"Red Shirt" Vent

[pinktink83]

Hmmm, this is very strange to me. I have a 4th grader and 2nd grader and it has never ever occurred to me to be annoyed at the parents who hold their kids back a year. I guess I just don't really care what other parents do...I'm too busy worrying about my own kids!!

I just don't see why it matters if there are kids who are a year older than they are in their class. They're all learning at the same level, just cause the kid is 11 instead of 10 doesn't mean he automatically knows more. He's been learning at the same level as the other kids all along. And if he's not particularly bright, he wouldn't be ahead of them at all anyway. I know some kids who skipped grades and the youngest in the class, too. Never saw it as a problem. Its more about your learning level than your age. Honestly, I'd be more concerned about the younger ones skipping grades, and how they fit in socially, but the ones I know haven't had a problem with it.

For most of the kids in the class, their birthdays are going to be all throughout the year, so even if they went to their "normal grade" they may STILL be a full 12 months younger/older than someone else. Even if this kid is tall...age doesn't really matter. I know some older kids who are pipsqueaks, and some younger kids who are amazons. Its just roll of the genetic dice. Sure, age can be a factor, but most likely, this kid was going to be taller than his classmates no matter what grade he was in.

And...about the older siblings...that has nothing to do with whether or not he was held back a year. A kid with older siblings will still have older siblings whether they are moved up, stayed, or held back. It depends where they were born in their family line-up, not when their parents sent them to school, lol.

Of course, I support both sides of the coin. I think its just fine to hold a child back a year in starting Kindergarten if mom thinks they need more time emotionally/mentally/socially to mature. Especially since most areas don't offer half-day kindergarten anymore. Some 5 year olds just can't handle all day school, 5 days a week yet.

And think what you want about it, but numerous studies have shown, that especially for boys, it can be very beneficial for them to start at age 6 as opposed to 5. Their learning skills haven't quite caught up to the girls yet, and it can set up a negative connotation of school right from the start if they feel like they aren't "smart enough".

 

[Colleen27]

Did the school explain why it is "too soon" to diagnose a child with a learning diablity in kindergarten? The reason is because the child has to show that he/she is reading at a level that is inconsistent with their intelligence level (i.e. average/above average intelligence, but reading below average), and to do that, the child must be reading below grade level. It takes a year or two of formal schooling for the "behind grade level" to develop, since many of the kids starting kindergarten are not yet strong readers. I'm not sure how your district does it, but the schools I have taught in test children several times a year to see if they are meeting benchmarks. Those that aren't are flagged for additional reading services. Some students in those services catch up and move out of the service, some don't. Those that don't are then testing for learning disabilities. Even at that point, not all kids get an LD label- only those that have a discrepency between IQ and ability. Some kids are low readers, but they have a low IQ, so they are reading at an appropriate level for their intellegence.

No, they didn't but our private therapist did. I don't have a problem with the idea that K is too soon to test for things like dyslexia, since there needs to be an identifiable gap between their oral and written skills. What I have a problem with is the idea that while K is too soon to identify problems, it isn't considered too soon to hold kids back for the manifestation of those problems. Given the dubious evidence supporting grade retention in the first place (the consensus is it leads to short-term improvement at the expense of long-term outcomes), that seems a terribly short sighted policy on the part of the school. (And one I don't entirely blame the school for - according to the non-profit that DS's therapist referred us to, 2nd grade is when many LDs are dx'd. With NCLB mandating high-stakes testing starting in 3rd grade, and our state running that testing in October, I completely understand why schools don't want kids being dx'd in 2nd grade with less than one academic year to get up to grade level before the all-important test.)

 

[Leajess99]

No, they didn't but our private therapist did. I don't have a problem with the idea that K is too soon to test for things like dyslexia, since there needs to be an identifiable gap between their oral and written skills. What I have a problem with is the idea that while K is too soon to identify problems, it isn't considered too soon to hold kids back for the manifestation of those problems. Given the dubious evidence supporting grade retention in the first place (the consensus is it leads to short-term improvement at the expense of long-term outcomes), that seems a terribly short sighted policy on the part of the school. (And one I don't entirely blame the school for - according to the non-profit that DS's therapist referred us to, 2nd grade is when many LDs are dx'd. With NCLB mandating high-stakes testing starting in 3rd grade, and our state running that testing in October, I completely understand why schools don't want kids being dx'd in 2nd grade with less than one academic year to get up to grade level before the all-important test.)

