60 Minutes piece on redshirting to air tomorrow (3/4)

[jenfromnj]

I know this has been discussed here, so I thought it might be of interest. There's a bit about it here:

http://www.cbsnews.com/video/watch/?id=7400587n&tag=contentBody;storyMediaBox

[WatchingThemGrow]

thanks! set to record on Tivo!

[TwinFoxes]

I'm definitely going to watch, thanks OP.

[wellyes]

Did anyone watch? I'm curious about it, but I couldn't bear to watch, I find 60 minutes pieces to be irritatingly shallow (usually).

[vludmilla]

Did anyone watch? I'm curious about it, but I couldn't bear to watch, I find 60 minutes pieces to be irritatingly shallow (usually).

It was ok. I doubt the coverage would change a person's perspective on the issue.

I wonder if there are any news shows that you prefer? Personally, I love Frontline on PBS. Not topical at all.

[clb]

The piece was the last 15 minutes of show. I just caught it. Thanks OP.

[Gracemom]

Nothing new on the piece for me. I definitely wanted a more in depth anaylsis. Showed two moms and their personal experience for their sons. Interviewed Malcolm Gladwell about his book Outliers. Briefly discussed some additional research. I did think it was interesting that Chicago public schools were not allowing any exceptions for age at cutoff for K and 1st grade. I think there will always be kids who will do better in K at 6 rather than 5, due to maturity and academic readiness concerns. I wonder how many of those kids have to repeat a later grade.

[plusbellelavie]

It was ok. I doubt the coverage would change a person's perspective on the issue.

.

:yeahthat:...I didn't think it gave any new "information" but I did like the line from the author of Outliners Maxwell Gladwell "that if everyone does it the effect is cancel out"

If you missed it...here is the segment

http://www.cbsnews.com/video/watch/?id=7400898n&tag=contentMain;contentAux

[GvilleGirl]

Seemed like a general overview for people who have never heard of it.


I wonder how many of those kids have to repeat a later grade.

Probably very little since it is rare to hold kids back now.

I'm not totally against it, but someone has to be the youngest.

[jenfromnj]

Just watching now on DVR. I agree, no real surprises in the information supplied. I was really surprised to learn that the Chicago public school system "forces" parents to enroll their kids in the class in which they belong according to their birthday, and doesn't permit redshirting.

The kids profiled were both August birthdays, as well, so it didn't touch upon the recent topic of discussion here re: holding back children whose birthdays are in the winter/spring.

[Pyrodjm]

Just watching now on DVR. I agree, no real surprises in the information supplied. I was really surprised to learn that the Chicago public school system "forces" parents to enroll their kids in the class in which they belong according to their birthday, and doesn't permit redshirting.



Pretty sure that this is true in NYC public schools also.

[Kindra178]

The no redshirting rule in Chi is a big topic of discussion here. It's a fantastic equalizer as well. On the flipside, there is at least one well respected private here that won't even look at a summer birthday kid.

[lmh2402]

i really didn't like that first mom profiled...she rubbed me much the wrong way.

other than that, agree...nothing really new. though, i did think it was interesting that IMO, the feel of the piece was fairly blatantly negative toward/not-supportive of redshirting. did not seem/feel unbiased at all.

and also agree with pp comment...at the end of the day, someone is always going to be the youngest... so when/where does the line get drawn...

[WatchingThemGrow]

I thought the research was interesting - and the fact that you could find research to support both decisions.

Thought it was funny that the advice to families TTC was "have a winter baby."

[Green_Tea]

I was really surprised to learn that the Chicago public school system "forces" parents to enroll their kids in the class in which they belong according to their birthday, and doesn't permit redshirting.



I didn't know that either. I have been saying for ages that I wish towns/states would implement laws that prohibited "extreme" redshirting in the absence of diagnosed learning disabilities or other documented issues. I'd love to see a law that requires all kids born within 90 or even 120 days of the cutoff start on time. I can totally understand why parents who are dealing with an October or November birthday in a town or city with a Dec 31 cut-off (like we have where I live) want to hold their 4 year old back, and think there should be some flexibility for those very young kids. But I think the practice of holding back kids who meet the deadline by several months and have no reason not to start other than their parents wanting them to have "an edge" is pure madness and has the potential to create a whole host of other problems for their kids, other kids and their teachers within the public school system.

[crl]

I didn't know that either. I have been saying for ages that I wish towns/states would implement laws that prohibited "extreme" redshirting in the absence of diagnosed learning disabilities or other documented issues. I'd love to see a law that requires all kids born within 90 or even 120 days of the cutoff start on time. I can totally understand why parents who are dealing with an October or November birthday in a town or city with a Dec 31 cut-off (like we have where I live) want to hold their 4 year old back, and think there should be some flexibility for those very young kids. But I think the practice of holding back kids who meet the deadline by several months and have no reason not to start other than their parents wanting them to have "an edge" is pure madness and has the potential to create a whole host of other problems for their kids, other kids and their teachers within the public school system.

I haven't seen the 60 minutes piece. I do see this point of view. But as the parent of a special needs kid, I have often been in the position of experts, including public school teachers, thinking they know what is best for my kid and KNOWING they were WRONG. It is incredibly stressful. I hesitate to believe that hard and fast rules will ever be right for every child and I hate to think of parents put in the position of making difficult choices based on such rules.

Catherine

[jenfromnj]

i really didn't like that first mom profiled...she rubbed me much the wrong way.


I agree--she came across (to me) as fairly smug and self-satisfied.


I didn't know that either. I have been saying for ages that I wish towns/states would implement laws that prohibited "extreme" redshirting in the absence of diagnosed learning disabilities or other documented issues. I'd love to see a law that requires all kids born within 90 or even 120 days of the cutoff start on time. I can totally understand why parents who are dealing with an October or November birthday in a town or city with a Dec 31 cut-off (like we have where I live) want to hold their 4 year old back, and think there should be some flexibility for those very young kids. But I think the practice of holding back kids who meet the deadline by several months and have no reason not to start other than their parents wanting them to have "an edge" is pure madness and has the potential to create a whole host of other problems for their kids, other kids and their teachers within the public school system.

I agree with much of what you said here, Green Tea. I was really surprised to find that, since redshirting is so increasingly prevalent in our current town, my son with an early spring birthday could well be one of the younger boys in his K class (when the time comes). It just seems like a slippery slope, if that many people refuse to let their child be one of the youngest.

[Green_Tea]

I haven't seen the 60 minutes piece. I do see this point of view. But as the parent of a special needs kid, I have often been in the position of experts, including public school teachers, thinking they know what is best for my kid and KNOWING they were WRONG. It is incredibly stressful. I hesitate to believe that hard and fast rules will ever be right for every child and I hate to think of parents put in the position of making difficult choices based on such rules.

Catherine

I have no issue at all with kids with special needs starting on a different schedule, which is why I said that I support parents of kids with documented learning disabilities or other issues having the freedom to make the decision to hold their kids back. My best friend redshirted her 5 year old DD who has multiple delays, and I absolutely think it was the right choice. I can completely understand why that would be a smart choice for some kids and their families. What I am not in favor of is kids born well in advance of the deadline and without any mitigating factors, being held back simply to have "an edge." In some towns (like the one I live in) redshirting is so common that parents of kids who meet the cut-off by more than six months and can do everything academically required for K are holding back their kids simply because everyone else is. A close friend of mine held back her June baby, so he was 6 years and 3 months starting K. Some of his classmates wouldn't turn five until the end of December. She wanted him to be the oldest and most mature, and he is. But she complains that he's bored, his classmates are poorly behaved and immature, and that his teacher is not differentiating appropriately for him. That's what I take issue with.

[OKKiddo]

I didn't know that either. I have been saying for ages that I wish towns/states would implement laws that prohibited "extreme" redshirting in the absence of diagnosed learning disabilities or other documented issues. I'd love to see a law that requires all kids born within 90 or even 120 days of the cutoff start on time. I can totally understand why parents who are dealing with an October or November birthday in a town or city with a Dec 31 cut-off (like we have where I live) want to hold their 4 year old back, and think there should be some flexibility for those very young kids. But I think the practice of holding back kids who meet the deadline by several months and have no reason not to start other than their parents wanting them to have "an edge" is pure madness and has the potential to create a whole host of other problems for their kids, other kids and their teachers within the public school system.

See, I have a 5 year old (December baby) son who has autism. He's beginning to read, counts very high, early math, etc. But, socially, he's still very behind--he never initiates any social interaction. Ever. We're really reading up on red-shirting, but one of our fears of red shirting him is that others might look upon him as if he's more disabled than he really is and treat him poorly. And if they implement a policy that forces parents to send their child by x amount of time unless a documented learning disability, I'm sure that would make my fears come true. We're not looking to give our son an unfair advantage, we're just looking for him to have equal footing in a situation where he's already had to come from so far behind.

[Green_Tea]

See, I have a 5 year old (December baby) son who has autism. He's beginning to read, counts very high, early math, etc. But, socially, he's still very behind--he never initiates any social interaction. Ever. We're really reading up on red-shirting, but one of our fears of red shirting him is that others might look upon him as if he's more disabled than he really is and treat him poorly. And if they implement a policy that forces parents to send their child by x amount of time unless a documented learning disability, I'm sure that would make my fears come true. We're not looking to give our son an unfair advantage, we're just looking for him to have equal footing in a situation where he's already had to come from so far behind.

I'm not sure I understand - are you worried that if you start him on time he'll struggle? Or of you start him later it will be harder for him?

I'm not in favor of any law or policy that dictates when kids with special needs should or should not start school. That is a decision that should be made by their parents and the professionals they work with. And I do think that there should be some "wiggle room" for kids who's birthdays fall within 90 or 120 days of the cut-off. It's the redshirting of kids who meet the cut-off by several months and have no documented delays or issues of any kind that make me twitchy. I am not in favor of redshirting an otherwise eligible kid simply for "an edge."

[crl]

It's the redshirting of kids who meet the cut-off by several months and have no documented delays or issues of any kind that make me twitchy. I am not in favor of redshirting an otherwise eligible kid simply for "an edge."

I think the hard thing for me is the "documented" part. I get twitchy about experts (whether that's neuropsychologists, etc or school officials) making these calls. I feel like it is a parental choice. And I worry about people being "forced" into choosing between homeschooling or private school or sending a kid they think isn't ready. It is incredibly stressful to hear experts opining on your child when you know they do not understand your child at all.

I really do see your point, I'm just not sure it should trump the idea that parents know their kids best.

Catherine

[belovedgandp]

We have a 9/1 cut-off so most of the birthdays discussed are the summer ones. I am sending my June boy next year. I know he's ready, but I am extremely curious to see what the make-up of his class will be.

The attitude that it will serve them better to be older as a blanket statement for all kids just rubs me the wrong way. Many parents talk about it being better for the long term, but I think it is extremely short sighted in some ways. Only looking at these early elementary years and not beyond.

[arivecchi]

DH and I watched this last night and thought they made a strong case for redshirting. I did not think the first mom was smug - just uber confident in her decision. For me, a summer bday would be a no-brainer with a Sept. 1 cutoff.

[Gracemom]

DH and I watched this last night and thought they made a strong case for redshirting. I did not think the first mom was smug - just uber confident in her decision. For me, a summer bday would be a no-brainer with a Sept. 1 cutoff.

I think you have to look at each particular child. My son with an August b-day was so not ready, but his best friend with a July b-day was reading great, super mature and social, and totally ready to do. He has done great. I know each family made the right decision for each child.

[ast96]

It's never a no-brainer. I have a 9 year old with a June 20 birthday (and a Sept. 1 cut off) who is in fourth grade now, one of the tallest in his class, and has always been at the top of his class academically (and socially, if I was measuring). His class has boys a full year older than he is in it. They struggle socially. They are starting puberty (as is he, actually -- he has pit hair, wears deodorant, etc.). The ones who were redshirted for whatever reason aren't the leaders of the class and they aren't the academic stars either.

For some kids, redshirting is definitely the best answer. I have seen that. But not for the majority, necessarily. What I have seen is that in elementary school, the year doesn't always "fix" the problems. Sometimes kids just have quirks or issues to work through, and that's who they are, year or not.

My third boy is August 8. He is young compared to his classmates -- no doubt about it. But he has passed every Kindy readiness test since September, and his teacher says he blends. She doesn't recommend redshirting him. He is interested in the things his brothers are -- so even though he is in Pre-K, he is obsessed with Skylanders and Ninjago Legos. His vocabulary is advanced from listening to his brothers talk constantly. If I held him back, I am sure he would cause behavior issues. He already is a handful, but not in an immature way.

People say, what about middle school? I'd rather my boys be around the same ages as their female peers. I don't want my kid turning 13 when some girls in the class are still 11 or turning 12. Middle school is hard for everyone for some reason. If they are among the youngest, that will be their burden. They'll survive. By high school I honestly think it will be a non-issue. I was a summer birthday, drove and voted and drank last, and I was fine with it. It's just a birthday.

I am in favor of redshirting when the kid calls for it. But I don't think a birthday alone makes the decision. You have to look at your kid and make a leap of faith.

[o_mom]

I think the hard thing for me is the "documented" part. I get twitchy about experts (whether that's neuropsychologists, etc or school officials) making these calls. I feel like it is a parental choice. And I worry about people being "forced" into choosing between homeschooling or private school or sending a kid they think isn't ready. It is incredibly stressful to hear experts opining on your child when you know they do not understand your child at all.

I really do see your point, I'm just not sure it should trump the idea that parents know their kids best.

Catherine

But, there has to be some limit - we don't just let parents decide that they can put their 3 yo in K because they know them best and we don't offer intervention on a request basis.

I personally think they ought to have the same standard for red-shirting that they do for acceleration. For example here, the cutoff is Aug 1st, they will automatically waiver to Sep 1st. Beyond that, you have to appeal and show why your child should enter early. I think that they should do the same for red-shirting - July 1st by parental choice and older than that you have to appeal.

[SnuggleBuggles]

See, I have a 5 year old (December baby) son who has autism. He's beginning to read, counts very high, early math, etc. But, socially, he's still very behind--he never initiates any social interaction. Ever. We're really reading up on red-shirting, but one of our fears of red shirting him is that others might look upon him as if he's more disabled than he really is and treat him poorly. And if they implement a policy that forces parents to send their child by x amount of time unless a documented learning disability, I'm sure that would make my fears come true. We're not looking to give our son an unfair advantage, we're just looking for him to have equal footing in a situation where he's already had to come from so far behind.

But, will the extra time really change who he is and how he interacts with the world? My ds1 has some quirks and an ADD dx (they though Aspergers could be a possibility briefly) and we sent him on time (summer boy). It took me a while to appreciate that no matter what we had done, we wouldn't have changed who he was or how he interacted with the world. Academically he is right on- and above. Socially, he has found his groove and friends. I just always think if I had held him back in hopes that more things would fall into place and they hadn't, I'd be frustrated. But, as I have said in previous redshirting threads, I am not 100% sure I did the right thing but I challenge any mom to say they did if they sit back and think about all pros and cons- maybe not today but when they graduate from highschool and see the whole picture. :)

[SnuggleBuggles]

It's kind of funny. It seems that it changed no minds and maybe reinforced opinions for whichever way people were already leaning. The arguments made for redshirting were utterly uncompelling to me. I do think that it gives the held back kids an unfair advantage in some things (though, there may wind up being unforeseen disadvantages over time). I do think it is unfair that my appropriately on time kid is competing against kids that are older. And definitely agree that how much can this all spiral out of control? Red shirt summer b-days then the spring parents don't want their kids to be the youngest and hold them out. I am in favor of cut off dates; you can't be older than x to be in the grade. Yeah, this piece only reaffirmed my choice not to redshirt.

[Kindra178]

DH and I watched this last night and thought they made a strong case for redshirting. I did not think the first mom was smug - just uber confident in her decision. For me, a summer bday would be a no-brainer with a Sept. 1 cutoff.

I didn't watch but this issue is near and dear to me. I used to think it's a no brainer, but it is more complicated than that.

