abnormalities.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
The selfishness on display here is revolting.

A child who is given the advantage of being the oldest and best is pushing another kid to be younger and worse in comparison.

Schools are a community where actions have consequences on others .

Why on earth should I lift a finger to help anyone if the world is just full of A-holes ?

DCUM anti-redshirters are SO bizarre. I didn't redshirt, and read these threads because of the entertainment value from the weirdo anti-redshirters. This one is perplexing, though. Is PP also arguing that no kids should have outside supplements? No tutoring? No moving to "good" school districts? All of those have far, far more documented impact on others than redshirting (which is statistically insignificant) but I suspect that PP is one of the hyper competitive parents who does all of that. If you want to call an action selfish, why pick one that is statistically irrelevant and ignore the actions where there are years of data documenting the adverse impact on other kids?

I just can't get over the naked hypocrisy of the anti-redshirters.

Agree with everything, except redshirting is statistically significant, but after you control for many other variables just barely. After 2-3 years it is indeed insignificant. So it’s just a very minor effect lasting for a short time. If you really want to “cheat” read to your child every day till kindergarten, this will have a much stronger effect on their academic success.

For the bizarre anti redshirted, use the time you bash other peoples redshirting choices to do homework with your child. It will be more constructive and helpful for your kid.

I'm pretty sure this weirdo has mentioned before they don't even have kids. They have zero skin in the game and are full of opinions. They are so out of touch they don't even realize schools have moved on from the 12/31 cut off date.

DP. Oh, that little weirdo bad been told plenty of times that 12/31 is an unusual cut off date. She knows schools don't use it. Bit still, she insists that it is "natural law" that the cutoff date is 12/31, and therefore that parents of fall birthday kids who sent their kids on time for their districts are actually redshirting their kids. Yes, you read that correctly.

It's just part of the parade of surreal hypocrisy that is DCUM anti-redshirters.

Pretty sure the weirdo feels like they could have really been someone if it wasn't for those pesky kids a few months older. But for them she was going to be a star. It's all the fault of those few older kids, feeling proud of themselves when they got one over on her back in first grade.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
The selfishness on display here is revolting.

A child who is given the advantage of being the oldest and best is pushing another kid to be younger and worse in comparison.

Schools are a community where actions have consequences on others .

Why on earth should I lift a finger to help anyone if the world is just full of A-holes ?

DCUM anti-redshirters are SO bizarre. I didn't redshirt, and read these threads because of the entertainment value from the weirdo anti-redshirters. This one is perplexing, though. Is PP also arguing that no kids should have outside supplements? No tutoring? No moving to "good" school districts? All of those have far, far more documented impact on others than redshirting (which is statistically insignificant) but I suspect that PP is one of the hyper competitive parents who does all of that. If you want to call an action selfish, why pick one that is statistically irrelevant and ignore the actions where there are years of data documenting the adverse impact on other kids?

I just can't get over the naked hypocrisy of the anti-redshirters.

Agree with everything, except redshirting is statistically significant, but after you control for many other variables just barely. After 2-3 years it is indeed insignificant. So it’s just a very minor effect lasting for a short time. If you really want to “cheat” read to your child every day till kindergarten, this will have a much stronger effect on their academic success.

For the bizarre anti redshirted, use the time you bash other peoples redshirting choices to do homework with your child. It will be more constructive and helpful for your kid.

I'm pretty sure this weirdo has mentioned before they don't even have kids. They have zero skin in the game and are full of opinions. They are so out of touch they don't even realize schools have moved on from the 12/31 cut off date.

DP. Oh, that little weirdo bad been told plenty of times that 12/31 is an unusual cut off date. She knows schools don't use it. Bit still, she insists that it is "natural law" that the cutoff date is 12/31, and therefore that parents of fall birthday kids who sent their kids on time for their districts are actually redshirting their kids. Yes, you read that correctly.

It's just part of the parade of surreal hypocrisy that is DCUM anti-redshirters.