That seems very early for testing. Our testing is done in late April/early May every year. The kids do other testing for reading levels and Math levels to make sure they are on target but the standardized testing is late April/Early may. I also like that the schools here can not recommend holding a child back but the parent can make the request to.

 

[2Kds2K9]

To the OP, I'm deeply offended by your comments. My son was "redshirted" as you call it by the school. The school and I decided that he needed to be held back a year. This was in first grade and he has a January birthday. Yes, he was taller than everyone else in his class. Yes, he was the tallest one on the basketball court. BUT, now that he's a teenager, he has "aged out" of some of his favorite sports! So, he gets to sit on the sideline and WATCH HIS BUDDIES play. How fun is that?!

I'm sure that the mother you were speaking to did not go into detail as to why she held her child back. Not a deep conversation that I would have had with a stranger. When asked why we held our son back, my pat answer has always been that we felt it was best for him. I don't need or want to go into detail as to why I made such an agonizing decision. And I'm sure the other mother feels the same way.

Parents make these decisions for their own personal reasons. So please, next time just smile and let it be.

Off my soapbox!

 

[brymolmom]

To the OP, I'm deeply offended by your comments. My son was "redshirted" as you call it by the school. The school and I decided that he needed to be held back a year. This was in first grade and he has a January birthday. Yes, he was taller than everyone else in his class. Yes, he was the tallest one on the basketball court. BUT, now that he's a teenager, he has "aged out" of some of his favorite sports! So, he gets to sit on the sideline and WATCH HIS BUDDIES play. How fun is that?!

I'm sure that the mother you were speaking to did not go into detail as to why she held her child back. Not a deep conversation that I would have had with a stranger. When asked why we held our son back, my pat answer has always been that we felt it was best for him. I don't need or want to go into detail as to why I made such an agonizing decision. And I'm sure the other mother feels the same way.

Parents make these decisions for their own personal reasons. So please, next time just smile and let it be.

Off my soapbox!

I applaud you for taking this matter seriously and for agonizing over the decision, but I assure you - many parents do not. As I have stated, I have spoken to several parents who are either still pregnant or with young babies with Fall bdays (obviously no knowledge yet about how 'ready' they will be) and they still decide to hold back. So your situation is very different than those which annoy me.

And it is very likely BECAUSE of the parents who annoy me why your son is in such a difficult position with sports. If parents didn't just hold back for no true reason except the gift of time, some sort of delay or attempted to send but just struggled too much...then there would only be a handful like your son who truly belong in the lower grade. If rules like 'aging out' didn't exist - it wouldn't force parents to make the decision only when it is truly necessary. So many more parents, likely, in your area would be doing it. So you are in your difficult boat for the same reason as I am - because many parents don't do it agonizing...they just do it.

And for the poster who said an 11 year old might not know more than a 10 year old...you very well might be right. But a 6 year old starting kindergarten who has been redshirted (much more likely to be in very good preschool or have at-home parent working with him/her a lot) is VERY LIKELY to know much more than a 4 year old in that same classroom. Not necessarily due to better brain- but just due to more days on this Earth. And unfortunately, the content in the classroom is not always the same (or I might not mind), often, the 6 year old's parent will want some sort of 'challenge' or 'enrichment' for their child - basically forcing the Kindergarten teacher to do some of the work of a 1st grade teacher (which the child would have if he had been sent on time), thus taking teacher resources away from the 4 year old who wasn't held back.

 

[gina2000]

I have no problem with "red shirting" when it is done for developmental reasons. I do, however, have a problem with parents in school districts who have arbitrarily decided that if their child is within 4 months of the cutoff, he/she will not attend school.

In northern NJ, holding children back arbitrarily has become the norm. If the school has an 10/1 cutoff date, no one sends their student to school if the child is born after MAY 15. My SIL lives in such a district. When she moved in, she was shocked to discover that parents routinely hold kids out an extra year. Her daughter was held out because she was extremely immature and close to the cutoff. Had she sent her, this child would have had a full 1/3 of her class significantly older. In this district, no one wants to have the youngest child in the class. It's all about success...I laugh but pretty soon first graders will routinely be age 9 in this district. And this is why I disagree with parental decisions.