[janine]

I have no issue at all with kids with special needs starting on a different schedule, which is why I said that I support parents of kids with documented learning disabilities or other issues having the freedom to make the decision to hold their kids back. My best friend redshirted her 5 year old DD who has multiple delays, and I absolutely think it was the right choice. I can completely understand why that would be a smart choice for some kids and their families. What I am not in favor of is kids born well in advance of the deadline and without any mitigating factors, being held back simply to have "an edge." In some towns (like the one I live in) redshirting is so common that parents of kids who meet the cut-off by more than six months and can do everything academically required for K are holding back their kids simply because everyone else is. A close friend of mine held back her June baby, so he was 6 years and 3 months starting K. Some of his classmates wouldn't turn five until the end of December. She wanted him to be the oldest and most mature, and he is. But she complains that he's bored, his classmates are poorly behaved and immature, and that his teacher is not differentiating appropriately for him. That's what I take issue with.

Agree. The whole practice (redshirting in effort to get ahead only) rubs me the wrong way...what edge? And I guess this is al at the expense of other kids who follow the "rules". It just creates this crazy competitiveness built around when you happened to have been born. Why should the rest of those with kids born right before the cut off who are physically tinier now be surrounded by huge kids who are 1+yrs older? And is it right to hold a child back who is developmentally ready just to chase that so called "edge" - to me that is selling the child's intellectual development short. I remember when being the youngest was a plus....like you were the smartest to be able to hold your own and still have time leftover! It's keeping up with the joneses being injected into kindergarten, and sad statement on priorities IMHO.


And I found that first mom in the 60 minutes piece to be highly annoying as well.

ETA: My DD has a Sept birthday and makes the cutoff by days. I never considered holding back.

[lmh2402]

my son with an early spring birthday could well be one of the younger boys in his K class (when the time comes). It just seems like a slippery slope, if that many people refuse to let their child be one of the youngest.

this is us too. i wasn't, unfortunately, surprised by it...i actually expect(ed) it...but it is concerning. particularly as DS does have some..."issues" related to social readiness, etc. however, he's also physically very big already. and already reading. so holding him back an extra year seems like a possible recipe for disaster. like he might stick out like sore thumb, which, i think, would not be good for his confidence or his experience overall. we aren't ruling anything out - too early to say anything for sure. but right now, if i had guess what we'd do, we'll send him.


It's kind of funny. It seems that it changed no minds and maybe reinforced opinions for whichever way people were already leaning. The arguments made for redshirting were utterly uncompelling to me. I do think that it gives the held back kids an unfair advantage in some things (though, there may wind up being unforeseen disadvantages over time). I do think it is unfair that my appropriately on time kid is competing against kids that are older. And definitely agree that how much can this all spiral out of control? Red shirt summer b-days then the spring parents don't want their kids to be the youngest and hold them out. I am in favor of cut off dates; you can't be older than x to be in the grade. Yeah, this piece only reaffirmed my choice not to redshirt.

agree with all of this. especially the bolded. my DH watched with me and was actually aghast when the question of sports came up and the mom said, "yes," she did take it into consideration when making the decision. he was like, "seriously? seriously?! that's...insane! and so. not. fair."

at the end of the day, i definitely do think there needs to be rules in place to manage that spiral, but with flexibility and exceptions allowed in cases of special needs.

[secchick]

I never really thought about is much as my first 2 kids bdays are right in the middle, around 6 mos before/after the cutoff, but DS2 is an early August bday. Assuming he is PT before age 3, we will send him to pre-K3 at the private school the other kids attend and he would presumably be the youngest in his class when K starts.

Some kids in DDs K class turned 6 as early as May. One friend of ours has a DD about to turn 6 in one of the public school Vanguard K classes (which is a magnet program you have to test into). Her DD was borderline on test scores, but they let her in because they had a few extra spots in the class. She said her DD was literally the only one who was not 6 before the school year started. The other kids are accelerated, in that they were reading and writing very well early in the school year. Her very bright DD is struggling with being behind, but the reason all of her classmates were doing so well is that they really should have been in first grade. There appear to be a ton of parents redshirting for the purpose of test scores and getting their kids into magnet programs. I think it is an unfair advantage.

[SnuggleBuggles]

I forgot about the key statement made...the kids that are being redshirted, are the kids who least need it. Involved parents, more financially well off... It's hard enough to be disadvantaged in those areas and now those kids are in class with kids who really have a gigantic (unfair) leg up. I know that some school cultures (like expensive private schools) don't really share this issue but it is a problem for public school.

[wellyes]

I forgot about the key statement made...the kids that are being redshirted, are the kids who least need it. Involved parents, more financially well off... It's hard enough to be disadvantaged in those areas and now those kids are in class with kids who really have a gigantic (unfair) leg up. I know that some school cultures (like expensive private schools) don't really share this issue but it is a problem for public school.

Affordability is a factor.... I know a lot of parents who are anxiously awaiting kindergarten as the end of daycare bills, and would never think to voluntarily pay an additional year. (Not talking about special needs, of course). I actually know a woman who moved to a district with age 4 kindergarten-- Cambridge-- to save money.

I personally don't have strong feelings on the topic. Ask me again when my late-June boy is about to turn 5.

[sidmand]

See, I have a 5 year old (December baby) son who has autism. He's beginning to read, counts very high, early math, etc. But, socially, he's still very behind--he never initiates any social interaction. Ever. We're really reading up on red-shirting, but one of our fears of red shirting him is that others might look upon him as if he's more disabled than he really is and treat him poorly. And if they implement a policy that forces parents to send their child by x amount of time unless a documented learning disability, I'm sure that would make my fears come true. We're not looking to give our son an unfair advantage, we're just looking for him to have equal footing in a situation where he's already had to come from so far behind.

My son is 6 now but we were in a similar boat. We have a 9/1 cutoff and his birthday is June. I debated so much. My aunt told me, when in doubt, keep them out.

DS was diagnosed with PDD--it's probably more likely Aspergers. He's very smart and I wasn't concerned about the academic piece but was very concerned about how he'd do socially. He doesn't always "get" it, cried easily, still sucks his thumb...I was concerned about how his services mIght be affected though. And, as someone pointed out, who is to say he wouldn't still be so sensitive and cry so easily in a year?

Both DH and I started K when we were four. We were both fine academically (and tall!) but socially...I can't say that another year would have changed that though.

We ended up sending DS on time. He's one of the tallest boys in his class (and one of the youngest) and he's totally on target academically. Socially is still an issue but we're working on it. His teachers say they can't imagine DS not in the "right" grade so I think we made the right choice but who knows? I've head more people say they regret NOT holding them back but you've got to decide if another year is REALLY going to make any difference. We decided it really wouldn't. And at his IEP meeting they said he's met all the OT goals they had (he long ago met speech and social goals). So he's almost there. I hope!

[janine]

So why exactly is this so much more common among boys than girls? The term originates for sports related reasons - and in that case makes sense -a boy who is physically larger/older is more likely to succeed in sports. But now we are talking about developmental issues - and are boys really that much more likely to have social/academic developmental issues than boys? To the degree we are seeing boys held back vs. girls?

[crl]

So why exactly is this so much more common among boys than girls? The term originates for sports related reasons - and in that case makes sense -a boy who is physically larger/older is more likely to succeed in sports. But now we are talking about developmental issues - and are boys really that much more likely to have social/academic developmental issues than boys? To the degree we are seeing boys held back vs. girls?

Boys are more likely to have autism, ADHD and other learning disabilities. One could argue that school is set up for girls not boys in terms of maturity and expectations. Some of that may be cultural, but brain development is different between the genders.

Catherine

[janine]

Boys are more likely to have autism, ADHD and other learning disabilities. One could argue that school is set up for girls not boys in terms of maturity and expectations. Some of that may be cultural, but brain development is different between the genders.

Catherine

Yes, but in the numbers we are seeing redshirting occuring? And surely there are cases where girls have disabilities too. Or is it that those who redshirt for reasons that are not developmental (which also happens to be occuring mostly with boys) are not being honest and it's all getting swept under this category in order to seem more justified.

[ast96]

It's mostly boys because school is, quite frankly, not very boy friendly in the early years (I realize the tide turns later on for girls). Boys are -- gross generalization here -- harder to control, to keep still, to expect behavior from for that many hours a day and with greatly decreasing time for recess and P.E.

I have boys who do not have a hard time sitting still now, but in K? It was a little tougher. I think it is frankly easier for the mostly female teachers in elementary school to deal with 6 year old boys in K than it is to deal with 5 year old boys, and so forth. Or they have the impression it will be.

Most of the moms I know who redshirted did not do it for athletic reasons, but a few blatantly admit it was for sports. I shake my head.

I see this as a class issue as well because of the financial issues involved -- parents who can't afford more daycare or another year of preschool or even an additional year of private school will not hold back, but parents who have the luxury of choice can do whatever they wish.

[sidmand]

Yes, but in the numbers we are seeing redshirting occuring? And surely there are cases where girls have disabilities too. Or is it that those who redshirt for reasons that are not developmental (which also happens to be occuring mostly with boys) are not being honest and it's all getting swept under this category in order to seem more justified.

Yes. The cases of Autism/PDD/Aspergers/developmental delays has skyrocketed in just the last few years. The Boston Globe had an article last week on the increased numbers of preschoolers/Kindergarteners from just a few years ago. They opened up a public school they had *just* closed because of the increased number of children who qualified for services/education because of Autism, developmental delays, diagnoses that required school, etc.

[ast96]

I actually know a ton of kids who were redshirted, and I admit I don't think a single one of them was redshirted because of a diagnosis like PDD, Aspergers, etc. I know a few redshirted for athletics and a lot redshirted for "immaturity."

[sidmand]

I actually know a ton of kids who were redshirted, and I admit I don't think a single one of them was redshirted because of a diagnosis like PDD, Aspergers, etc. I know a few redshirted for athletics and a lot redshirted for "immaturity."

That must depend on where you are. I don't know a single child redshirted for athletics. The only ones I know were redshirted for other delays. But that's also probably the crowd I know! :)

[ast96]

Definitely must be about your school community and who you know. I mean, I am sure it does happen, and maybe sometimes the kids in our school(s) who are redshirted are diagnosed after the fact. But I thought it was interesting I couldn't come up with one off the top of my head.

[Melaine]

I'm shocked about the sports thing...SHOCKED.

[ast96]

I know one 8/9 year old boy in second grade. His parents -- older parents, and this is their younger son -- held him back for baseball. He's much taller than the other kids, and he is a bully. They play him UP in baseball -- he plays with kids in the division one step older than my FOURTH grader, so 11-12 year olds. So he's used to hanging out every afternoon with older kids, and then he is in second grade with little boys like mine, who is still 7. He is a huge behavior issue and probably bored out of his skull.

[janine]

Yes. The cases of Autism/PDD/Aspergers/developmental delays has skyrocketed in just the last few years. The Boston Globe had an article last week on the increased numbers of preschoolers/Kindergarteners from just a few years ago. They opened up a public school they had *just* closed because of the increased number of children who qualified for services/education because of Autism, developmental delays, diagnoses that required school, etc.

Ok, but if we were to carve those #'s out I'd say we'd still see more boys than girls being held back. The comment on this being because boys are not mature enough at Kindergarten stage makes some sense, but then like you said what about when the trend turns in later years....girls would then be at greater disadvangate right when it counts most. Girls tend to become more self conscious as they approach high school and wouldn't this be even more the case if boys are now 1-2 years older and basically men?

And what about globally..don't all children start school around this time, aged 5-6. Why are we not seeing such issues (boys lagging due to not being mature and therefore being held back,etc). It seems to me (and yes this is another generalization) it's because the US tends to value sports more than they should in the school system and because there is the perception that the "jock"/physically imposing guy will do better/be more popular down the line. Plus there is the issue of parents competing with each other..and not "lose out" on any slight advantage...even if it's based on shallow premises.

ETA: Not talking about those who are held back for legitimate reasons, ie. developmental/medical.

[crl]

I think it is very difficult to tell why any particular child has been held back. My child looks very typical in the classroom and has since day one of K. Now, on day one of what should have been K, he was completely incapable of handling K without a one on one aide for much of the day. He made huge progress in that extra year. We also moved during that extra year to a state with a December cutoff instead of a September cut off--not planned when we made the decision. So we ended up holding him back for several months instead of just a couple.

I am sure people think we held him back to give him an edge or for sports or whatever. We didn't.

This is a very difficult topic for many people for lots of reasons. I find these threads very challenging.

Catherine

[jse107]

But, there has to be some limit - we don't just let parents decide that they can put their 3 yo in K because they know them best and we don't offer intervention on a request basis.

I personally think they ought to have the same standard for red-shirting that they do for acceleration. For example here, the cutoff is Aug 1st, they will automatically waiver to Sep 1st. Beyond that, you have to appeal and show why your child should enter early. I think that they should do the same for red-shirting - July 1st by parental choice and older than that you have to appeal.

I like that idea. I have a mid-August son with a district cut-off of Sept. 1. We red-shirted for maturity issues. He's super-smart but emotionally very sensitive. Part of it is just who he is, but he doesn't stand out so much being in 1st grade this year, rather than 2nd.

[mom2binsd]

Speaking from the perspective of a special educator (SLP), children with IEP's are almost never ever held back, and children who are in Early Childhood programs through the school district must head to K on time or else they forfeit the services, the point being, that they age out of the Early Childhood program by age 5 and services will continue at the Elementary level. This is for children with a variety of diagnosis (developmental delay, autism, speech language impaired). In almost all cases it was to the child's benefit to continue into K and they would continue to receive the services they needed.

Speaking from a parent, I wonder if we over thinking this??? Are we trying to avoid every possible hiccup that might present itself. If we don't redshirt are the consequences dire...I'd love to hear from parents who sent their child with close bday's who had a bad experience.

I watched the program, and think that you can spin it anyway you want it. Of course the lady who is paying through the nose for private is going to be happy, and I'm sure she is, but she also doesn't know if sending her child to the public school on time would have been an issue either.

I think they really only touched on the issue at the end that it's again a case of the have's and the have not's. If you can afford to spend another year paying for preschool (if you WOTH), it's not an issue. The parents that consider red-shirting are almost always the parents who are very involved, have provided lots of enrichment and opportunities for learning/socialization and have the skills to cope with any issues that do come up.

I have two very good friends who red shirted boys (one an Aug. boy with a Sept. cut off, he was shy/little/and socially awkward, the extra year was great for him, the other a June boy with Aug. cutoff, struggled with academics in preschool and the extra year gave him the readiness skills he needed to enjoy K, he was ready socially though and was average size and is now a big kid.

Bottom line you do what you think is best for your child.

This is almost similar to the debate many get into with respect to private vs public (when the public school available is perfectly fine)....my friends and I all seem to agree that those who went to good public schools and those who went to private pretty much ended up at the same place in college and no better off in life. ******This is only my experience with my friends (almost all of whom went to 4 yr college, most with graduate degrees, most with good/excellent jobs) and who about 1/4 went to private and 3/4 went to public.

[janine]

I like that idea. I have a mid-August son with a district cut-off of Sept. 1. We red-shirted for maturity issues. He's super-smart but emotionally very sensitive. Part of it is just who he is, but he doesn't stand out so much being in 1st grade this year, rather than 2nd.

I find this topic v. interesting and trying to understand it - I hope I'm not offending anyone.

The "emotionally very sensitive" piece is what I'm having a hard time understanding. I could say that about my daughter to (at age 3). She is the youngest by chance (birthdate is right before cutoff), but if others' redshirt this would increase to 2 years. Should I redshirt (this is a rhetorical question)? By nature she is sensitive, cautious - but she's also physically tinier even for those her age but as a girl, most would consider this typical. I have no question she is intellectually ready, but if others redshirt, there is the question of whether she would feel intimidated and incorporate it into her personality futher.

