Anonymous wrote:I can understand redshirting a child who's in danger of doing poorly in school so that they'll do okay. But redshirting a child who's already slated to do okay in school so they can excel is just greedy. Therefore, I think parents should have the right to redshirt, but that the redshirted child should not be allowed to enter any competitions. They should not be allowed to run for class president, valedictorian, etc. They shouldn't be allowed to apply to any colleges in the top 20 or receive scholarships. If they want to play sports, they should play in their age-appropriate grade. If your kid is developmentally behind, then you do whatever you need to do in order to help them pass by the skin of their teeth. But it makes no sense to reward a kid for proving that they're smarter than someone a year younger than them.

You’re funny! Get lost.

Anonymous wrote:The solution to the redshirting debate - the ONLY solution - is to do all athletic testing, training and competitions according to year of birth instead of school year, and to normalize all standardized test scores based on month of birth.

That way, people can put their kids in the classes where they are learning best, but all kids are evaluated fairly with respect to each other.

In other countries, athletics is already set up for birth year. But since the stakes are so high here with scholarships to ridiculously expensive colleges then they can go a step further and look at month too.

Basically you need to take away as many advantages as possible and make the decision purely about where and with whom particular kids learn best.

I don't object to this, but i would suggest another answer is to allow for rolling school starts and sub-divide grades by age. It might be complex, but we put a man on the moon, we can do hard things like reinvent our tired ass education system. clearly having 18 months difference between kids in a grade group doesn't work. Neither does having 12 months difference, which the current system does, without red shirting. Many of those who red-shirt are doing so to correct for the disadvantage to their kids built into the system. There used to be a kindergarten readiness standard. But now we start plowing kids into all day, every day schooling at 3 or earlier, far before it is developmentally appropriate and then consider that some people, with mid Sept bdays, are sending their TWO year olds to this in order to secure the place at school. It's gotten crazy. School is broken, red-shirting is a symptom, not the disease.

Anonymous wrote:Not this debate again. Stay in your lane. It is none of your business what parents decide for their children.

plus one hundred billion. My kid has an August 15 bday, and we had a a medial issue, and series of surgeries that took our otherwise healthy (but very shy and cautious) child out of school for nearly all of PK4, which was his first experience with school. We decided to ease him in with PK4 in lieu of sending him to K when he was eligible. I don't go into my son's health issues with strangers who ask me what great my kid is in, or his age so perhaps the vapid bitches on this forum will judge me. If so, shrug to the whatev. This board is populated at 98.5 percent with people spoiling for a fight or else frustrated people capable of being nice in person who come here to get their frustration out or vent about someone they know personally in the guise of "what do you think of redshirting?" -- most people in real life are simply not this interested in other people's choices, and most people simply nod and move on if they do have an opinion.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Nothing will satisfy the anti redshirters here.

I actually really like the anti-redshirters, because it means they would have sympathy for me if they knew I was redshirted. All these years later, my parents still think they acted for the best, whereas I still resent them for not sending me on time.

For real? Are you in therapy for this?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Nothing will satisfy the anti redshirters here.

I actually really like the anti-redshirters, because it means they would have sympathy for me if they knew I was redshirted. All these years later, my parents still think they acted for the best, whereas I still resent them for not sending me on time.

Did your parents ever explain why they didn't think you'd be able to handle school like every other kid?

They didn't want me to be among the youngest, which was ridiculous seeing as how my birthday's in September and the cutoff was the new year. This means that at-least a quarter of my classmates would have been younger than me, as there were more than 3 months between my birthday and the cut-off.

Another September baby who really wishes I had been redshirted, but it wasn't a thing in the 70s.

Why didn't you take a gap year between high school and college?

The solution to the redshirting debate - the ONLY solution - is to do all athletic testing, training and competitions according to year of birth instead of school year, and to normalize all standardized test scores based on month of birth.

That way, people can put their kids in the classes where they are learning best, but all kids are evaluated fairly with respect to each other.

In other countries, athletics is already set up for birth year. But since the stakes are so high here with scholarships to ridiculously expensive colleges then they can go a step further and look at month too.

Basically you need to take away as many advantages as possible and make the decision purely about where and with whom particular kids learn best.

I can understand redshirting a child who's in danger of doing poorly in school so that they'll do okay. But redshirting a child who's already slated to do okay in school so they can excel is just greedy. Therefore, I think parents should have the right to redshirt, but that the redshirted child should not be allowed to enter any competitions. They should not be allowed to run for class president, valedictorian, etc. They shouldn't be allowed to apply to any colleges in the top 20 or receive scholarships. If they want to play sports, they should play in their age-appropriate grade. If your kid is developmentally behind, then you do whatever you need to do in order to help them pass by the skin of their teeth. But it makes no sense to reward a kid for proving that they're smarter than someone a year younger than them.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: I have a question for all of you who weren't redshirted but didn't like being among the youngest and wished your parents had held you back. Why you didn't you do one of the following?

