"Red Shirt" Vent

[tartemis]

just because your child was ready to read at three doesn't mean all kids are. I have worked with kids that could not read at 7 but at 9 were reading high school material. Reading readiness is like anything else. You can't force a child to potty train, do algebra, or read when they are not ready.

but as long as it isn't your child those things don't really matter, do they?

I'm not saying that all children should be reading at 3 just because my daugher is. She is brilliant, of course. But by 5? Yeah, they should already know their letters and at least be ready to work on reading.

And yeah, some kids can't read at 7, but that doesn't mean that we tailor curriculm for the late bloomers or those with learning disabilities. You target curriculm so that it challenges the majority of kids within a 12 month window -- it will always leave some above and below. For those above, you have gifted programs; for those below, you have remedial or special ed programs.

But if you continuously expand that window (through red-shirting) it makes it harder and harder to what is best for the MAJORITY of kids, not the outliers.

 

[Jennabeth]

-- This idea that "I did what was best for MY child" without thinking about the broader consequences for society is selfish and, often times, short-sighted. Great, so you didn't want your kid to be the smallest, shyest, shortest, whatever, so you hold them back and let some other family deal with being in that category -- possibly some other family that doesn't have the resources that you do to keep a child at home for another year (not to mention the leapfrogging problem). It is also a by-product of the "me" generation.

Again, putting words in my mouth. I waited not because of her being the "smallest, shyest, shortest" in her class (she is one of the smallest and shortest BTW). I waited because I wanted to give her a chance to succeed in school. An by succeed, I do not mean being at the top of her class, I wanted her to enjoy school and learning. I wanted her to make friends and have a good experience. I really don't care about grades as long as they pass and do their best.

Oh so what I did was all about "me", gee and I thought I was being to considerate to others by not sending a child who would require a lot of the teacher's time and resources. If it was all about ME I would have sent my DD earlier and saved myself $7500 in childcare, not to mention the fact that I could ship her off to college a year earlier and save myself a year of expenses from supporting her. It's too bad I'm so selfish and contributing to the decline of society.

You should move to MI, then your DD could go next year.

 

[indimom]

Man, I try to stay away, I really do, but I just get sucked back in.

My daughter was 6 when she started K (she also was 10 days behind the cutoff and we didn't push to get her in a year early). She didn't know all of her letters/sounds yet. We had worked on it, but she just couldn't seem to get it. She learned her letters in K and started on some simple reading.
All through gradeschool, she remained a slow reader, it was absolutely TEDIOUS for her and us, but she kept her honor roll status.
She didn't really start reading well until about 5th grade. I was beginning to despair (Dad and I are both avid readers.) She could keep her As because her comprehension was high, but it took her twice as long to read as the other A students so it was still a struggle just to get everything done. She is doing much, much better now, but NOT all children are the same or hit the same landmarks at the same time. Not even "good" students.
Oh, and she still can't spell. Her little brother started helping her with spelling when she was a 2nd grader and he was a Kindergartener. He still does. I just tell her to thank her lucky stars she lives in this generation where spellcheck is available.

 

[Colleen27]

I'm not saying that all children should be reading at 3 just because my daugher is. She is brilliant, of course. But by 5? Yeah, they should already know their letters and at least be ready to work on reading.

Working on reading isn't the same as actually reading, though, and there are schools out there that hold kids back in K if they aren't reading. And again, sending a child who isn't ready on time and having him retained has been shown time and again to impact the child's entire academic career - kids who are retained are less likely to graduate, more likely to drop out, more likely to drink/do drugs, and less likely to attend or graduate from college. There is a broader consequence to society that is attached to all of those things too, and it is a far greater "cost" than the younger kids in a class feeling bad because the bigger kid got the starting spot on the basketball team.

Like with any decision, there will be those who do it for the wrong reasons but that shouldn't be justification for slamming those who do it for the right reasons.

 

[Leajess99]

And we do not have higher test scores, nor do we have a higher graduation rate. So what is the point? Higher scores in 1st through 3rd have done nothing to improve the overall education.

So, the condescending attitude is kind of silly. But don't take this wrong.

Just out of curiousity but have the tests changed over the past 30 years?? Of course they have but at the same time the test scores are averaged using ALL test takers information. Not all kids are given the same opprotunities. Schools in poorer areas often do poorly on the tests thus resulting in less money for the school which causes the domino effect. We reward schools with high test scores with more money and punish schools with lower test scores by withholding money. How does this make any sense?? How is a school in a poor area supposed to compete with a school in an upper class district getting more money?? Oh wait, then again I doubt many here even understand about the socioeconomic problems for many schools. Look at the kids who NEVER get to go to Disney because their families financially cannot afford it and their education is not the greatest due to the lack of proper funding. Many kids cannot break the cycle of being in a poor family/neighborhood because schools continue to suffer.