These school districts love having a significant portion of a class older than the norm. It boosts test scores, improves competition in sports, and all in all makes the school district look great. But is it a true measure of a school district's success? Or is it a skewed test group fueled by parental obsession?

What happens to a child close to the cutoff who goes to school in a district such as the one I described? He/she is quite a bit younger than his/her classmates, may work at appropriate grade level but may not be able to compete with older students. Teachers teach to the middle of a class....the middle of the class has 6 months' maturity on any other district's class. There is an obvious disadvantage for the average student here.

I would love to see schools start kindergarten every six months so the maturity gap won't be so pronounced. The second class would always be 1/2 year behind but would be 1/2 year younger. This may make parental decisions about schooling easier.

 

[palavra]

but who gets to decide who is ready? If there is not age at which my child is required to be in school, I could aregue that my 9 year old is "not ready" to be in school yet. There has to be a line drawn somewhere. What needs to hapeen is that everyone goes to school at 5, the children are evaluated, and thier individual needs met.

No, in America it is compulsory for kids to be in school by age 7 in most states. I like how it is done now with both the school and the parents having a say about the child's readiness for school. Take my case, for example. My 8 year old is in second grade. Her birthday is literally one day before the cutoff. Because she was also diagnosed with ADHD at age 4 and was definitely socially immature, we decided to wait a year for kindergarten. This decision, of course, had nothing to do with sports. Flash forward to today. My daughter is the smallest kid in her class even though she is the third oldest of 22. She is also gifted academically, reading at a 6th grade level in 2nd grade. She and two other kids in her class have been singled out for advanced work because our school, being private, does not have a gifted class. So, were we right to "red shirt" her? I beleive we were, even though academically, she obviously could have gone to kindergarten as a young 5. Socially, she is stll on the immature style, and I believe our choice has given her the best chance for success in school.

 

[drinkme]

No, in America it is compulsory for kids to be in school by age 7 in most states. I like how it is done now with both the school and the parents having a say about the child's readiness for school. Take my case, for example. My 8 year old is in second grade. Her birthday is literally one day before the cutoff. Because she was also diagnosed with ADHD at age 4 and was definitely socially immature, we decided to wait a year for kindergarten. This decision, of course, had nothing to do with sports. Flash forward to today. My daughter is the smallest kid in her class even though she is the third oldest of 22. She is also gifted academically, reading at a 6th grade level in 2nd grade. She and two other kids in her class have been singled out for advanced work because our school, being private, does not have a gifted class. So, were we right to "red shirt" her? I beleive we were, even though academically, she obviously could have gone to kindergarten as a young 5. Socially, she is stll on the immature style, and I believe our choice has given her the best chance for success in school.

We did the same thing. My ds10's bday is the day before the cut off. He did just okay in PreS, but Kindergarten was a nightmare. He was not ready. Even though he passed K, the teacher told me that she recommended holding him back for another year of K. So, we did that. It was the best thing. He went from being so overwhelmed and feeling like a failure to succeeding in school. He is now in 4th grade and reading at a high level, and in the advanced math class. So, if we didn't have him repeat K, he may have caught up with his peers in several years, but maybe not. He may have just given up trying after a couple of years. My ds is also small, and probably one of the smallest boys in his class.

I also wish they would separate the kids by 6 months, not 12 months.

 

[rchristiansen]

WOW - what an interesting thread. I haven't read through each and every post, but I see the emotions on both sides. And for me it really frustrates me that so many people are so concerned with their kids excelling in sports and NOT academics. (now this is just from the little I read, but....)It seems that many parents that "red-shirted" want their kids to be the best in sports and many that didn't are upset that their kid is outshone by a taller bigger kid.

We have the exact opposite situation. Our daughter is highly gifted and has a mid-September birthday. The previous state we lived in cutoff was Sept 30th, here it's Sept 1st. We moved mid-year in Kindergarten! I made the new school district put it in writing that she didn't have to "go back" to PreK when we moved.