[janine]

Speaking from the perspective of a special educator (SLP), children with IEP's are almost never ever held back, and children who are in Early Childhood programs through the school district must head to K on time or else they forfeit the services, the point being, that they age out of the Early Childhood program by age 5 and services will continue at the Elementary level. This is for children with a variety of diagnosis (developmental delay, autism, speech language impaired). In almost all cases it was to the child's benefit to continue into K and they would continue to receive the services they needed.

Speaking from a parent, I wonder if we over thinking this??? Are we trying to avoid every possible hiccup that might present itself. If we don't redshirt are the consequences dire...I'd love to hear from parents who sent their child with close bday's who had a bad experience.

I watched the program, and think that you can spin it anyway you want it. Of course the lady who is paying through the nose for private is going to be happy, and I'm sure she is, but she also doesn't know if sending her child to the public school on time would have been an issue either.

I think they really only touched on the issue at the end that it's again a case of the have's and the have not's. If you can afford to spend another year paying for preschool (if you WOTH), it's not an issue. The parents that consider red-shirting are almost always the parents who are very involved, have provided lots of enrichment and opportunities for learning/socialization and have the skills to cope with any issues that do come up.

I have two very good friends who red shirted boys (one an Aug. boy with a Sept. cut off, he was shy/little/and socially awkward, the extra year was great for him, the other a June boy with Aug. cutoff, struggled with academics in preschool and the extra year gave him the readiness skills he needed to enjoy K, he was ready socially though and was average size and is now a big kid.

Bottom line you do what you think is best for your child.

This is almost similar to the debate many get into with respect to private vs public (when the public school available is perfectly fine)....my friends and I all seem to agree that those who went to good public schools and those who went to private pretty much ended up at the same place in college and no better off in life. ******This is only my experience with my friends (almost all of whom went to 4 yr college, most with graduate degrees, most with good/excellent jobs) and who about 1/4 went to private and 3/4 went to public.


This part I also don't get - I think we could afford another year of preschool. but feel very against the idea of redshirting b/c to me it is holding back a child from entering a class he/she is intellectually prepared for even though they might not be physically or for other more nebulous reasons,etc. I assume you are speaking exculsively about kids staying back b/c of some established disability.

[wimama]

I didn't know that either. I have been saying for ages that I wish towns/states would implement laws that prohibited "extreme" redshirting in the absence of diagnosed learning disabilities or other documented issues. I'd love to see a law that requires all kids born within 90 or even 120 days of the cutoff start on time. I can totally understand why parents who are dealing with an October or November birthday in a town or city with a Dec 31 cut-off (like we have where I live) want to hold their 4 year old back, and think there should be some flexibility for those very young kids. But I think the practice of holding back kids who meet the deadline by several months and have no reason not to start other than their parents wanting them to have "an edge" is pure madness and has the potential to create a whole host of other problems for their kids, other kids and their teachers within the public school system.


But, there has to be some limit - we don't just let parents decide that they can put their 3 yo in K because they know them best and we don't offer intervention on a request basis.

I personally think they ought to have the same standard for red-shirting that they do for acceleration. For example here, the cutoff is Aug 1st, they will automatically waiver to Sep 1st. Beyond that, you have to appeal and show why your child should enter early. I think that they should do the same for red-shirting - July 1st by parental choice and older than that you have to appeal.

:yeahthat: I think there has to be limits or some parents are and will take advantage of the system to give their kids a leg up on the other classmates. I think a 120 day window for red shirting and a 30 day window for acceleration is appropriate. Past those windows appeals could be permitted. I do think parents should have a reasonable amount of choice in the matter. And, I understand the point made that this could potentially cause more labeling of kids that are red shirted or held back because of special needs or red shirting for delays the child may have. But, I think the class room dynamic created by red shirting would be more detrimental to a quirky child or child with delays or special needs. Both socially and academically. If a teacher has to deal with bored redshirted kids then she/he has less time to spend with the kids with delays, kids with special needs and normal aged kids. And socially it would create an even more uneven playing field.

That said, one of my only comforts the last few weeks I was pregnant with E was that if I was still pregnant past the September school cut off I wouldn't have to decide if she was ready for school or not. She would just miss the cut off. I was so ready to be done being pregnant, and all the BBB red shirting threads helped tone down my end of pregnancy crankiness about still being pregnant. :ROTFLMAO:

[janine]

:yeahthat: I think there has to be limits or some parents are and will take advantage of the system to give their kids a leg up on the other classmates. I think a 120 day window for red shirting and a 30 day window for acceleration is appropriate. Past those windows appeals could be permitted. I do think parents should have a reasonable amount of choice in the matter. And, I understand the point made that this could potentially cause more labeling of kids that are red shirted or held back because of special needs or red shirting for delays the child may have. But, I think the class room dynamic created by red shirting would be more detrimental to a quirky child or child with delays or special needs. Both socially and academically. If a teacher has to deal with bored redshirted kids then she/he has less time to spend with the kids with delays, kids with special needs and normal aged kids. And socially it would create an even more uneven playing field.

That said, one of my only comforts the last few weeks I was pregnant with E was that if I was still pregnant past the September school cut off I wouldn't have to decide if she was ready for school or not. She would just miss the cut off. I was so ready to be done being pregnant, and all the BBB red shirting threads helped tone down my end of pregnancy crankiness about still being pregnant. :ROTFLMAO:

100% agree. But then I have heard in some districts redshirting works in their advantage because of their testing results being higher with kids being older and therefore more advanced than what is deemed standard (allowing for increased funding). A friend of mine was told to have her kindergartener repeat K for this reason (they moved cutoff date even further back). It's a slippery slope.

[Green_Tea]

I didn't know that either. I have been saying for ages that I wish towns/states would implement laws that prohibited "extreme" redshirting in the absence of diagnosed learning disabilities or other documented issues. I'd love to see a law that requires all kids born within 90 or even 120 days of the cutoff start on time. I can totally understand why parents who are dealing with an October or November birthday in a town or city with a Dec 31 cut-off (like we have where I live) want to hold their 4 year old back, and think there should be some flexibility for those very young kids. But I think the practice of holding back kids who meet the deadline by several months and have no reason not to start other than their parents wanting them to have "an edge" is pure madness and has the potential to create a whole host of other problems for their kids, other kids and their teachers within the public school system.

I feel like I should clarify - I mean that kids born 90-120 days before the cutoff should be required to start on time. I think you all knew that's what I meant, but when I reread it I realized it wasn't clear! (Ah, the dangers of posting after 8 pm...)

[wimama]

Speaking from the perspective of a special educator (SLP), children with IEP's are almost never ever held back, and children who are in Early Childhood programs through the school district must head to K on time or else they forfeit the services, the point being, that they age out of the Early Childhood program by age 5 and services will continue at the Elementary level. This is for children with a variety of diagnosis (developmental delay, autism, speech language impaired). In almost all cases it was to the child's benefit to continue into K and they would continue to receive the services they needed.

Speaking from a parent, I wonder if we over thinking this??? Are we trying to avoid every possible hiccup that might present itself. If we don't redshirt are the consequences dire...I'd love to hear from parents who sent their child with close bday's who had a bad experience.

I watched the program, and think that you can spin it anyway you want it. Of course the lady who is paying through the nose for private is going to be happy, and I'm sure she is, but she also doesn't know if sending her child to the public school on time would have been an issue either.

I think they really only touched on the issue at the end that it's again a case of the have's and the have not's. If you can afford to spend another year paying for preschool (if you WOTH), it's not an issue. The parents that consider red-shirting are almost always the parents who are very involved, have provided lots of enrichment and opportunities for learning/socialization and have the skills to cope with any issues that do come up.

I have two very good friends who red shirted boys (one an Aug. boy with a Sept. cut off, he was shy/little/and socially awkward, the extra year was great for him, the other a June boy with Aug. cutoff, struggled with academics in preschool and the extra year gave him the readiness skills he needed to enjoy K, he was ready socially though and was average size and is now a big kid.

Bottom line you do what you think is best for your child.

This is almost similar to the debate many get into with respect to private vs public (when the public school available is perfectly fine)....my friends and I all seem to agree that those who went to good public schools and those who went to private pretty much ended up at the same place in college and no better off in life. ******This is only my experience with my friends (almost all of whom went to 4 yr college, most with graduate degrees, most with good/excellent jobs) and who about 1/4 went to private and 3/4 went to public.

Thank you for posting and sharing your perspective. Those two cases you described would fall with in the 120 day mark for red shirting. I think those are all great reasons to red shirt. I am not anti-red shirting. I just think there needs to be a line drawn in the sand or there will be more and more parents that take advantage of the system. I don't like the Chicago mandatory cutoffs. I think there should be some parental choice in the decision making. Because every kid is different. But, when some parents choices are impacting the well being of the rest of the classroom of children. Then limits need to be set to prevent that from happening. The red shirting parents rights should impinge on the rights of the other kids in the classroom for a good learning environment.

How do you feel the classroom dynamic would change for those children with IEP's who are sent to K on time when there are a bunch of red shirted kids who were more than 3-6 months from the cutoff in the classroom?

[mom2binsd]

This part I also don't get - I think we could afford another year of preschool. but feel very against the idea of redshirting b/c to me it is holding back a child from entering a class he/she is intellectually prepared for even though they might not be physically or for other more nebulous reasons,etc. I assume you are speaking exculsively about kids staying back b/c of some established disability.


I probably didn't word that clearly, I was referring to the kids who are being held back because the parents want to for reasons such as maturity/sports/size... the observation is that those who are financially able to (upper middle class) can afford an extra year of paying for preschool is just reinforcing the thought that the "have's" who chose to redshirt can make the situation more advantageous/put others at a possible disadvantage. Does that make sense and for those nebulous reasons (I like that word you chose) like you, I don't support redshirting.

[sewarsh]

I didn't read this whole thread, but really struggled when deciding to send my July DD to K (Sept 1 cutoff). She was socially and academically ready but there were some "immaturities" her preschool teachers felt should be worked out before going to K.

I did SO much research, talked to SO many people, including preschool teachers, K teachers, guidance counselors at Elem & Middle school and principals. I spoke with parents who red-shirted & didn't and loved it, parents who did send on time & loved it & those that regretted it. Its pretty trendy to redshirt here, almost expected.

I send my DD because my heart of hearts told me she was ready. the "immaturities" she had, I felt, wouldn't get worked out until she was in a more structured environment.

All in all i'm happy with our decision to send her, however it hasn't been "easy street" the entire year. She got a few notes and phone calls because of the "immaturities and talking too much" issues her preschool teachers warned us about. She was easily distracted and had a hard time getting her work done in time. About a month ago, my DD told me she finished her work on time again at school that day...that was the 4th day in a row and I complimented her. She said "Yah, mom, I think I'm finally getting the hang of it!"

So, go figure my July DD finally getting the hang of K in February - sure, its later than most other kids in her class, but she's getting it and I'm okay with that. She's very average in terms of academics but at the end of the day, what mattered most to me when making the decision is what the Middle School Guidance School counselor told me...."The smartest kid can get the worst grades, the youngest kid can be the smartest....what matters the most is the home support. If your child has little to no help at home, they are going to have a hard time succeeding no matter when their bday is."

Just my experience...

Now, I have 2 boys, age 3.5 & 6mo. Their bdays are Aug 27 & Sept 1. I'm definitely holding back 3.5YO, already know it and am certain it will be necessary for him. Not sure about our baby, but almost wish his bday was Sept 2 so I didn't have a choice in the matter!!! :)

[deborah_r]

I never considered holding either of my boys back for Kinder (DS1 is May, DS2 is June), but I do find myself very concerned about DS2 starting this fall. He does well socially, but he is *very* small for his age, and he is in speech therapy. I'm worried these two things together, being smaller and maybe sounding "babyish", are going to be a problem. However, paying for another year of daycare/preschool would be a very difficult thing for us right now, so I'm just hoping he makes a lot of progress in speech therapy before Sept. He just started therapy in January. (doctor identified the possible problem at his 4 year checkup, and it took a long time to work through the assessment process with the school district - before the doctor noticed his speech, I just thought he sounded like all the other kids his age, because I can understand him fine)

[SnuggleBuggles]

Thank you for posting and sharing your perspective. Those two cases you described would fall with in the 120 day mark for red shirting. I think those are all great reasons to red shirt. I am not anti-red shirting. I just think there needs to be a line drawn in the sand or there will be more and more parents that take advantage of the system. I don't like the Chicago mandatory cutoffs. I think there should be some parental choice in the decision making. Because every kid is different. But, when some parents choices are impacting the well being of the rest of the classroom of children. Then limits need to be set to prevent that from happening. The red shirting parents rights should impinge on the rights of the other kids in the classroom for a good learning environment.

How do you feel the classroom dynamic would change for those children with IEP's who are sent to K on time when there are a bunch of red shirted kids who were more than 3-6 months from the cutoff in the classroom?

If my kid, who already struggles socially in relating to his peers, has to then try and relate to kids that are more mature then it is a problem. Maybe not a big deal in kindergarten but by 3-4th grade, the tween phenomenon happens and kids that are on the younger side get left in the dust. That is a problem not just for kids with IEPs but any that are on the young side in a class- made worse by kids that should be a grade up from where they are. eta- the flip side could be an issue too. The older kids might have a hard time relating to younger kids, especially when puberty hits. I wish the show would have talked about what happens when the kids get older, vs just the elementary years.

[ast96]

I think it is very difficult to tell why any particular child has been held back. My child looks very typical in the classroom and has since day one of K. Now, on day one of what should have been K, he was completely incapable of handling K without a one on one aide for much of the day. He made huge progress in that extra year. We also moved during that extra year to a state with a December cutoff instead of a September cut off--not planned when we made the decision. So we ended up holding him back for several months instead of just a couple.

I am sure people think we held him back to give him an edge or for sports or whatever. We didn't.

This is a very difficult topic for many people for lots of reasons. I find these threads very challenging.

Catherine

I want you to know I was only saying of the kids I personally KNOW, whose parents I know and have discussed it with, I didn't know any who were held back with diagnoses. Probably because a lot of kids I know with diagnoses did go to special needs preschool and have been in the system and weren't held back.

But I feel like parents need to make the decisions, and I feel just as judged for NOT holding my kids back as you probably do sometimes. We all do our best. And like I said, for some kids I feel it is crucial! Just not as many as we are pressured about. I'm sure you did the right thing for your child.

[janine]

Sewarsh, thanks for sharing, especially since you have a DD (don't hear so much about this for girls). But I have to wonder how a preschooler can be deemed immature/talking too much? Plus pre-school isn't required and is more for socializing, so I'm surprised it's used as a barometer for schooling, espeically when they are so young. I guess I have alot to learn since I"ll be going through this for the first time (about to have my first preschool parent / teacher conference and DD is just one day before cutoff).

Yay for your daughter meanwhile, I think you did the right thing.

[alexsmommy]

I send my DD because my heart of hearts told me she was ready. the "immaturities" she had, I felt, wouldn't get worked out until she was in a more structured environment.

All in all i'm happy with our decision to send her, however it hasn't been "easy street" the entire year. She got a few notes and phone calls because of the "immaturities and talking too much" issues her preschool teachers warned us about. She was easily distracted and had a hard time getting her work done in time. About a month ago, my DD told me she finished her work on time again at school that day...that was the 4th day in a row and I complimented her. She said "Yah, mom, I think I'm finally getting the hang of it!"



I think this will be me in one years time. I have been struggling with what to do with DS2, a July b-day with a Sept 1 cut off. I struggled last year with whether to refer him for speech, then just as I decided it was needed, he had a developmental explosion... his preschool teacher said, "Hey, who turned him on?" Well again this year, I am worried about the same issues as the PP, difficulty staying on task and getting work done. I was researching alternatives if I redshirted him etc, then boom, once again, he's mid-developmental explosion. His interests are becoming more mature, he's asking to read to me and sound out the words, he's able to sit and play a game with me for an hour.... So I realize that this may be his pattern and if it is, that is fine and normal. DS1 had the good fortune to have a b-day where even with the same pattern, he would have hit the developmental leap right before school starts each year. I've done some things to hopefully help DS2 with the transition next year and he's done great with them, so for now, I'm planning on sending him on time unless I or one of his teachers sees some really big red flag.

