According to the antiredshirters,their 4 year old reaps benefits from the 6yo in the class any perceived differences between the 4 and 6 yo disappear by the third grade. So, really, why all the fuss?

Anonymous wrote:Someone has to be the youngest and it's lousy when you hold your kid back so that it's not your kid. Spare me the, "it's a decision each parent should make for their own kid" because the parent of every redhsirt kid I know is obnoxious. Very driven to make sure their older kid is #1.

This is what you get your feathers ruffled about? Perhaps you could have used the "gift of time" because you sound bitter and immature. Every kid I know who has been redshirted including my own has been due to maturity issues or learning challenges. All of us consulted with multiple trained professionals including teachers, speech therapists and world renowned developmental pediatricians and neurologists. Consider yourself lucky that this is what gets you in a tizzy because most of the people I know have real problems and don't have time to whine about kids taking an extra year. Why not spend your time obsessing about the people losing their homes due to natural disasters and families who can't afford to feed their children. Do some volunteer work. Heck travel to an impoverished part of Africa or a war torn country or something. You need real issues to care about rather than spending your time stomping your feet and complaining about kids with special needs needing some extra help and more time. Have you no empathy?

Anonymous wrote:the schools should start grading on a curve base off of age. Thus not a one sized fits all approach and accounting for the gift of time given to kids.

I'm confused! Your private school gives grades in K and 1st? I thought they all just did comments.

If the antiredshirters are right -- their 4 year old reaps benefits from the 6yo in the class. So who is the age-based curve for? The 4yo or 6yo?
And if the antiredshirters are right -- any perceived differences disappear by the third grade -- who ever cares about grades before then?

Anonymous wrote:the schools should start grading on a curve base off of age. Thus not a one sized fits all approach and accounting for the gift of time given to kids.

You realize that there is always a legitimate 12 month age span in every grade. Are you saying that you believe children with Oct., Nov., and Dec. birthdays should be graded differently than children with Apr., May, and June birthdays? That seems like an odd position, particularly because it assumes that the older children somehow would have had more time with the academic material simply b/c of their age. An "older" but not redshirted 1st grader is still learning basic math at the same pace as others in the class, why would they be graded as if they have had an additional 6-8 months of math instruction when that is not the case?

Anonymous wrote:
Actually bright 4-year-olds would like to compete with a class of ready but red-shirted 6 year-olds. Easy fodder. Bring on the ready red shirters. It gets out the competitive juices in our precocious youth. That explains why these youngsters excel. Make their day and do them a favor.

Great. Then we're all happy. I'm sure that will settle the debate.

Quite correct indeed. Several posters have made the point that redshirting is a fuss over nothing -- a mountain out of a mole hill. Those who choose to red shirt will suffer the consequences. For the younger children in the class -- the consequences are to their benefit.

This point comes across clear from a number of remote posts!

the schools should start grading on a curve base off of age. Thus not a one sized fits all approach and accounting for the gift of time given to kids.

These comments are so mean. We have one boy with a June bday who we held back b/c he needed it; he had a significant speech delay and was not ready for K at age 5. The school (public) agreed with our decision. And we have another boy with an August bday who will start K at age 5, as he will be ready. Every kid is different and as a parent I just try to do what's right for each kid. One size does not fit all.

Someone has to be the youngest and it's lousy when you hold your kid back so that it's not your kid. Spare me the, "it's a decision each parent should make for their own kid" because the parent of every redhsirt kid I know is obnoxious. Very driven to make sure their older kid is #1.

My DC has an early Fall b-day and is a big kid. There is so much red-shirting backlash, that more than a few times other parents have made snide comments to us about how much "older" he is for the grade. But he's actually not older at all, he just looks it.

If the kid is 7 by June then it will have 2 years plus 1 summer of being a college student legally allowed to drink. Also can drive earlier in the school career. might be more popular with older kids and more in the party crowd.

Weigh it against the potential trouble of being 18+ while in high school and charged as an adult for anything.

If sporty the extra year of growth could help with college admissions. I see no academic advantage.

Anonymous wrote:Actually bright 4-year-olds would like to compete with a class of ready but red-shirted 6 year-olds. Easy fodder. Bring on the ready red shirters. It gets out the competitive juices in our precocious youth. That explains why these youngsters excel. Make their day and do them a favor.

Great. Then we're all happy. I'm sure that will settle the debate.

Actually bright 4-year-olds would like to compete with a class of ready but red-shirted 6 year-olds. Easy fodder. Bring on the ready red shirters. It gets out the competitive juices in our precocious youth. That explains why these youngsters excel. Make their day and do them a favor.

The "your child can't be oldest because I want my child to be oldest" crusaders keep posting the same NYT opinion piece as proof positive that redshirting is dangerous. One simple search on NYT and you can find plenty of opinions that 4 yo and young 5 may be too young for kindergarten.

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/05/28/education/28kind...l?scp=13&sq=kindergaren&st=cse

http://www.nytimes.com/roomfordebate/2011/06/12/wh...n?scp=14&sq=kindergaren&st=cse

So you can all relax. Yes, there's a debate. But no one suggests that you shouldn't do what you think is best for your child.

Anonymous wrote:I agree with the OP in that this is a very disturbing trend.

About 50% of the parents I talk to are considering "holding their children back" so that they are the oldest in the class and get to feel more successful, more like leaders, etc.

I think it should be stopped.

It should be, but I don't know that it will. Many want their kid to succeed at any cost. It is a bad thing, but then again so is the no child left behind policy.