When it was time for Kindergarten to start it never occurred to me to hold her back. In fact I was trying to figure a way to accelerate her. My main concern was making sure that the school provided an appropriate education for her academic level. I never thought about sports or how little/small she would be (which she is now compared to many of the others in 3rd grade). Many school administrators gave us that silly generic talk of not being socially ready. Gifted kids have a tendency to be out of the social norms anyway and we have a whole other host of issues to deal with.

I used to get really angry when parents bragged about their kids excelling in sports, and not academics. But I try to not let it get to me now ---

 

[Kat&Dom]

I find this thread to be very interesting. I am one of those parents who put their son in Kindergarten at age 4 - he turned 5 one month into school. He is doing very well in school. I did debate about holding him back but he was so excited and anxious about starting school that I decided to put him in and see how it worked out. I am so glad that I did put him in, even though he will be 17 when he starts college.

At our teacher/parent interview, the teacher told me that my son gets along with all age levels and has great social skills. She also told me that a couple of grade 4 kids play tag with my son before and after school. My mom drops my son off at school and she said, it is so cute to see my son do a special handshake in the mornings with the grade 4 boys.

My son's best buddy was also 4 when he started kindergarten. My son has a group of 6 close friends at kindergarten that he plays hockey with, does playdates with, etc but he also is good friends with some older kids. I have no concerns with him socializing with older children because that is real life. In the workforce, you have 20 year olds and 50 year olds that work closely together so I am totally fine that he is happy to play with his own age group or to hang with grade 4 kids.

 

[rchristiansen]

I have no concerns with him socializing with older children because that is real life. In the workforce, you have 20 year olds and 50 year olds that work closely together so I am totally fine that he is happy to play with his own age group or to hang with grade 4 kids.

I agree - I don't have any friends who are the same age as me I do find it interesting though, that my DD8 gets along really well with kids much younger and much older than her. She also gets along really well with the boys - not sure if that is a good or bad thing at this stage in the game

 

[design_mom]

WOW - what an interesting thread. I haven't read through each and every post, but I see the emotions on both sides. And for me it really frustrates me that so many people are so concerned with their kids excelling in sports and NOT academics. (now this is just from the little I read, but....)It seems that many parents that "red-shirted" want their kids to be the best in sports and many that didn't are upset that their kid is outshone by a taller bigger kid.

We have the exact opposite situation. Our daughter is highly gifted and has a mid-September birthday. The previous state we lived in cutoff was Sept 30th, here it's Sept 1st. We moved mid-year in Kindergarten! I made the new school district put it in writing that she didn't have to "go back" to PreK when we moved.

When it was time for Kindergarten to start it never occurred to me to hold her back. In fact I was trying to figure a way to accelerate her. My main concern was making sure that the school provided an appropriate education for her academic level. I never thought about sports or how little/small she would be (which she is now compared to many of the others in 3rd grade). Many school administrators gave us that silly generic talk of not being socially ready. Gifted kids have a tendency to be out of the social norms anyway and we have a whole other host of issues to deal with.

I used to get really angry when parents bragged about their kids excelling in sports, and not academics. But I try to not let it get to me now ---

I haven't seen anyone who has "red shirted" in this thread say they did it because of sports. It's the people who are against saying that they "know people" who did. I personally think it's a girlfriend's hairdresser's roommate's aunt sort of thing.

 

[princessmom29]

There is nothing in your posts that sounds helpful at all. Teachers that are good see the best in their student and work to draw that out, rather than witching and moaning about crappy parents etc. There are always behaviors that need to be worked with and skills that they née help with. That us half if what teaching is all about.

What I find offensive is the snarl in your writing, specifically about the little cheerleaders lacking the energy and motivation to work for an hour. Do you work out he way you should? How does an obese person fuss about kids when she herself does not do what us best for herself? I don't get it. Your tendency to look down on others is offensive. Luckily, this forum offers ignore. I see enough of the crappy with the kids I work with. I will choose to ignore that some teachers out there choose to pile in more rather than make the world better.