[KHF]

Speaking from a parent, I wonder if we over thinking this??? Are we trying to avoid every possible hiccup that might present itself. If we don't redshirt are the consequences dire...I'd love to hear from parents who sent their child with close bday's who had a bad experience.

My DD has an 8/22 birthday with a 9/1 cutoff. We sent her to K on time and didn't really ever consider holding her back. She was fine socially, maybe a little shy, but seemed academically ready. Throughout K she seemed OK too, though she struggled some with reading. I attributed it to her being one of the younger ones in the class.

Fast forward to this year in first grade. She has seriously struggled with reading and math and is getting a lot of extra help and services. I've been kicking myself most of this year, thinking that it was my fault for not holding her back a year. We've had her eyesight evaluated, and saw some small improvements with glasses. Now we're in the beginning stages of getting her tested for dyslexia. Her teacher this year has been truly a godsend, in helping us determine what could be wrong. Her kindergarten teacher didn't pick up on any of the warning signs and didn't let us know that she was behind. I really feel that dyslexia may be the answer to why she's struggled so much, despite having an awesome vocabulary and being obviously intelligent.

So, I guess the bottom line is...I thought maybe I'd made a mistake in sending her on time, but it turns out that redshirting her in K would have probably just delayed us a year on getting her the help she needs.

[maestramommy]

I wasn't able to view the program, and I've only read the latter responses on this thread. I do have a question for all who decided NOT to hold back their DC. Did you ever feel at some point during the K year that your kid was just not doing well and were then faced with having them repeat K? I'm asking because our ped has rec'd this course of action for Arwyn. That if she is doing fine socially (as far as we've been told she is) to go ahead and start K on time, and if she struggles a lot academically during that year to have her repeat K. In his mind having doubts about cognition isn't a good enough reason to redshirt. Our cutoff is 9/30 and her bday is 5/25. So she's in plenty of time for the cutoff. But she still has so many speech distortions that she can't make any assessment on our own as to whether she is academically ready. Her IEP meeting is in 2 weeks, should be interesting.

[ast96]

Only one of my summer birthdays has finished K, but in his case, no, we never had a doubt during his K year, and he was in an accelerated private school program with many peers a year older than he was. If we had, I would not have hesitated to repeat K.

[sewarsh]

I wasn't able to view the program, and I've only read the latter responses on this thread. I do have a question for all who decided NOT to hold back their DC. Did you ever feel at some point during the K year that your kid was just not doing well and were then faced with having them repeat K? I'm asking because our ped has rec'd this course of action for Arwyn. That if she is doing fine socially (as far as we've been told she is) to go ahead and start K on time, and if she struggles a lot academically during that year to have her repeat K. In his mind having doubts about cognition isn't a good enough reason to redshirt. Our cutoff is 9/30 and her bday is 5/25. So she's in plenty of time for the cutoff. But she still has so many speech distortions that she can't make any assessment on our own as to whether she is academically ready. Her IEP meeting is in 2 weeks, should be interesting.

Although this technically is an option, i wouldn't consider it. I spoke to 2 adults who repeated Kindergarten and to this day, they said it was something that always bothered them. The Elem guidance counselor actually said they really don't hold kids back unless there's a big need, so she actually suggested that I do not consider this an option when deciding whether or not to send DD. Of course if i sent her and she was behind then it would become an option at that point.

What I did consider was doing K in a private school and then either repeating K at the public school or going straight to public school 1st grade.

Again, this is just my opinion - i know its only Kindergarten but i didn't want my DD seeing her class mates moving onto 1st grade while she stayed back in K.

[SnuggleBuggles]

I wasn't able to view the program, and I've only read the latter responses on this thread. I do have a question for all who decided NOT to hold back their DC. Did you ever feel at some point during the K year that your kid was just not doing well and were then faced with having them repeat K? I'm asking because our ped has rec'd this course of action for Arwyn. That if she is doing fine socially (as far as we've been told she is) to go ahead and start K on time, and if she struggles a lot academically during that year to have her repeat K. In his mind having doubts about cognition isn't a good enough reason to redshirt. Our cutoff is 9/30 and her bday is 5/25. So she's in plenty of time for the cutoff. But she still has so many speech distortions that she can't make any assessment on our own as to whether she is academically ready. Her IEP meeting is in 2 weeks, should be interesting.

Ds1 did private k at a preschool-k school. So, no matter what he would be moving on to a new school at the end of k. We discussed repeating k at the new school vs moving to 1st grade. The teachers said to go to 1st based on his academic abilities.

[sste]

Really, I think the schools have us coming and going on this one. Parents view this new decision as empowering; it now appears to be a rite of kindy passage for most parents of entirely typical children to struggle with this. Well, statistically the only people being empowered are the school administrators who now have higher test scores, more docile students, and can foist larger classrooms and more developmentally inappropriate practices on our children.

I can't believe the focus is on parent decision-making. The *schools* should be called to task for capitalizing on this situation for personal gain to the detriment of educational quality and equity . . .

[DebbieJ]

Just watching now on DVR. I agree, no real surprises in the information supplied. I was really surprised to learn that the Chicago public school system "forces" parents to enroll their kids in the class in which they belong according to their birthday, and doesn't permit redshirting.



I just learned that our suburban Chicago district does this too. My friend has twins who will be 5 in August and she was going to hold them back. She sent them to 3 yo preschool this year, so now they'll miss 4 yo preschool and go right to K.

[sidmand]

I wasn't able to view the program, and I've only read the latter responses on this thread. I do have a question for all who decided NOT to hold back their DC. Did you ever feel at some point during the K year that your kid was just not doing well and were then faced with having them repeat K? I'm asking because our ped has rec'd this course of action for Arwyn. That if she is doing fine socially (as far as we've been told she is) to go ahead and start K on time, and if she struggles a lot academically during that year to have her repeat K. In his mind having doubts about cognition isn't a good enough reason to redshirt. Our cutoff is 9/30 and her bday is 5/25. So she's in plenty of time for the cutoff. But she still has so many speech distortions that she can't make any assessment on our own as to whether she is academically ready. Her IEP meeting is in 2 weeks, should be interesting.

I'd see if that's even an option with the IEP. Like someone posted before, I'm not sure what happens if a child repeats a grade with an IEP in place. I think they should address anything academically, particularly since you already have an IEP in place? I'm questioning that only because we have the opposite issues with DS. He's fine academically but the social issues (and OT) are what need to be mainly addressed by the IEP. But I believe there are things in place for extra assistance academically, or teaching things another way or pulling the child aside for reteaching.

[SnuggleBuggles]

Really, I think the schools have us coming and going on this one. Parents view this new decision as empowering; it now appears to be a rite of kindy passage for most parents of entirely typical children to struggle with this. Well, statistically the only people being empowered are the school administrators who now have higher test scores, more docile students, and can foist larger classrooms and more developmentally inappropriate practices on our children.

I can't believe the focus is on parent decision-making. The *schools* should be called to task for capitalizing on this situation for personal gain to the detriment of educational quality and equity . . .

:bighand: That was really interesting and helpful!

[maestramommy]

Although this technically is an option, i wouldn't consider it. I spoke to 2 adults who repeated Kindergarten and to this day, they said it was something that always bothered them. The Elem guidance counselor actually said they really don't hold kids back unless there's a big need, so she actually suggested that I do not consider this an option when deciding whether or not to send DD. Of course if i sent her and she was behind then it would become an option at that point.

What I did consider was doing K in a private school and then either repeating K at the public school or going straight to public school 1st grade.

Again, this is just my opinion - i know its only Kindergarten but i didn't want my DD seeing her class mates moving onto 1st grade while she stayed back in K.

Wow, didn't know it would bother Kers that much. Our ped's DD2 repeated K and he said it really didn't seem to affect her much, whereas if she has to repeat 1st grade that would've bothered her much more and there would've been more of a stigma. But I guess it really depends on the kid. And here is where I struggle the most, because even though Arwyn seems rather oblivious and mellow most of the time, she's had so much 4yo angst sometimes I wonder what she's really thinking and feeling. She's sensitive in some ways (terrified of life sized characters, sometimes certain songs spook her for unknown reasons), but in social situations she always seems like she's in her own world and does her own thing. So it didn't occur to me that repeating K might be a problem to her.

Thanks Debbie (Sidmand) for reminding about the point of the IEP. Actually I have no idea at this point if she will qualify for services for K. Her teacher hasn't indicated either way, though she says that Arwyn has made huge progress this year, which is true.

sste, your latest point was powerful. It's ironic but I wonder if K expectations were the same as they were when I was in K, how many parents would be struggling with this. Certainly we wouldn't.

[SnuggleBuggles]

sste, your latest point was powerful. It's ironic but I wonder if K expectations were the same as they were when I was in K, how many parents would be struggling with this. Certainly we wouldn't.

I wonder if k expectations have shifted as a result of redshirting? They had to adjust curriculum to accomodate the needs and abilities of kids that used to be in 1st grade? Chicken or the egg...

[crl]

Most Ks were half day when I went many years ago. Now most are full day. That's one simple change that makes a difference in meeting behavioral expectations.

(Just a side note, ds was receiving special education services and continued to receive them during his extra year of preschool. Federal law requires an appropriate placement. If K is not appropriate, I think a school forcing a child into K to continue to receive services may be in violation of federal special education laws.)

Catherine

[Kindra178]

I wasn't able to view the program, and I've only read the latter responses on this thread. I do have a question for all who decided NOT to hold back their DC. Did you ever feel at some point during the K year that your kid was just not doing well and were then faced with having them repeat K? I'm asking because our ped has rec'd this course of action for Arwyn. That if she is doing fine socially (as far as we've been told she is) to go ahead and start K on time, and if she struggles a lot academically during that year to have her repeat K. In his mind having doubts about cognition isn't a good enough reason to redshirt. Our cutoff is 9/30 and her bday is 5/25. So she's in plenty of time for the cutoff. But she still has so many speech distortions that she can't make any assessment on our own as to whether she is academically ready. Her IEP meeting is in 2 weeks, should be interesting.

We struggled with this decision last year at this time and decided to enroll ds1. Because he was in a Montessori program, it would have been really easy to keep him for the third year of primary and punt on the decision until next year or take advantage of free kindergarten.

Academically he is doing well. He's very mathy and is a beginning reader. Socially fine, too. He has friends/other kids to play with. Is he the King Bee? I don't think so, but he is in a multi age classroom, so really the second graders rule the roost.

He is quiet, shy and nervous/perfectionist. My dh is quiet, shy and nervous/perfectionist too (march bday, so old for the grade back in the day with a December 1 cutoff). What we are realizing is that old for the grade, young the grade or in between, he is who he is. Ds1 doesn't have the classic boy problems of not sitting still, etc (now my twins are another story on that). IF he did, or if the preschool teachers gave us any indication that he should be held, we would have held him. Frankly, I was hoping for that because I didn't want to make decision.

A shy kid may be older and more confident, but still could be shy. We are happy with our choice but we know it's too early to tell anything. Middle school is what I am more concerned about.

ETA:

I was pushed ahead because I missed the cutoff and repeated k. The reason I was held was because I cried every day. I clearly remember missing home. The decision was good one for me but I definitely found school easy in the early elem years.

[vludmilla]

I wonder if k expectations have shifted as a result of redshirting? They had to adjust curriculum to accomodate the needs and abilities of kids that used to be in 1st grade? Chicken or the egg...

Among researchers in this area, some have posited that the shift toward a more academic kindergarten was instigated by redshirting. I think it would be difficult to truly tease apart but I think it is a fair theory.

[secchick]

I wonder if k expectations have shifted as a result of redshirting? They had to adjust curriculum to accomodate the needs and abilities of kids that used to be in 1st grade? Chicken or the egg...

I think a lot of what changes K expectations is the emphasis on testing and NCLB. I would be lying if I said it wasn't a major consideration in our decision to go private, given that we line in an area that is popular largely because of the excellent public schools in the immediate area. We just got the testing notice for DD. She doesn't have to take the state tests, but the school is administering ITBS (which is the standardized testing I took as a a child) after spring break. All they said was to show up on time, feed your child breakfast, and bring a snack. The testing is to identify things that the teacher needs to address on a class and individual basis, and that kind of focus is easier when your K class only has 17 and a full time aide. Her private school also, I think, has realistic expectations and she has had absolutely no homework in K. It is a shame that schooling issues for such young children are so stressful, and that the focus can't just be on teaching kids to love learning. Her school has 3 K classes, but does separate out the redshirted or held back kids to a single class, though, in theory, all the classes end up at the same spot in terms of preparation for first grade.

[sewarsh]

Honestly, I was mad I had to deal/stress out about this. It shouldn't even be an option. Kids should go when they are supposed to go (unless redshirting helps a child with documented issues). Its ridiculous. I struggled most with wondering if my DD would be able to keep up with classmates over a year older than her in the same class. It still p*sses me off.

[ast96]

Honestly, I was mad I had to deal/stress out about this. It shouldn't even be an option. Kids should go when they are supposed to go (unless redshirting helps a child with documented issues). Its ridiculous. I struggled most with wondering if my DD would be able to keep up with classmates over a year older than her in the same class. It still p*sses me off.

I was bitter about this too when DS1 was going into K. It felt like I was screwed either way. It's not really fair to expect him to be in class with kids 12-18 months older than he is. I still feel that way, but he hasn't had issues, so I have tried not to let it bother me too much.

I worry about the little one. He's ready, I can't hold him back, but he is still LITTLE, especially compared to kids a full year older.

[crl]

I'm bitter that people assume I'm being unfair to their kids because I held my kid back. I'm bitter that people assume he is bored and a bully at school because I held him back. I try to assume positive intent from other parents, but when they have no idea what it is like to have a four year old who will not sit still long enough to write his first name without an aid assisting, well, it sucks. All around. And there are no easy choices in that situation.

Catherine

[scrooks]

I agree with those that are bitter- for both reasons. I hate having to make this decision and I hate the fact that people will think I am "cheating " the system if we hold her back (which is the current plan). I have been following this thread with stress all day. I don't care about sports nor do I care if my dd is queen bee or not...honestly .... I just want to give her the best opportunity I can. Right now, I dont think that is putting her in a class with kids over a year older than her. Am I possibly contributing to the issue - yes but to me my kid is more important.

[DebbieJ]

My youngest was born 20 days after the cut off and I wish I could send him to preschool early this year! He could totally handle it.

[edurnemk]

My youngest was born 20 days after the cut off and I wish I could send him to preschool early this year! He could totally handle it.

Same here, DS is 15 days past the cut-off and I seriously considered trying to have him put one year ahead because he seemed so ready. I was always the youngest in my class and had no issues (they made an exception for me since I was born after the cut-off date), in fact I think I would've been bored if I'd been held back a year, but that's just my particular case. So with that background I thought I wanted DS to be skipped ahead, but in the end decided not to. He's in Montessori now, so he gets to work and play with kids up to 2 years older than him, he's doing great. Our school (private) is very strict about cut-off dates but they will recommend holding back in particular cases. However if there are no real issues red-shirting is not allowed.

[sidmand]

[QUOTE=maestramommy;3448889
Thanks Debbie (Sidmand) for reminding about the point of the IEP. Actually I have no idea at this point if she will qualify for services for K. Her teacher hasn't indicated either way, though she says that Arwyn has made huge progress this year, which is true.[/QUOTE]

FWIW, I don't know if this is true of all districts but our preschool told us they would never recommend a child be removed from the IEP until AFTER K and then only if they tested out of it and that the parents would be well aware that that was happening. They said K is so different and such a transition from preschool that you never know what might happen and it's easier to maintain services that are already in place then to end an IEP and need to start one again. Again, not sure that is true of all districts but they told me that for both DS and DD.

[[email protected]]

Honestly, I was mad I had to deal/stress out about this. It shouldn't even be an option. Kids should go when they are supposed to go (unless redshirting helps a child with documented issues). Its ridiculous. I struggled most with wondering if my DD would be able to keep up with classmates over a year older than her in the same class. It still p*sses me off.