You could've purposely repeated a grade.

You could've re-classed in high school and graduated a year later.

You could've taken a gap year between high school and college.

You could've taken a year off during college.[b]

If you really wanted to be a year behind where you were, why didn't you do any of these things?

Two of these solutions don't even make sense. But we didn't want to repeat a grade because it would have been regarded by our peers as flunking. Plus it would have been rather difficult to explain at the time and seen as socially awkward. We just wish our parents had the foresight to see how this would have benefitted us before we started school.
Y

Then why didn't you take a gap year after high school?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Nothing will satisfy the anti redshirters here.

I actually really like the anti-redshirters, because it means they would have sympathy for me if they knew I was redshirted. All these years later, my parents still think they acted for the best, whereas I still resent them for not sending me on time.

Did your parents ever explain why they didn't think you'd be able to handle school like every other kid?

You are so nasty.

Anonymous wrote: I have a question for all of you who weren't redshirted but didn't like being among the youngest and wished your parents had held you back. Why you didn't you do one of the following?

You could've purposely repeated a grade.

You could've re-classed in high school and graduated a year later.

You could've taken a gap year between high school and college.

You could've taken a year off during college.[b]

If you really wanted to be a year behind where you were, why didn't you do any of these things?

Two of these solutions don't even make sense. But we didn't want to repeat a grade because it would have been regarded by our peers as flunking. Plus it would have been rather difficult to explain at the time and seen as socially awkward. We just wish our parents had the foresight to see how this would have benefitted us before we started school.
Y

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There shouldn't be a debate. Absent a diagnosed delay or challenge, send your kids to school on time.

Nope. Even if it bothers you.
It’s especially the rich people who do this because they want to eek out every advantage for their child and because they don’t need the free daycare like you do. Rich people can afford to send their kid to a high quality pre-K to mature.
Poor you. The average-dumb just get dumber.

It's not just the rich. We are middle to lower middle class, and we redshirted as well We weren't dumb enough to forgo the opportunity to give our August born child the biggest advantage we could give her.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Nothing will satisfy the anti redshirters here.

I actually really like the anti-redshirters, because it means they would have sympathy for me if they knew I was redshirted. All these years later, my parents still think they acted for the best, whereas I still resent them for not sending me on time.

Have you so few real issues in life that you hold on to resentment for this?

I absolutely have sympathy for you, but not for the reason you think I should.

I wish I had been held back bc I was one of the youngest and never quite fit in socially even though academically I was at the top of the class.

If you didn't like being one of the youngest, why didn't you purposely repeat a grade, o[b]r take a gap year after high school? [i]Falling back is much easier than catching up.

How would this have solved the problem of her not liking been the youngest in school.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Nothing will satisfy the anti redshirters here.

I actually really like the anti-redshirters, because it means they would have sympathy for me if they knew I was redshirted. All these years later, my parents still think they acted for the best, whereas I still resent them for not sending me on time.

Did your parents ever explain why they didn't think you'd be able to handle school like every other kid?

They didn't want me to be among the youngest, which was ridiculous seeing as how my birthday's in September and the cutoff was the new year. This means that at-least a quarter of my classmates would have been younger than me, as there were more than 3 months between my birthday and the cut-off.

Another September baby who really wishes I had been redshirted, but it wasn't a thing in the 70s.

Anonymous wrote:In practice, in the public schools, very few kids are redshirted with birthdays before July 1st anyway. I’d guesstimate in my corner of FCPS, redshirting is really only common (50% or more of the kids) for mid-September and later birthdays. I feel like it was more common when I was growing up in the 80s! I know there’s more redshirting in private schools, but if you’re choosing private you can prepare for this and make decisions accordingly.

The cutoff is a October 1. It were only mid September or later kids being redshirted, you would only be looking at a two week cohort.

Anonymous wrote:A private school that I am considering for my child has a rule that the child must turn 5 before September 1 (typical) but that a child cannot have turned 6 before July 1st of the year they start K. That way there is only a max of 14 months between the youngest and the oldest.

I like this.

yeah, but most parents redshirt kids who were born in July, Aug, and Sept. very few redshirt June and earlier. And also this policy is easy to implement at a private school, but a public school can't refuse to let a child in school. And it's unlikely that they would want a kid who hasn't been to kindergarten to go straight to first grade.