I once had a professor tell me that when your opponet stoops to personal attack they have no ammo left. You just ran out.
I never said ANYTHING about the girls not working out hard enough. What I said was the MOTHERS didn't think they could make it though an hour without snacks and games. Cheer practice is NOT constant cardio at 6-7 years old, far from it. I all I asked was that they pay attention to what is being taught, and guess what??? Not a single girl had a problem doing that, the problem was with the parents NOT the children, and I would never air any of this out in front of the children. They had no clue there was a proiblem unlessthier parent chose to inform them. If someone my size, as you so NICELY pointed out, can teach it, then I think 6-7 year olds can do it without a problem. I don't look down on anyone, but I do call a spade a spade and speak up when I see a problem. Sorry that you don't like that, but it is the only way to improve a bad situation. What ia would say abotu a situation on a message board or to a friend is completely different than what I would actually say to a child. I would think anoyone with common sense would grasp that without the need to explain it. They are two totally different situations. Most of my students appreciate that I tell them when I feel that something they are donig is unacceptable, and give them a chance to correct it. I am done rising to the bait for you. As I said above, you obviously have no ammo left if you are stooping to this level.

 

[rchristiansen]

I personally think it's a girlfriend's hairdresser's roommate's aunt sort of thing.

You're probably right! Like I said I could read this whole thing

 

[princessmom29]

I haven't seen anyone who has "red shirted" in this thread say they did it because of sports. It's the people who are against saying that they "know people" who did. I personally think it's a girlfriend's hairdresser's roommate's aunt sort of thing.

you are wrong there. I personally know of 2 children in my DD's K calss whose parents told ME they were redshirted for sports. Not I heard form someone, I was personally told by another parent that her child needed another year to grow so he would be the big enough to get playing time for football, and another who told me that her son needed another year to build his coodination for soccer so he would be a starter. It wasn't just me that heard it. A fairly large group of us were discussing birthday parties and ages, and the conversation turned to "holding back" or not. They volenteered thier reasons for holding thier children back.

 

[princessmom29]

I have no problem with "red shirting" when it is done for developmental reasons. I do, however, have a problem with parents in school districts who have arbitrarily decided that if their child is within 4 months of the cutoff, he/she will not attend school.

In northern NJ, holding children back arbitrarily has become the norm. If the school has an 10/1 cutoff date, no one sends their student to school if the child is born after MAY 15. My SIL lives in such a district. When she moved in, she was shocked to discover that parents routinely hold kids out an extra year. Her daughter was held out because she was extremely immature and close to the cutoff. Had she sent her, this child would have had a full 1/3 of her class significantly older. In this district, no one wants to have the youngest child in the class. It's all about success...I laugh but pretty soon first graders will routinely be age 9 in this district. And this is why I disagree with parental decisions.

These school districts love having a significant portion of a class older than the norm. It boosts test scores, improves competition in sports, and all in all makes the school district look great. But is it a true measure of a school district's success? Or is it a skewed test group fueled by parental obsession?

What happens to a child close to the cutoff who goes to school in a district such as the one I described? He/she is quite a bit younger than his/her classmates, may work at appropriate grade level but may not be able to compete with older students. Teachers teach to the middle of a class....the middle of the class has 6 months' maturity on any other district's class. There is an obvious disadvantage for the average student here.

I would love to see schools start kindergarten every six months so the maturity gap won't be so pronounced. The second class would always be 1/2 year behind but would be 1/2 year younger. This may make parental decisions about schooling easier.

This is EXACTLY what I am talking about and what is happening in private schools in my area. It is becoming more and more the norm here . A decade ago, no one would have even considered redshirting, and now 25-30% of kids in private schools are redshirts.The expectations in K have not changed. The standards are still the same. It is all about bieng the best, and not what is the child actually needs.

 

[Shleedogg]

I read the first few pages of this thread and was talking to DH about it yesterday. Our DD has an early Nov birthday. She seems to be advanced so far in terms of vocabulary and speaking (but hey, she's 2, who knows what she'll be doing in 2 yrs). I was worried that if she is still academically advanced that she would be bored if we held her back until she was 5 turning 6 in the fall of kindergarten. DH agreed with me until he did the math to high school. His only concern at that point was that she could potentially be 13 as a freshman dating an 18 or even 19 yr old senior. He got even more worried when he started thinking about college... I tried to tell him that as her parents we could not allow her to date someone that old. He's convinced she won't obey us and will automatically be dating a senior as a freshman. I think it's so cute how overprotective he is at the mere thought of her dating

I thought perhaps our school district would have an early cutoff thereby making this a moot point. I just checked our current district and the district we hope to have a house built in by the time DD goes to school and the cutoff at both is Dec 1st. Uh oh....