Same for me, but I was ticked that I had to be thinking about redshirting a boy born the Saturday before Thanksgiving. He has a cousin 4 months older who lives in another state who wasn't even eligible to enroll in kindy. In my mind, I didn't redshirt my son; the stupid state got the dates wrong (an error that is is in the process of fixing).

I have no doubt I made the right choice. DS is smart, but he's wiggly. He's exhausted from being "good" at the end of a half-day of kindy. However, he has stayed out of trouble and is thriving. Of the five kids with fall birthdays, four were turning 6 like DS. Waiting a year allowed us time to work on fine motor skills (like drawing figures and pre-writing).
and self-discipline. We noticed a big step in development right after DS turned 5. It would have been a nightmare dealing with kindergarten expectations the first three months of school when he just wasn't ready.

Before we'd moved north, we applied to a public Waldorf charter school that required students to turn 6 by June 1 before entering first grade. Kids who were eligible for kindy in CA but wouldn't meet the first grade requirement had a two year kindergarten class. Those were the only circumstances in which I was willing to send my son "on time."

BTW, I have yet to hear a person in real life question my decision when they hear his birth date.

[sntm]

Slightly OT, but DS's 3rd grade class just finished a book (with several weeks of discussion) that was about a boy who had to repeat the 3rd grade. Though the book seemed a little meh (and out of touch in some areas, I think it was a late 1980s book), it was interesting the subjects it brought up. DS talked a lot about how the boy must have felt, and how he was much more confident and less resentful at the end when he was able to get to the level that he needed to be.

Personally, I like that option so much better than redshirting. The stigma of repeating a year has gotten worse lately and was never great, but it seems so much more sensible than introducing the crazy variables (including known complications like have been discussed) when they may be unnecessary. It makes me wish that all schools had more fluid divisions, like Montessori schools do, where kids can float around, be in certain groups for certain subjects, move up in the middle of the year, move down if it is too challenging, rather than the rigidity of the current system.

Pipe dreams, I know. another reason I wish I could homeschool.

[sntm]

double post

[ast96]

When I say I am bitter, I am mostly not thinking about other parents. I am more bitter at the state of things that lead to these decisions... schools that prefer older kids to "age appropriate" kids, insufficient programs for kids who need help either advanced or to catch up, ridiculous Kindy standards, sports that allow this kind of discrepancy, etc. I understand why everyone I know made the decision. Only one I truly disagree with (the sports kid, and they tell everyone that is the reason why they held him back, so I'm not guessing).

[bisous]

It makes me wish that all schools had more fluid divisions, like Montessori schools do, where kids can float around, be in certain groups for certain subjects, move up in the middle of the year, move down if it is too challenging, rather than the rigidity of the current system.

Pipe dreams, I know. another reason I wish I could homeschool.

My mom is a 1st grade teacher for a school here in CA. The principal is considered making one big "primary school" instead of dividing between 1st, 2nd, 3rd, etc. I love this idea. If I hear anything else about it, I'll let you know.

The idea is out there but this was the first that I had heard of a public school implementing it!

[MissyAg94]

My DD's birthday is one week before the cut-off in our previous state of residence. We didn't send her to K when she turned five. We didn't agonize over it. We just decided not to send her. She's a typically functioning child. No developmental issues. We don't care about sports. We just made a decision and moved on. I haven't given it a second thought and honestly don't entertain criticism about our decision from other people. Our child, our decision.

[bisous]

I just want to send hugs to those who are struggling with a quirky kid. I totally get it.

[Multimama]

I just wanted to thank everyone for this interesting conversation. We're quite a ways away from this decision and I don't think we'll agonize over it, but reading these threads always helps me see the different sides and makes the options clearer for me. Plus it's a fascinating topic!

[KrisM]

What gets me is the how the age for red-shirting gets older and older. Our cut-off is Dec. 1. It is just about assumed that fall birthdays will be held back a year. So much so that now parents with kids born in the summer are starting to hold them back. I've been asked by numerous people if we'll hold DS2 back. He's a mid-July birthday, so 4.5 months before the cut-off date. No, we are not holding him back. I'm sure he'll be one of the youngest in the class.

I have a friend who held back her March child because he was immature. He turns 8 this month and is in 1st grade.

At what point does it stop? How large of an age-span will we create?

[AnnieW625]

See, I have a 5 year old (December baby) son who has autism. He's beginning to read, counts very high, early math, etc. But, socially, he's still very behind--he never initiates any social interaction. Ever. We're really reading up on red-shirting, but one of our fears of red shirting him is that others might look upon him as if he's more disabled than he really is and treat him poorly. And if they implement a policy that forces parents to send their child by x amount of time unless a documented learning disability, I'm sure that would make my fears come true. We're not looking to give our son an unfair advantage, we're just looking for him to have equal footing in a situation where he's already had to come from so far behind.

I have not read all of the responses, and I haven't seen the documentary, but my cousin sent her son who was diagnosed with autism and he has a September birthday the year he turned 5. They have a nanny who helps with extra stuff at home and that has really helped him a lot. They live in a very well off suburb just NE of downtown LA.

[maestramommy]

FWIW, I don't know if this is true of all districts but our preschool told us they would never recommend a child be removed from the IEP until AFTER K and then only if they tested out of it and that the parents would be well aware that that was happening. They said K is so different and such a transition from preschool that you never know what might happen and it's easier to maintain services that are already in place then to end an IEP and need to start one again. Again, not sure that is true of all districts but they told me that for both DS and DD.


Hmm! It's quite possible that the same is true in our district, because Arwyn's teacher is listed as the caseworker through next year, which always puzzled me. She explained what that meant, but not why so it's still not clear why this range of dates was put down. I mean, it's been like that since last year. I will keep that in mind.

[speo]

I also hate having to make this decision. I loved that for DS1, who has an April bday, there was just no consideration. At the time in CA, we had a Dec cutoff. DS2 is a middle of Oct bday. CA is moving the cutoff to Sep 1 and our district is doing a month a year to make it gradual. So my son is 2 weeks from a cutoff that then won't even be there next year. I do not need my son to be the oldest, but I don't want him to be the youngest by a lot. My son is 10th percentile. I do not want him to be the youngest and the shortest boy. He is extremely social and has a hard time sitting and not talking to other kids. He would be helped by waiting a year and gaining some more self control. Our district also has a fully funded Transitional K program, so that makes my decision easier.

I also know 5 different families who sent their fall boy on time, who then had to repeat K. Why would I want to do that when I can just wait another year? Ultimately the cutoff is arbitrary. Why would my redshirted/close to cutoff son be so bored and cause problems, when someone born a month after the cutoff would not? They are born only 6 weeks apart?

I would actually be happier (as others have argued) if there was a defined maximum. I hate that I have to make my decision relative to what I think everyone else is doing. Most of the upper middle/middle class people around here redshirt. And the lower income people do not. In CA, they changed the cutoff but didn't add a maximum. One of the reasons for changing the cutoff was to prevent redshirting. But all they have effectively done is changed when everyone will redshirt. It is crazy.

[crl]

I just want to send hugs to those who are struggling with a quirky kid. I totally get it.

Thank you.

Catherine

[OKKiddo]

I'm not sure I understand - are you worried that if you start him on time he'll struggle? Or of you start him later it will be harder for him?

I'm not in favor of any law or policy that dictates when kids with special needs should or should not start school. That is a decision that should be made by their parents and the professionals they work with. And I do think that there should be some "wiggle room" for kids who's birthdays fall within 90 or 120 days of the cut-off. It's the redshirting of kids who meet the cut-off by several months and have no documented delays or issues of any kind that make me twitchy. I am not in favor of redshirting an otherwise eligible kid simply for "an edge."

I do worry that if we start him on time that he'll struggle emotionally and socially. He still never initiates any social interaction. Ever. Emotionally he's extremely sensitive and I don't want him to be teased. My fear of starting him later is that he'll never outgrow his diagnosis and end up being the kid with the special needs label (and the teasing that could go with it) for rest of his school years. All around I know that we face possible bullying and definite teasing issues and I want to do what will be best for him but these are tricky choices that don't have a clear cut answer on the other side.

[OKKiddo]

But, will the extra time really change who he is and how he interacts with the world? My ds1 has some quirks and an ADD dx (they though Aspergers could be a possibility briefly) and we sent him on time (summer boy). It took me a while to appreciate that no matter what we had done, we wouldn't have changed who he was or how he interacted with the world. Academically he is right on- and above. Socially, he has found his groove and friends. I just always think if I had held him back in hopes that more things would fall into place and they hadn't, I'd be frustrated. But, as I have said in previous redshirting threads, I am not 100% sure I did the right thing but I challenge any mom to say they did if they sit back and think about all pros and cons- maybe not today but when they graduate from highschool and see the whole picture. :)

My son is quiet, shy, and doesn't have a lot of confidence and then add in his autism and you can see why I'm uncomfortable with just tossing him in to see if he sinks or swims. My job as his mom is to protect him and get him as prepared as I can. I still have time to decide and in that time I will be watching and weighing our options.

[OKKiddo]

But, will the extra time really change who he is and how he interacts with the world? My ds1 has some quirks and an ADD dx (they though Aspergers could be a possibility briefly) and we sent him on time (summer boy). It took me a while to appreciate that no matter what we had done, we wouldn't have changed who he was or how he interacted with the world. Academically he is right on- and above. Socially, he has found his groove and friends. I just always think if I had held him back in hopes that more things would fall into place and they hadn't, I'd be frustrated. But, as I have said in previous redshirting threads, I am not 100% sure I did the right thing but I challenge any mom to say they did if they sit back and think about all pros and cons- maybe not today but when they graduate from highschool and see the whole picture. :)


My son is 6 now but we were in a similar boat. We have a 9/1 cutoff and his birthday is June. I debated so much. My aunt told me, when in doubt, keep them out.

DS was diagnosed with PDD--it's probably more likely Aspergers. He's very smart and I wasn't concerned about the academic piece but was very concerned about how he'd do socially. He doesn't always "get" it, cried easily, still sucks his thumb...I was concerned about how his services mIght be affected though. And, as someone pointed out, who is to say he wouldn't still be so sensitive and cry so easily in a year?

Both DH and I started K when we were four. We were both fine academically (and tall!) but socially...I can't say that another year would have changed that though.

We ended up sending DS on time. He's one of the tallest boys in his class (and one of the youngest) and he's totally on target academically. Socially is still an issue but we're working on it. His teachers say they can't imagine DS not in the "right" grade so I think we made the right choice but who knows? I've head more people say they regret NOT holding them back but you've got to decide if another year is REALLY going to make any difference. We decided it really wouldn't. And at his IEP meeting they said he's met all the OT goals they had (he long ago met speech and social goals). So he's almost there. I hope!

My son has really grown a lot this past year and no longer requires anything but speech and ABA. There's no need for a para in his classroom for him because he is very good with schedules and following directions. He still has a tendency to go into his own world and not notice things around him but for the most part the teacher only has to call his name or touch his shoulder to call him back. Again, it all comes back to the social and emotional issues with him. I don't want to rush him if he's not ready and cause a serious lack in confidence and self esteem. But I don't want to delay him and cause the same issues later when he realizes that he's much older than others in his class (if I hold him out that last year he'll turn 7 in the December after he starts Kindergarten).

I was a December baby in school and started the August after I turned 5-so I turned 6 before I finished Kindergarten. I was very social, not too emotional (I am a girl, lol), and was already reading. I was always in the advanced classes/groups in school and I think that really helped boost my confidence--a good thing since I wasn't one of the popular kids in school (we lived in VERY small towns so this wasn't really an issue with me but with other parents and me never being allowed over because of the small town social elite and my working poor parents).

Back to my son...we'll be moving to Japan this summer and if he starts school on time, it will be Kindergarten in a DOD School in Japan. I'm terrified of making the wrong decision for him! But, all we can do right now is watch and weigh carefully our options. We'll know when we know....

[OKKiddo]

I'm bitter that people assume I'm being unfair to their kids because I held my kid back. I'm bitter that people assume he is bored and a bully at school because I held him back. I try to assume positive intent from other parents, but when they have no idea what it is like to have a four year old who will not sit still long enough to write his first name without an aid assisting, well, it sucks. All around. And there are no easy choices in that situation.

Catherine

I have this issue with my 3.5 year old...only he can't sit still long enough to COUNT or even stay engaged and focused long enough to sing the ABC's! He's a June baby with the same diagnosis as my older son (although we're all certain he's misdiagnosed and only has speech delays due to his chronic ear infections and possibly some ADHD issues). Still, even his special ed Pre-3 teacher says to us that she feels holding him back an extra year will be extremely beneficial for him. We have plenty of time to decide for him on that one, but unless he has some MAJOR improvements in the next year I won't be sweating that decision for him. Nope. That's a much easier one.

[crl]

My son has really grown a lot this past year and no longer requires anything but speech and ABA. There's no need for a para in his classroom for him because he is very good with schedules and following directions. He still has a tendency to go into his own world and not notice things around him but for the most part the teacher only has to call his name or touch his shoulder to call him back. Again, it all comes back to the social and emotional issues with him. I don't want to rush him if he's not ready and cause a serious lack in confidence and self esteem. But I don't want to delay him and cause the same issues later when he realizes that he's much older than others in his class (if I hold him out that last year he'll turn 7 in the December after he fcnstarts Kindergarten).


...

I completely understand. Ds made huge progress in his extra year of preschool. He went from not being able to sit still long enough to write his name without an aid to keep him on task to being able to follow the teacher's directions so well that he helped some of the younger kids when they weren't listening (his teacher told me it was great that he would quietly repeat her instructions to the kids who hadn't been listening so they wouldn't get in trouble).

I can't say how it will play out in the long run, but I can say with certainty that ds has gone from struggling socially to being somewhat "popular." I don't think the extra year changed him or fixed all his issues, but I do think it allowed him to mature enough to make it in a classroom environment without an aid and I do thnk that made an enormous difference to how the other children perceive him.

Best of luck with your choices!

Catherine

[janine]

What gets me is the how the age for red-shirting gets older and older. Our cut-off is Dec. 1. It is just about assumed that fall birthdays will be held back a year. So much so that now parents with kids born in the summer are starting to hold them back. I've been asked by numerous people if we'll hold DS2 back. He's a mid-July birthday, so 4.5 months before the cut-off date. No, we are not holding him back. I'm sure he'll be one of the youngest in the class.

I have a friend who held back her March child because he was immature. He turns 8 this month and is in 1st grade.

At what point does it stop? How large of an age-span will we create?

This is my issue too. My daughter is a full year younger based on birthdate alone. With redshirting in the numbers we are seeing, it'll now be 2 years. How is that ok? I would have to consider holding her back just to be among peers so as not to impact her confidence level,etc. When does it stop is right. We are already woefully behind in educating our youth compared to other Western nations, now we'll have an aging grade school population to boot? I usually support empowering the indivudual but seems to be spiriling and impacting things in the big picture, and I hope there will be some standardization implemented. Cut offss for age both way - can't be too young and can't be too old. Special cases should be treated on an individual basis and documented.

Does anyone know if this occurs at private schools as well?

[MelissaTC]

Cuurently in M's class, the age range is 9.5 to almost 12!! This is 4th grade. Of course my cartoon loving, matchbox car playing, I could care less what I am wearing 9 year old seems like a baby. There are boys a smidge shorter than me that act like they are teenagers, chatting on their cell phones after school. It is just frustrating. Our situation is different because our school only has two classes per grade for the lower grades so things are more obvious.

M is a June birthday. When he went to K, the cut-off date was Oct. 16. He is very sensitive and emotional. Time has not changed that a whole lot. He had a tough year last year when he was bullied but this year, has come into his own. Academically, he is one of the kids at the top of his class. He is an A student and at times, very bored at school. I can't imagine if we had held him back a year. This kid begs for crazy math problems and loves to tackle anything really "hard" as he puts it.

It bothers him that some of the kids at school think he and his friends are "babies" because they engage in typical 9 and 10 year old behaviors and interests, like sports, video games, Legos, cars, cartoons, etc... I don't know what the answer is but in our situation, it has created a very funky, strange dynamic.

[crl]

Does anyone know if this occurs at private schools as well?

Many private schools insist, either officially or unoffically, on red shirting summer boys. Either they set their cut off later for all kids, or they only admit boys who have been held back, or implement similar policies. I am sure this varies widely from school to school, depending on philosophy, etc.

Catherine

[justlearning]

This whole redshirting issue becomes more complicated due to states/school districts/schools having different cutoff dates. Whereas some states have a cutoff of Dec 1, my son's school has a cutoff date of June 1. Their reasoning is that they're an academically rigorous school and they find that students do better when they enter K a little older.

But what's happened at that school is that parents are redshirting even with the earlier cutoff date to avoid having their child be the youngest. So my son, whose birthday is mid-May, has always been the youngest. Some kids with April and May birthdays were held back so that they wouldn't be the youngest. I'm pretty sure those parents would have never held their kids back a year if the school's cutoff date was Oct, Nov. or Dec. But considering that it's June, they feel that the birthdays are too close to the cutoff date.

I think redshirting makes more sense when it's an issue of a parent deciding that the child isn't mature (in whatever area) enough to start K that year or to be long-term with that group of peers. But it becomes more problematic when it becomes an issue of just not wanting your child to be the youngest.

[ast96]

Many private schools insist, either officially or unoffically, on red shirting summer boys. Either they set their cut off later for all kids, or they only admit boys who have been held back, or implement similar policies. I am sure this varies widely from school to school, depending on philosophy, etc.

Catherine

It does happen in both private and public (we have been in both). Our private does not insist on redshirting or have any policies that lead to it, but because they promote so much about how "advanced" they are (they aren't really that advanced), parents tend to redshirt to make sure their summer birthdays can handle the work.

Ironically, I am thinking about sending my August 8 boy there for Kindy so he can have an extra year at a smaller school with more parties and playground time than he would get in public school, then transferring him to first grade at public school the following year. They know this and are fine with it.

[SnuggleBuggles]

Many private schools insist, either officially or unoffically, on red shirting summer boys. Either they set their cut off later for all kids, or they only admit boys who have been held back, or implement similar policies. I am sure this varies widely from school to school, depending on philosophy, etc.


:yeahthat: The private school we originally chose red shirted. Before we got too far in the application process, I asked them point blank what they do with summer boys. She told me that they don't red shirt. Well, he was not offered a spot in k but pre-k. When asked why, she said that he would be too young for k that year. When I questioned her earlier info re. redshirting, she said there was nothing she could do about it. She said that it all came down to who was applying that year and so many parents had redshirted that kids were all 6 going on 7...just by chance, she said. I don't really believe her. I think there is an unofficial policy at private schools to have older kids. Older kids= better test scores. Private schools have parents that can afford the option of paying for childcare an extra year. So, I think it is the whole ball of wax at private schools- a culture to delay entry from both the parents and administration. That has just been my experience now with 2 private schools. (Ds2 just got held back because he was "too young" for the next program at his school despite making the cut off.)

[janine]

:yeahthat: The private school we originally chose red shirted. Before we got too far in the application process, I asked them point blank what they do with summer boys. She told me that they don't red shirt. Well, he was not offered a spot in k but pre-k. When asked why, she said that he would be too young for k that year. When I questioned her earlier info re. redshirting, she said there was nothing she could do about it. She said that it all came down to who was applying that year and so many parents had redshirted that kids were all 6 going on 7...just by chance, she said. I don't really believe her. I think there is an unofficial policy at private schools to have older kids. Older kids= better test scores. Private schools have parents that can afford the option of paying for childcare an extra year. So, I think it is the whole ball of wax at private schools- a culture to delay entry from both the parents and administration. That has just been my experience now with 2 private schools. (Ds2 just got held back because he was "too young" for the next program at his school despite making the cut off.)

Why would a private school be motivated by test scores? They are privately funded - I can see that they would want certain stats to be able to recruit better students, but I don't think they are as driven by tests as they are by reputation - and if they have a bunch of old kids in young classes I think that would be a negative. Just speaking logically here - no experience yet except for my own schooling in which there was no redshirting and rather, plenty of young advanced kids. Of course this was years ago.....
In your case could it be due to a year of high volume of applications, but interesting to hear. Sounds like this school by school basis, but I know I would rule out a private school that redshirted summer kids routinely.

[AnnieW625]

Why would a private school be motivated by test scores? They are privately funded - I can see that they would want certain stats to be able to recruit better students, but I don't think they are as driven by tests as they are by reputation - and if they have a bunch of old kids in young classes I think that would be a negative. Just speaking logically here - no experience yet except for my own schooling in which there was no redshirting and rather, plenty of young advanced kids. Of course this was years ago.....
In your case could it be due to a year of high volume of applications, but interesting to hear. Sounds like this school by school basis, but I know I would rule out a private school that redshirted summer kids routinely.

DD1's school does the Iowa Test of Basic Skills test. Her school is WASC accredited so maybe they require it.

I know at my cousin's private high school test scores end up mattering because they want the kids to do well on SAT tests and such because they can then get into more colleges which then makes the school look better for recruitment purposes.

[crl]

DD1's school does the Iowa Test of Basic Skills test. Her school is WASC accredited so maybe they require it.

I know at my cousin's private high school test scores end up mattering because they want the kids to do well on SAT tests and such because they can then get into more colleges which then makes the school look better for recruitment purposes.

Yes, many private schools make a fairly big deal out of where their graduates go next. So do the grade school kids end up at the elite high schools. Do the elite high schools' graduates end up at Ivy League colleges. This is a major motivator for many people in choosing private school to begin with and then in making their choice from amongst private schools.

Catherine

[SnuggleBuggles]

Why would a private school be motivated by test scores? They are privately funded - I can see that they would want certain stats to be able to recruit better students, but I don't think they are as driven by tests as they are by reputation - and if they have a bunch of old kids in young classes I think that would be a negative. Just speaking logically here - no experience yet except for my own schooling in which there was no redshirting and rather, plenty of young advanced kids. Of course this was years ago.....
In your case could it be due to a year of high volume of applications, but interesting to hear. Sounds like this school by school basis, but I know I would rule out a private school that redshirted summer kids routinely.

I think that if parents are choosing a school and rely on researching on places like Great Schools, test scores will factor into their decision. Older kids taking the tests may translate to more impressive scores.

[momof2girls]

What gets me is the how the age for red-shirting gets older and older. Our cut-off is Dec. 1. It is just about assumed that fall birthdays will be held back a year. So much so that now parents with kids born in the summer are starting to hold them back. I've been asked by numerous people if we'll hold DS2 back. He's a mid-July birthday, so 4.5 months before the cut-off date. No, we are not holding him back. I'm sure he'll be one of the youngest in the class.

I have a friend who held back her March child because he was immature. He turns 8 this month and is in 1st grade.

At what point does it stop? How large of an age-span will we create?

I'm seeing a lot of that too. There has to be a cutoff somewhere. DD is a June bday (4 months before the cutoff) and people asked if I was going to hold her back. It never even occurred to me! She is the youngest in her class b/c everyone else held back! Someone has to be the youngest. It seems it has turned into an automatic option for many regardless of the DCs age these days. At this point I acutally know some kids who will be 19 when they graduate high school.

[MelissaTC]

Our school does ITBS as well. They take it in the beginning of the school year so M took his 4th grade test in September of 4th grade rather than as an end of year test. The school loves to brag that all the kids test at or above grade level. They also use it as an identifier for the Duke TIP program.

At our school, most of the students- 90%- go to one of the local Catholic high schools or a national high ranking charter school (admission is pure lottery). Everyone else does public. Alumni news is shared and there are many former students at UNC-Chapel Hill, NC State, Notre Dame, Haverford, etc.. They are going on to pretty good colleges for the most part. The school likes to say that they laid a good foundation for the future. I believe they do, academically, and that is why I keep M there. Plus, I love that he has art and band every week. A well rounded education is very important to me and my local ps can not give him that when they are taking tests for tests to plan for tests every week. I wish I was exaggerating.

[niccig]

I'm not sure if DS's private school red-shirted. There were 2 boys with October, November boys that were held back. And one boy with a July birthday. Everyone thinks the July birthday boy was ridiculous to hold back. He's 15 months older than some of the other kids, and towered over everyone else. Socially, he was doing things that the rest of the kids didn't want to play, so it didn't help out on the playground. Now, they're in grade 1 and he's in a 1/2 split class, and he's older than some grade 2 kids. It's definitely a weird dynamic.

DS has a late Dec birthday and our cutoff was Dec 1. Holding him back would have been silly, as he would have been nearly 2 years older than other kids. And that extra year would not have helped him be the bigger boy at all. We would have had to hold him back 3+ years for that. Being the smallest has not been an issue at all.

[sste]

I will say that I find it disturbing that so many parents considering red-shirting a child *without special needs, developmental delays, or real developmental differences* have the view, "It is too bad X or Y is at the expense of other kids . . . but I have to do what is best for my kid" And that is uncritically accepted here.

I actually don't think red-shirting a typical child works out to be an advantage. But to the extent that OTHERS believe it does and they are doing it for that purpose, that does bother me.

I don't see things that way and I won't teach my kids to see things that way. We have obligations to others. And if that means that my child is challenged for a few years because he is "younger," he has to learn the lifelong skill of not coming in first, or we need to address any social or academic issues head-on . . . I see those as positives. I see it as positive that I am modeling for my kids fairness and community and independence of thought and action. I am all for strategy when it comes to things like exploiting information or one's analytical skills or research as an adult or young adult . . . but not attempting to game the system with a bunch of four and five year olds! I know you all are probably thinking "poor sucker" . . . but my husband and I have always tried to approach things this way and it has not hurt us (to the contrary I suspect) in terms of our life satisfaction, professional attainment, academic credentials, and even monetary income.

[o_mom]

I will say that I find it disturbing that so many parents considering red-shirting a child *without special needs, developmental delays, or real developmental differences* have the view, "It is too bad X or Y is at the expense of other kids . . . but I have to do what is best for my kid" And that is uncritically accepted here.

I actually don't think red-shirting a typical child works out to be an advantage. But to the extent that OTHERS believe it does and they are doing it for that purpose, that does bother me.

I don't see things that way and I won't teach my kids to see things that way. We have obligations to others. And if that means that my child is challenged for a few years because he is "younger," he has to learn the lifelong skill of not coming in first, or we need to address any social or academic issues head-on . . . I see those as positives. I see it as positive that I am modeling for my kids fairness and community and independence of thought and action. I am all for strategy when it comes to things like exploiting information or one's analytical skills or research as an adult or young adult . . . but not attempting to game the system with a bunch of four and five year olds! I know you all are probably thinking "poor sucker" . . . but my husband and I have always tried to approach things this way and it has not hurt us (to the contrary I suspect) in terms of our life satisfaction, professional attainment, academic credentials, and even monetary income.

Well said.

[wellyes]

Why is it called redshirting? The only thing I can think is star trek but that can't be it.

[secchick]

I will say that I find it disturbing that so many parents considering red-shirting a child *without special needs, developmental delays, or real developmental differences* have the view, "It is too bad X or Y is at the expense of other kids . . . but I have to do what is best for my kid" And that is uncritically accepted here.

I actually don't think red-shirting a typical child works out to be an advantage. But to the extent that OTHERS believe it does and they are doing it for that purpose, that does bother me.

I don't see things that way and I won't teach my kids to see things that way. We have obligations to others. And if that means that my child is challenged for a few years because he is "younger," he has to learn the lifelong skill of not coming in first, or we need to address any social or academic issues head-on . . . I see those as positives. I see it as positive that I am modeling for my kids fairness and community and independence of thought and action. I am all for strategy when it comes to things like exploiting information or one's analytical skills or research as an adult or young adult . . . but not attempting to game the system with a bunch of four and five year olds! I know you all are probably thinking "poor sucker" . . . but my husband and I have always tried to approach things this way and it has not hurt us (to the contrary I suspect) in terms of our life satisfaction, professional attainment, academic credentials, and even monetary income.

I could not agree more.

[justlearning]

Why is it called redshirting? The only thing I can think is star trek but that can't be it.

It's from sports--here's an explanation: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Redshirt_(college_sports)

According to Webster's Third New International Dictionary, Unabridged, the term redshirt comes from the red jersey commonly worn by such a player in practice scrimmages against the regulars.

So with kids, it's considered sitting your kid out a year when they would be technically eligible to participate but you don't want them to start yet.

[janine]

I will say that I find it disturbing that so many parents considering red-shirting a child *without special needs, developmental delays, or real developmental differences* have the view, "It is too bad X or Y is at the expense of other kids . . . but I have to do what is best for my kid" And that is uncritically accepted here.I actually don't think red-shirting a typical child works out to be an advantage. But to the extent that OTHERS believe it does and they are doing it for that purpose, that does bother me.

I don't see things that way and I won't teach my kids to see things that way. We have obligations to others. And if that means that my child is challenged for a few years because he is "younger," he has to learn the lifelong skill of not coming in first, or we need to address any social or academic issues head-on . . . I see those as positives. I see it as positive that I am modeling for my kids fairness and community and independence of thought and action. I am all for strategy when it comes to things like exploiting information or one's analytical skills or research as an adult or young adult . . . but not attempting to game the system with a bunch of four and five year olds! I know you all are probably thinking "poor sucker" . . . but my husband and I have always tried to approach things this way and it has not hurt us (to the contrary I suspect) in terms of our life satisfaction, professional attainment, academic credentials, and even monetary income.

don't think it's uncritically accepted here at all. That's my whole issue...the fact that I even have to consider redshirting is solely due to the fact that so many others are doing it without justified reasons to the point they are impacting the whole - and raising average age. I am unlikely to hold back though..my DD is ready, just irritates me that she will be among kids years older.

Our school district cut off is sept 30. Private School is sept 1. My DD falls right in between..

[maestramommy]

.

I don't see things that way and I won't teach my kids to see things that way. We have obligations to others. And if that means that my child is challenged for a few years because he is "younger," he has to learn the lifelong skill of not coming in first, or we need to address any social or academic issues head-on . . . I see those as positives. I see it as positive that I am modeling for my kids fairness and community and independence of thought and action. I am all for strategy when it comes to things like exploiting information or one's analytical skills or research as an adult or young adult . . . but not attempting to game the system with a bunch of four and five year olds! I know you all are probably thinking "poor sucker" . . . but my husband and I have always tried to approach things this way and it has not hurt us (to the contrary I suspect) in terms of our life satisfaction, professional attainment, academic credentials, and even monetary income.

That's very well said. I can't find any reason to disagree with you, and Dh would be nodding his head emphatically as well. So would our parents :p

What I find sad is that when I read these boards it feels like the parents who struggle with it the most are the ones whose kids DO have special needs, developmental issues, on an IEP, etc. Not the ones that just don't want their kids to struggle against older classmates. And again I wonder if fewer of us would struggle if demands for K were more like what they used to be. One of the pp remarked that moving K to full day program already puts demands on kids that they may not be ready for developmentally. Our district is caught up in the demands of NCLB, while still sticking to less than a 3 hour day. I have to wonder how many kids would be on an IEP or 504 if were enrolled in a K that has reasonable demands.

[csnoop]

I haven't had a chance to read all the comments. But when I saw the show, I thought of everyone here and the other threads on this issue.

I do think the show did raised an issue for me that others here may have talked about but is not discussed as much in depth. INEQUITY!!! I don't think anyone who is either an immigrant, low-income, low socio-econ status would even know what red-shirting is (not just the term but understand what the concept is). They would be too happy to save the $$ involved for childcare. You just send your kids to school when they are of the right age. No questions asked. The increase use to red-shirting in our communities will just contribute more to the inequity in our education systems. This will be just one of many other factors. This just saddens me.