 

[brymolmom]

No, in America it is compulsory for kids to be in school by age 7 in most states. I like how it is done now with both the school and the parents having a say about the child's readiness for school. Take my case, for example. My 8 year old is in second grade. Her birthday is literally one day before the cutoff. Because she was also diagnosed with ADHD at age 4 and was definitely socially immature, we decided to wait a year for kindergarten. This decision, of course, had nothing to do with sports. Flash forward to today. My daughter is the smallest kid in her class even though she is the third oldest of 22. She is also gifted academically, reading at a 6th grade level in 2nd grade. She and two other kids in her class have been singled out for advanced work because our school, being private, does not have a gifted class. So, were we right to "red shirt" her? I beleive we were, even though academically, she obviously could have gone to kindergarten as a young 5. Socially, she is stll on the immature style, and I believe our choice has given her the best chance for success in school.

Yes that age requirement is because Kindergarten is not cumpulsory so it was truly intended (when written) to be kids going into first grade. All I think is that they need to reassess that cumpulsory age requirement to figure in Kindergarten so there isn't such a wide range of ages.

Now think about your dd and how well she's doing - now think about a 3rd grader whose parents just didn't think was 'right' in 3rd grade so they opted to send them back to 2nd (I know, it can't happen - just bear with me, trying to tell you what it feels like on the other side of the coin). So this 3rd grader likely has already been taught all the same material as your dd and then some. And now, let's say there's only room for 3 kids in the advanced work program, and BAM - your dd no longer makes it because this 3rd grader is taking her place.

This is how those of us at the younger end of the spectrum feel. That with many parents Redshirting it ultimately negatively affects our own kids.

 

[dzorn]

I read the first few pages of this thread and was talking to DH about it yesterday. Our DD has an early Nov birthday. She seems to be advanced so far in terms of vocabulary and speaking (but hey, she's 2, who knows what she'll be doing in 2 yrs). I was worried that if she is still academically advanced that she would be bored if we held her back until she was 5 turning 6 in the fall of kindergarten. DH agreed with me until he did the math to high school. His only concern at that point was that she could potentially be 13 as a freshman dating an 18 or even 19 yr old senior. He got even more worried when he started thinking about college... I tried to tell him that as her parents we could not allow her to date someone that old. He's convinced she won't obey us and will automatically be dating a senior as a freshman. I think it's so cute how overprotective he is at the mere thought of her dating

I thought perhaps our school district would have an early cutoff thereby making this a moot point. I just checked our current district and the district we hope to have a house built in by the time DD goes to school and the cutoff at both is Dec 1st. Uh oh....

My birthday is late November with a Dec 1 cut off. Tell DH to stop worrying.

Denise in MI

 

[Leajess99]

WOW - what an interesting thread. I haven't read through each and every post, but I see the emotions on both sides. And for me it really frustrates me that so many people are so concerned with their kids excelling in sports and NOT academics. (now this is just from the little I read, but....)It seems that many parents that "red-shirted" want their kids to be the best in sports and many that didn't are upset that their kid is outshone by a taller bigger kid.

We have the exact opposite situation. Our daughter is highly gifted and has a mid-September birthday. The previous state we lived in cutoff was Sept 30th, here it's Sept 1st. We moved mid-year in Kindergarten! I made the new school district put it in writing that she didn't have to "go back" to PreK when we moved.

When it was time for Kindergarten to start it never occurred to me to hold her back. In fact I was trying to figure a way to accelerate her. My main concern was making sure that the school provided an appropriate education for her academic level. I never thought about sports or how little/small she would be (which she is now compared to many of the others in 3rd grade). Many school administrators gave us that silly generic talk of not being socially ready. Gifted kids have a tendency to be out of the social norms anyway and we have a whole other host of issues to deal with.
I used to get really angry when parents bragged about their kids excelling in sports, and not academics. But I try to not let it get to me now ---

The bolded is so very true of truely gifted kids.