This being said, both my kids (boy and girl) have July birthdays. Our district used to have a 12/1 cutoff. They are slowly moving back the cutoff to 9/1 over the course a few years. I think this coming year will be a 11/1 cutoff. I am not exactly sure. I don't hesitate on bit about sending my kids to kindergarten when they turn 5. School also starts in Aug.

On the flip side, there is a boy in my friend's classroom. She is a 2nd grade teacher. This kid has been a nightmare for her in her 9+ years of teacher. He has major behavioral issues. He pretty picks on everyone who is even remotely smaller than him. He also has issues at home (as they always do). As part of his behavorial plan, they are sticking him in the 3rd grade class after lunch everyday so that my friend can actually teach her class.

CC

[daisysmom]

Our schools have a Sept 30 cut off. We were testing for 2 private kindergartens near by and my daughter has a March birthday. She tested really well, extremely high on the WPSI-III. I think she is just as mature as she should be at this age. Note that she didn't sit still for many years either, or know her abc's or numbers for times either - but I see her with other girls her age and they are all in the same boat, ALL being immature, all having tantrums, all acting like teenagers sometimes, etc.

So she got into both schools, and we chose the co-ed one. I didn't ask about red-shirting because I figured it didn't pertain to us at all (6 months from the cut off date).

Now I find out that she is going to be one of the youngest in her class. With a March birthday? I was shocked. I have since learned that spring and summer birthdays are typically "red shirted".

We would never have held her back b/c she is already bored in pre-K, she really loves school and loves being challenged. She isn't reading at all, but she just likes learning and experimenting and interacting -- and I think that school (instead of home) provides a great basis for this at this age. So I have no hesitation to send her, but I do wish that I could understand the logic behind redshirting other March-June birthdays when there is no underlying developmental delay. Immaturity? I think all of them are immature-- that's part of being 5. Heck, I am immature at 43 and I like it that way.

[csnoop]

Oops duplicate post

[janine]

Our schools have a Sept 30 cut off. We were testing for 2 private kindergartens near by and my daughter has a March birthday. She tested really well, extremely high on the WPSI-III. I think she is just as mature as she should be at this age. Note that she didn't sit still for many years either, or know her abc's or numbers for times either - but I see her with other girls her age and they are all in the same boat, ALL being immature, all having tantrums, all acting like teenagers sometimes, etc.

So she got into both schools, and we chose the co-ed one. I didn't ask about red-shirting because I figured it didn't pertain to us at all (6 months from the cut off date).

Now I find out that she is going to be one of the youngest in her class. With a March birthday? I was shocked. I have since learned that spring and summer birthdays are typically "red shirted".

We would never have held her back b/c she is already bored in pre-K, she really loves school and loves being challenged. She isn't reading at all, but she just likes learning and experimenting and interacting -- and I think that school (instead of home) provides a great basis for this at this age. So I have no hesitation to send her, but I do wish that I could understand the logic behind redshirting other March-June birthdays when there is no underlying developmental delay. Immaturity? I think all of them are immature-- that's part of being 5. Heck, I am immature at 43 and I like it that way.

:bighand:

[niccig]

I will say that I find it disturbing that so many parents considering red-shirting a child *without special needs, developmental delays, or real developmental differences* have the view, "It is too bad X or Y is at the expense of other kids . . . but I have to do what is best for my kid" And that is uncritically accepted here.

I actually don't think red-shirting a typical child works out to be an advantage. But to the extent that OTHERS believe it does and they are doing it for that purpose, that does bother me.

I don't see things that way and I won't teach my kids to see things that way. We have obligations to others. And if that means that my child is challenged for a few years because he is "younger," he has to learn the lifelong skill of not coming in first, or we need to address any social or academic issues head-on . . . I see those as positives. I see it as positive that I am modeling for my kids fairness and community and independence of thought and action. I am all for strategy when it comes to things like exploiting information or one's analytical skills or research as an adult or young adult . . . but not attempting to game the system with a bunch of four and five year olds! I know you all are probably thinking "poor sucker" . . . but my husband and I have always tried to approach things this way and it has not hurt us (to the contrary I suspect) in terms of our life satisfaction, professional attainment, academic credentials, and even monetary income.

I can see it that because many people redshirt, then everyone feels they have to redshirt. It spirals out of control. I do think the increasing requirements expected in K are contributing to this. It's not developmentally appropriate for many kids to sit at tables for so long, and many of those kids are boys. I think something is majorly wrong with the system when a grade 1 by age boy can cope with K requirements.

For me, it's not such an issue because of where DS's birthday falls. He's late December with a Dec 1 cut-off, so while not the eldest because of the redshirters, he's not that much younger than them. If he was a November birthday that went to school on time, I would feel different as the redshirter with a July birthday would have been 16 months older than DS. That's a huge gap.

[momof2girls]

Speaking as someone who was always the youngest in my class (Feb bday with a Dec cut-off, went to private school who "snuck" me in) throughout my academic yrs, it was fine. Yes I was smaller for a while and yes I was a little slower to notice boys, but I was fine. On the flip side I would ahve hated bring the oldest. I liked graduating younger from HS and college.

[smilequeen]

I will say that I find it disturbing that so many parents considering red-shirting a child *without special needs, developmental delays, or real developmental differences* have the view, "It is too bad X or Y is at the expense of other kids . . . but I have to do what is best for my kid" And that is uncritically accepted here.

I actually don't think red-shirting a typical child works out to be an advantage. But to the extent that OTHERS believe it does and they are doing it for that purpose, that does bother me.

I don't see things that way and I won't teach my kids to see things that way. We have obligations to others. And if that means that my child is challenged for a few years because he is "younger," he has to learn the lifelong skill of not coming in first, or we need to address any social or academic issues head-on . . . I see those as positives. I see it as positive that I am modeling for my kids fairness and community and independence of thought and action. I am all for strategy when it comes to things like exploiting information or one's analytical skills or research as an adult or young adult . . . but not attempting to game the system with a bunch of four and five year olds! I know you all are probably thinking "poor sucker" . . . but my husband and I have always tried to approach things this way and it has not hurt us (to the contrary I suspect) in terms of our life satisfaction, professional attainment, academic credentials, and even monetary income.

I agree with you, so much. I don't get why saying "it's my kid and I don't care how it affects other kids" is such an accepted thing. When it comes to public school, rampant redshirting is changing the education process as a whole. It's making K harder, more for first graders really, less developmentally appropriate.

I tend to think redshirting is a part of a culture that wants to prevent kids from struggling AT ALL and that's, in the long run, detrimental to all of our children.

Now, my son turns 5 in July, and this is TORTURE. He actually does have a developmental delay that we are currently investigating. He's signed up to be in K next year (which, he's in Montessori, but K means 5 full days and greater academic expectations than preschool does...if we do hold back he will go part time). If his delay turns out to be more complicated than we thought, we may hold back, but that is the only reason that we would. He is otherwise a totally normal child of his age. His maturity is mostly on par with a 4.5-5 year old boy, sometimes much greater (he can concentrate for an insane amount of time if he wants to) and sometimes a little less (he reminds me of ME actually). Academically, he is ahead of a public school kinder but average for a Montessori kid. He certainly wouldn't be the most mature or most advanced kid in K, and he might struggle. But I've been with his teachers for a while now (2 kids), they are loving, supportive, and awesome. He has US. He has his SLP who is amazing. The kid has more support than most kids could ever dream of. So he struggles a little, with a ton of support...how exactly would that hurt him in the long run? I don't think it would. I think he'd be better for it in the end.

Around here it's the June and July kids that get held back. June is iffy. So even on time, he'll have kids 13, 14 months older than him, but there will be kids only 2, 3, 4 months older too. And I don't think 2, 3, 4, even 6 months is a huge difference, even at this age.

But again, if his language delay is more significant and the amount of therapy he needs would turn out to be a detriment to his classroom time, I may feel differently. And his school is quite fine with us making our decision in August if we need to.

FWIW, I was the youngest in my class (the tallest girl though) and the smartest. Was I socially awkward? A little. Part of it was boredom. Do I wish I had been held back? HELL NO. I wish I had had more support, better teachers, adults who knew how to protect me from the mean girls. But not an extra year. Hell no. I was so glad to be done with school when I was done. I was a dentist at 25 years old. I was proud of that. I strive to give my kids the support I needed back then (bless my parents, but they didn't know and didn't have the resources that I have).

[arivecchi]

I will say that I find it disturbing that so many parents considering red-shirting a child *without special needs, developmental delays, or real developmental differences* have the view, "It is too bad X or Y is at the expense of other kids . . . but I have to do what is best for my kid" And that is uncritically accepted here. But if you extend that logic, parents with more resources should not send their kids to private schools, or sign up their kids for fancy summer camps or art or music classes, or take them on enriching trips to foreign countries. All those things put that child at a significant advantage as well. Do we frown upon that? Why is redshirting any different? You are also using your resources to give your child some sort of perceived advantage.




I do think the show did raised an issue for me that others here may have talked about but is not discussed as much in depth. INEQUITY!!! I don't think anyone who is either an immigrant, low-income, low socio-econ status would even know what red-shirting is (not just the term but understand what the concept is). They would be too happy to save the $$ involved for childcare. You just send your kids to school when they are of the right age. No questions asked. The increase use to red-shirting in our communities will just contribute more to the inequity in our education systems. This will be just one of many other factors. This just saddens me. While I understand this argument, redshirting is the least of our problems when it comes to inequity. That would start with schools not being funded by local real estate taxes.

All in favor of having kids from other areas come to better funded schools in our districts?

My guess is most parents would not be ok with that and that is a much bigger driver of inequity in US schools.

[sste]

I don't think the fact that the world is not a perfect or fair place is a justification for not trying to make it a fairer one where you can. If that was the case, there would never be a persuasive rationale for fairness or altruism.

I am probably not your target audience. I am districted for one of the more socio-economically diverse schools in the country and for the upper SES families in our area one of the reasons for staying in this district (with some hand-wringing!) is that it has proven very beneficial for lower-income and particularly african-american children. I won't deny my kids lessons or camp but I have paid for entire semesters worth of lessons on an anonymous donor basis for other children, at least twice in the past few years.

I think there are different ways to define advantage - - I feel like I am giving my kids an advantage through all of the above and hopefully giving other children some advantages too.

[arivecchi]

I don't think the fact that the world is not a perfect or fair place is a justification for not trying to make it a fairer one where you can. If that was the case, there would never be a persuasive rationale for fairness or altruism.

I am probably not your target audience. I am districted for one of the more socio-economically diverse schools in the country and for the upper SES families in our area one of the reasons for staying in this district (with some hand-wringing!) is that it has proven very beneficial for lower-income and particularly african-american children. I won't deny my kids lessons or camp but I have paid for entire semesters worth of lessons on an anonymous donor basis for other children, at least twice in the past few years.

I think there are different ways to define advantage - - I feel like I am giving my kids an advantage through all of the above and hopefully giving other children some advantages too.Oh, I am certain you are not my audience! But I do feel that for most people, citing the inequities created by redshirting while not denouncing others does not make a whole lot of sense.

My DH and I did end up concluding that DS will attend kindy on time, but I honestly would not criticize parents who reached a different decision. It's their kid, not mine and I think all parents are entitled to do what they think is best for their kids - especially when it comes to education.

[crl]

I don't think of my holding my ds back as giving him an advantage over other kids. I think of it as a way to help him fit into a school system that is not really very well suited to him. I also, honestly, think it was a benefit to the ther children in his K class. Instead of a classmate who was running around, distracting them and demanding more than his share of the teacher's attention, they had a classmate who fit in nicely and was even helpful to them sometimes.

Catherine

[mom3boys]

I haven't had time to read all the posts, but I though that it was interesting that this article came out yesterday:

http://vitals.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2012/03/05/10584568-adhd-overdiagnosed-in-youngest-kids-in-class

If you don't have time to read it, it basically shows that younger kids in classes are being overdiagnosed with ADHD. Basically, many don't have ADHD, they are just less mature than their older classmates. I consider redshirting my son sometimes not because I don't think he is "ready" but because of how I believe his teachers and others in this school will regard his behavior and aptitude compared to those who are 12+ months older than him. Like Gladwell said though, if everyone does it, there is no advantage. And there will always be a 12 month spread between youngest and oldest even if there is no redshirting and regardless of the cutoff date. Studies have shown that teachers tend to view the youngest kids more negatively no matter what the actual date of birth. If the cutoff is Sept 1, they view the June, July, Aug kids that way. If it's Dec. 31, they view the Oct, Nov, Dec kids that way!

FWIW, I live in a low-income district and no one redshirts. The people with means send their kids to private school. The ones without send their kids to public school as soon as they age in. I'm sure they would have been thrilled if their DS, like mine, was born 2 weeks early, making him ahead of rather than behind the cutoff (Oct 1 cutoff, late Sept birthday, originally an Oct due date), allowing him to start school a year earlier. I was originally happy about it too, now I hate that it forces me to make a decision about when to send him--if he was born in Oct, there would be no decision to make.

[Kindra178]

All in favor of having kids from other areas come to better funded schools in our districts?



We specifically chose our area over any other area for this very reason. Our school has kids that live in an orphanage, kids who live in Section 8 housing, and kids who live in homes that even in this housing market would currently sell for well over a million, or even two million. We wanted our kids to know that not every parent makes multiples of six figures.

[daphne]

But if you extend that logic, parents with more resources should not send their kids to private schools, or sign up their kids for fancy summer camps or art or music classes, or take them on enriching trips to foreign countries. All those things put that child at a significant advantage as well. Do we frown upon that? Why is redshirting any different? You are also using your resources to give your child some sort of perceived advantage.



I hear what you're saying here, but I think excessive redshirting (esp since it seems like it's often the higher SES kids who are redshirted) could *directly* negatively impact other less fortunate children, while sending your child to summer or art camps would not impact others in such a direct manner.

[wellyes]

While I understand this argument, redshirting is the least of our problems when it comes to inequity. That would start with schools not being funded by local real estate taxes.
:bighand:

Local funding of schools (aka the richer the parents are, the more opportunities the kids have) is utterly incompatible with the concept of the American dream.

[niccig]

I don't think of my holding my ds back as giving him an advantage over other kids. I think of it as a way to help him fit into a school system that is not really very well suited to him. I also, honestly, think it was a benefit to the ther children in his K class. Instead of a classmate who was running around, distracting them and demanding more than his share of the teacher's attention, they had a classmate who fit in nicely and was even helpful to them sometimes.

Catherine

I don't think anyone would disagree with you. The issue seems to be with the reasoning that holding a son back so he's bigger, and can dominate the class either academically or in sports, give their child the edge of being older, is what people have issues with.

[niccig]

While I understand this argument, redshirting is the least of our problems when it comes to inequity. That would start with schools not being funded by local real estate taxes.


I agree, this is ridiculous. No way is it an even playing field.

[Momit]

This issue is very interesting to me. DS's birthday is literally 4 days before the cutoff to start K. He is about 50th percentile for height/weight. So his size combined with his age are making me lean toward redshirting when the time comes. I would hate to be in an area with a zero exceptions policy (his due date was after the cutoff - does that count?!)

I will read the entire thread and check out the 60 Minutes piece later.

[new_mom_mry]

OK, a hypothetical question...it seems like there are sensitivities about redshirting in respect to potential inequity it creates, resultant changes to the K curriculum, etc...are there also sensitivities about the opposite coin of this issue, i.e., parents sending kids with say mid to late fall birthdays to K early, so at 4, when the cutoff is Sept 1 for example?? It doesn't sound like this a popular choice, since we are talking about redshirting kids with spring and summer birthdays, so I wanted to see whether others think it's at all common. In other words, parents presuming that their child is capable (gifted?) despite younger age.

[TwinFoxes]

I don't think most people are trying to game the system. I think they're trying to do the best thing for their kid. My mom fibbed and said I was two days older than I was so I started school at four instead of five. I don't think she was trying to game the system, she really thought it'd be best if I went to school. (Our grandmother lived with us, so it wasn't a childcare issue). Back when I started school starting early and skipping grades was the thing to do. Now it's red shirting. And sste, didn't you mention your DS went to a more diverse preschool until the funding was cut, and then you pulled him? (I could be wrong about that, forgive me if I am). What about the poorer kids who could have used a full price paying higher SES student in their class? I don't think it's wrong or bad that you didn't keep your DS in that school. I think there is almost an animal instinct that makes people put their kid's needs first, especially when any harm to other kids is kind of hard to define.

FWIW, I'm pretty sure my 40th percentile height/weight June birthday DDs will most likely start on time, but I'm really not basing my decision on how it effects the other kids.

[janine]

This issue is very interesting to me. DS's birthday is literally 4 days before the cutoff to start K. He is about 50th percentile for height/weight. So his size combined with his age are making me lean toward redshirting when the time comes. I would hate to be in an area with a zero exceptions policy (his due date was after the cutoff - does that count?!)

I will read the entire thread and check out the 60 Minutes piece later.

But his size is 50 percentile? Isn't that perfectly proportioned and the average? And his age is before cutoff - so why consider redshirt?

[janine]

OK, a hypothetical question...it seems like there are sensitivities about redshirting in respect to potential inequity it creates, resultant changes to the K curriculum, etc...are there also sensitivities about the opposite coin of this issue, i.e., parents sending kids with say mid to late fall birthdays to K early, so at 4, when the cutoff is Sept 1 for example?? It doesn't sound like this a popular choice, since we are talking about redshirting kids with spring and summer birthdays, so I wanted to see whether others think it's at all common. In other words, parents presuming that their child is capable (gifted?) despite younger age.

This is how I always looked at it - that it was desirealbe to be the yongest..means you are advanced and ahead of everyone. I wanted my daughter (25% for height 10% for weight ;)) to make the cutoff. I wish my 2nd daughter could be granted an exception (born 2wks after cutoff) so that she could start earlier and be too far behind her older sister. Then I learned about redshirting. Guess things have changed in how we think....

[speo]

I don't think most people are trying to game the system. I think they're trying to do the best thing for their kid.

Agreed. This is the system that has been created by the school districts/states. Parents who redshirt their kids ARE following the rules. But this is why the rules need to be changed for children without delays.

[niccig]

But his size is 50 percentile? Isn't that perfectly proportioned and the average?

I wouldn't keep him back for size alone. My DS went on time and is one of the eldest as his birthday is 24 days after the cut off. He's 20% for weight and height. There will be kids older than your DS that are smaller. I can almost guarantee that a 50% kid won't be the smallest.

[speo]

While I understand this argument, redshirting is the least of our problems when it comes to inequity. That would start with schools not being funded by local real estate taxes.


CA has done this. The $ is taken from the local level, back to the state, and redistributed. It is a mess and has not seemed to help. The wealthier districts just use their PTAs to make up for the loss of funds.

[janine]

I wouldn't keep him back for size alone. My DS went on time and is one of the eldest as his birthday is 24 days after the cut off. He's 20% for weight and height. There will be kids older than your DS that are smaller. I can almost guarantee that a 50% kid won't be the smallest.

was actually quoting a PP ;). My DD is the size of a 2 year old (at 3) and likely wil be 2yrs younger with others' redshirting + her birthdate.
But you know, none of these are reasons to hold back since she's smart and anxious to learn. Her being intimidated into not speaking up is what I do worry about a bit and what perturbs me with this whole redshirting phenomenon..all because *some* people are chasing an edge and school districts chasing the funding$.

[Calmegja2]

My DD's birthday is one week before the cut-off in our previous state of residence. We didn't send her to K when she turned five. We didn't agonize over it. We just decided not to send her. She's a typically functioning child. No developmental issues. We don't care about sports. We just made a decision and moved on. I haven't given it a second thought and honestly don't entertain criticism about our decision from other people. Our child, our decision.

I agree. I have never been criticized in real life over our decision to redshirt- but those online who do?

Our children. Our decision. Criticism means nothing to me on the subject.

Luckily- all the twitterpation I have ever witnessed over red shirting has occurred online, and only in two communities. This community- which tends to skew towards against it, and another community that skews towards it.

[JBaxter]

Agreed. This is the system that has been created by the school districts/states. Parents who redshirt their kids ARE following the rules. But this is why the rules need to be changed for children without delays.

Here you need to start your child in public school or have an approved home school program by age 8... yes 8 so red shirting is not skirting the system in that instance. I red shirted my oldest ( 15 yrs ago) and WISH I had my 2nd. I tell moms especially of boys when in doubt keep them out.

[sste]

[QUOTE=TwinFoxes;3449993]And sste, didn't you mention your DS went to a more diverse preschool until the funding was cut, and then you pulled him? (I could be wrong about that, forgive me if I am). What about the poorer kids who could have used a full price paying higher SES student in their class?=QUOTE]

I think there is a big difference between saying "I am only considering the needs of my kids and not the needs of other kids" and saying I will consider the needs of other children with my child's needs and I will accept *some* "disadvantage" or a less than "perfect" situation for my children in exchange for some advantage or fairness to other children. In our case, our daycare had become an unacceptable place with four different teachers in my child's classroom over five months and an incident in my child's class where an unsupervised child cut multiple kids' hair with adult scissors and cut one of the kids accidentally. Without the teacher noticing! Having my children in care that had become sub-standard and verging on unsafe was also not helping other kids in a meaningful way because their funding had sunk too low by many tens of thousands of dollars - - my extra $200 per month wasn't going to change that.

But, I don't see how pulling my child from an inclusion daycare that had become substandard due to massive budget cuts is remotely comparable to attempting to strategically have my entirely typical child be 12-18 months older than his or her classmates for a perceived academic and sports advantage??? Do these really seem comparable?

As I said before, if the rationale is that the world must be perfect or for that matter that *I* sste must be perfect in order for people to consider the needs of others or the countervailing considerations of fairness . . . then no one need ever contemplate the high road, much less take it.

[MissyAg94]

We didn't redshirt for academic or sports reasons. We didn't say, "Screw the other kids. We're redshirting." We aren't trying to give our DD a leg-up on the other kids. Academics are not a competition to us. In fact, our DD's preschool teacher said that it was an asset to have her (being older) in the classroom with some of the kids who were less mature (socially and academically.) She was helpful to them. She was a "cheerleader" for them. And she fit in great. Their were kids who were just a few weeks younger than her (who didn't make the cutoff) and there were kids who were almost a year younger. The classroom dynamic worked wonderfully.

We homeschool now so our decision hasn't "hurt" anyone. But when our DD goes to school, she will probably be among the oldest in the class and for social reasons, we are happy about that. And I know we'll be happy about it when she's in middle school and higher.

To me, this is just like the vaccine debate. We were called selfish by our ped for not vaxing on time. Sorry. We have to take the road that we feel is best for our child. There will NEVER be a level playing field for all people. It's impossible. So we do what's best for her and other parents do what's best for their children. And we all hope we made the right choices.

[TwinFoxes]

I'm sorry sste. :( I wasn't criticizing your choice at all. Like I said, I wasn't sure of the details of your situation.

[daisysmom]

I do find the 40%/50% worry about being the smallest in the class interesting. My daughter was born at the 10th% in weight, and 40% in height. For the first year, I worried constantly that she didn't eat enough. I yearned for a bigger baby all the time. Now she is the 80th% in weight and height. And at almost 5, the pediatrician's are telling us that the ideal is to be at the 30-40th percentile. Over 50% is overweight, and over 80 is obese! So I really think that being in the 40th percentile is not considered "small" in the medical community.

[AnnieW625]

...
This is a very difficult topic for many people for lots of reasons. I find these threads very challenging.

Catherine
:yeahthat: I agree with you 100% on that.


Most Ks were half day when I went many years ago. Now most are full day. That's one simple change that makes a difference in meeting behavioral expectations.

Catherine

I think this is an issue with DD1's class this year. Her class is only the second year of full day kindergarten; class is from 8:00 to 2:40. This year's class only has two kids with summer 2005 birthdays with a 9/1 cut off where as the teacher made it sound like there were more the year before, and we're better suited for the full day schedule. The class also has five kids with summer birthdays, and three of those kids are between 8/28 and 9/2. Yes one girl has a b-day one day past the cut off!

[jk3]

Seemed like a general overview for people who have never heard of it.



Probably very little since it is rare to hold kids back now.

I'm not totally against it, but someone has to be the youngest.

I completely agree.

[sste]

No, I feel badly this is so distressing to people to hear my thoughts on this. :(

I would not have brought it up if I didn't feel very strongly that this is a perspective that needs to be on the table. And hasn't been.

To the other comments, it is now a distance upthread but I believe I was explicit that my comments were: 1) not aimed at children with delays or special issues, 2)they weren't statements of what every red-shirting parents' intentions were much less every red-shirting parent on this site, 3) did not express my belief that red-shirting is a direct disadvantage for other kids - - as I posted I think it comes out in the wash quite quickly and the real disadvantage is that schools can utilize larger class sizes and less dev. appropriate practices; 4) were not a statement that red-shirting was the dominant issue in national educational disparities.

My statement was this that I disagree with the sentiment of *some* of the red-shirting community who have the following position: they are red-shirting for the express purpose of putting their child in a better position relative to other children and that while they recognize this as a cost to the other children, at the end of the day they must decide on the basis of what they perceive as best for their own child, regardless of the effects on others. And more broadly I am troubled by the ready acceptance of the notion that as parents we should put on blinders and in a zero-sum game situation, we should only consider our child's needs. In the long-run, that attitude IMO does not benefit our own kids or other kids.

[lmh2402]

No, I feel badly this is so distressing to people to hear my thoughts on this. :(

I would not have brought it up if I didn't feel very strongly that this is a perspective that needs to be on the table. And hasn't been.

To the other comments, it is now a distance upthread but I believe I was explicit that my comments were: 1) not aimed at children with delays or special issues, 2)they weren't statements of what every red-shirting parents' intentions were much less every red-shirting parent on this site, 3) did not express my belief that red-shirting is a direct disadvantage for other kids - - as I posted I think it comes out in the wash quite quickly and the real disadvantage is that schools can utilize larger class sizes and less dev. appropriate practices; 4) were not a statement that red-shirting was the dominant issue in national educational disparities.

My statement was this that I disagree with the sentiment of *some* of the red-shirting community who have the following position: they are red-shirting for the express purpose of putting their child in a better position relative to other children and that while they recognize this as a cost to the other children, at the end of the day they must decide on the basis of what they perceive as best for their own child, regardless of the effects on others. And more broadly I am troubled by the ready acceptance of the notion that as parents we should put on blinders and in a zero-sum game situation, we should only consider our child's needs. In the long-run, that attitude IMO does not benefit our own kids or other kids.

i checked out of this thread a few days ago, but since it's still kicking around i had to click and at least read the last page...or the last post (which is the above)...

without reading upthread b/c i don't have the time right now and i know it's always so emotionally charged...

i wanted to just say that i wholeheartedly appreciate and agree with the above... most especially the bolded. i :thumbsup: :thumbsup: :thumbsup: the bolded.

i hope, sste, you don't mind my jumping on our bandwagon. wouldn't want to steal your brilliance, but :yeahthat:

that, i think, is pretty much exactly what rubbed me so wrong about that first mom on the 60 minutes piece.

[arivecchi]

sste, why would you feel badly???!!!

You have every right to voice your well-thought out opinion!

As you know, we disagree on this topic, but I very much value hearing your side of the coin.

I guess when it comes to my kids I am selfish. While I will take other kids into account if it would affect their safety (i.e. food allergies), I honestly cannot handle worrying about much else! I will simply do what I feel is best and most advantageous for my kiddo. That is a full time job as is. I do care about the common good and trying to improve things as a whole for society, but I honestly do not feel like redshirting is that detrimental to other kids or society as a whole. It's a tempest in a teacup AFAIAC.

I will keep your comments in mind though. Maybe I do need to think about this some more as my kids enter school and we start living the consequences of these decisions.

[icunurse]

I live in the burbs of Chicago and I have NEVER heard anyone IRL talk about holding their kid back (or trying to push them ahead of the Sept 1st cutoff, either). I know several people with emotional children, delayed children, very far advanced children, day before cutoff birthdays, etc and none of them do anything but follow the cutoff guidelines. My DD is a late birthday (June) and very small for her age and it never crossed my mind to hold her back. IMO, immature kids or less social kids are going to just be like that, maybe they will change, maybe they won't. The early grades are the time to try things and work out issues, not walk in having it all together.

Around here, you can talk all day long about why you redshirted your kid, but because it just isn't common here, people are going to think it is because your kid failed a grade or has "issues" and parents will be sure to point out how your older kid needs to play against younger ones to be good (parents here ARE uber-competative with sports). Heck, I wouldn't say it out loud, but I'd be thinking it, too, probably.

[Kindra178]

I live in the burbs of Chicago and I have NEVER heard anyone IRL talk about holding their kid back (or trying to push them ahead of the Sept 1st cutoff, either). I know several people with emotional children, delayed children, very far advanced children, day before cutoff birthdays, etc and none of them do anything but follow the cutoff guidelines. My DD is a late birthday (June) and very small for her age and it never crossed my mind to hold her back. IMO, immature kids or less social kids are going to just be like that, maybe they will change, maybe they won't. The early grades are the time to try things and work out issues, not walk in having it all together.

Around here, you can talk all day long about why you redshirted your kid, but because it just isn't common here, people are going to think it is because your kid failed a grade or has "issues" and parents will be sure to point out how your older kid needs to play against younger ones to be good (parents here ARE uber-competative with sports). Heck, I wouldn't say it out loud, but I'd be thinking it, too, probably.

I assume you don't live on the North Shore! It's extremely common there, even for May birthdays. It's also common in certain of Chicago private schools, but not all (I don't mean Catholic) of the big names.

[icunurse]

I assume you don't live on the North Shore! It's extremely common there, even for May birthdays. It's also common in certain of Chicago private schools, but not all (I don't mean Catholic) of the big names.

No, but I know a few people who do live there who don't redshirt. But that is part of the point - I don't live in the boonies, either, and we do have areas of wealth and some great schools. Why should the same child be redshirted in one area but 20 miles south it is pretty much unheard of? And yet the kid here turns out okay? How much of it is being made into a competition issue by parents? Also, if the Northside kid ever has to slum it down here, he/she will be judged.

[elbenn]

Thank you sste for your always insightful opinions. I know that many people redshirt for a variety of reasons, but I live in an area where sports is a big deal and I often hear about how having a sports advantage is one of the reasons to redshirt. I disagree with that and think redshirting should only be for those children who really aren't ready academically or socially for kindergarten. I think the idea of having an appeals process if your child is close to the cut-off date would be a good system. If someone's child is really not ready for kindergarten, then the appeals process would hopefully be able to accommodate them.

[kijip]

I do find the 40%/50% worry about being the smallest in the class interesting. My daughter was born at the 10th% in weight, and 40% in height. For the first year, I worried constantly that she didn't eat enough. I yearned for a bigger baby all the time. Now she is the 80th% in weight and height. And at almost 5, the pediatrician's are telling us that the ideal is to be at the 30-40th percentile. Over 50% is overweight, and over 80 is obese! So I really think that being in the 40th percentile is not considered "small" in the medical community.

What? Hogwash. What about kids who are 90th percentile for height? My older son has consistently been 75-95% for weight over the course of his life (dropping down somewhat as he got older) and needs the skinny kid pants. You can count his ribs if he raises his arms. I think is BMI places him JUST inside of normal weight, just above underweight. I would be happy to see him gain a couple of pounds. A blanket statement that someone like my son is overweight or nearly obese defies reason. My younger son is 80% for weight now, but also just about that for height. He is hardly obese per common sense and his pediatric checkup. Our ped tells me that the concern is when the percentiles diverge DRASTICALLY. It stands to reason that the taller kids will weigh more than the shorter ones. Your daughter sounds fine to me. If she was 40% height and 80% weight I could see the ped being concerned but she sounds height weight proportionate to me.