Other countries continue to pour more money into their education systems while the United States tends to pour more money into other countries and the "war in terror". Look at some of the budgets for the schools and then ask yourself why these schools are struggling. I am sure you can see where the problem is.

 

[Leajess99]

Man, I try to stay away, I really do, but I just get sucked back in.

My daughter was 6 when she started K (she also was 10 days behind the cutoff and we didn't push to get her in a year early). She didn't know all of her letters/sounds yet. We had worked on it, but she just couldn't seem to get it. She learned her letters in K and started on some simple reading.
All through gradeschool, she remained a slow reader, it was absolutely TEDIOUS for her and us, but she kept her honor roll status.
She didn't really start reading well until about 5th grade. I was beginning to despair (Dad and I are both avid readers.) She could keep her As because her comprehension was high, but it took her twice as long to read as the other A students so it was still a struggle just to get everything done. She is doing much, much better now, but NOT all children are the same or hit the same landmarks at the same time. Not even "good" students.
Oh, and she still can't spell. Her little brother started helping her with spelling when she was a 2nd grader and he was a Kindergartener. He still does. I just tell her to thank her lucky stars she lives in this generation where spellcheck is available.

Just curious but have you had her checked for any learning disabilities or hearing issues to include Central Auditory processing deficit?? I am just asking because I had a friend whose daughter struggled with reading and spelling and my child who was 18 months younger than her would try to help her. Come to find out she has dislexia and after all the right help she is succeeding and really enjoying school.

 

[jodifla]

Wow, I can't tell you how much I just love these threads. I really need to stop reading them because it makes my blood boil. I love how those who choose to send their kids "on time" get to assume that their choice was made due to the child, but those like me who choose to red shirt, do it so our child will be the best/biggest/smartest in the class or because we aren't able to let our kids grow up. Did it ever occur to anyone that we made our choice because WE know or children and want what is best for that child?

In MI the cut off is 12/1 which, IMHO is way too late. That means my October baby would be 4 in K and 16 when she started her senior year. Now, I wasn't a happy about that but would have sent her if I thought she was ready, but I KNOW as her mother she wasn't ready so I waited. I am a WOHM so it really didn't make a different to me if was home all day, or in school. It's not like I got to spend more time with her during the day. She's now in second grade and is one of the older ones, but isn't the oldest (there are children in her class whose birthdays are in July & Aug) but is one of the smallest. If you saw here you would never think she was an older student, my girls are both tiny. She loves school, loves her friends and loves learning. I am 100% positive I made the best decision for her. It was not a decision we took lightly, we thought about it for 2 years and spoke with many people before making the decision and I would do it again.

So for those of you who sent their kids "on time," I'm happy it's working for you, but don't assume you know my situation or child. How would you like it if I made a broad statement and said all those who sent their 4 YO to K are doing it so you could get your kids out of the house sooner or did it because you wanted to save money on daycare, or how would you like it if I said you did it because then you would have an excuse when your child didn't do well in school? Now you know how how I feel with your broad statements and assumptions.

Oh, and for those who said it's a new thing, it isn't, at least in MI. I am a Sept birthday and am in my mid-30s and was sent to K when I was 5 turning 6 and was not the oldest in my class. I think if they want to make the system "fair" the whole US needs to standardize the cutoff and make it July 1st. There will always be kids who are smarter or bigger no matter what their age when they enter K.

Really great points, Jennabeth! And of course K only recently became an all day affair...it used to be a half day, which really boiled down to 2.5 hours -- and I recall that including a nap!

 

[indimom]

Just curious but have you had her checked for any learning disabilities or hearing issues to include Central Auditory processing deficit?? I am just asking because I had a friend whose daughter struggled with reading and spelling and my child who was 18 months younger than her would try to help her. Come to find out she has dislexia and after all the right help she is succeeding and really enjoying school.

No, we never did. She always had good grades so it wasn't something the school ever suggested. We knew she struggled a bit keeping up with all the reading and/or getting assignments done in a timely manner (again due just to the reading), but it never seemed "impossible" so we just kept moving on.
The most difficult was when she hit intermediate school because the reading program they were working on was based on the individual student and the better you did on the tests, the more and harder books you were expected to read. She was pretty stressed in 4th grade. Out of desperation, I finally suggested that she get the Harry Potter series on cassette and follow along in the books. Just so she could keep up with the pace that was expected. Something about that seemed to make it click and by fifth grade she seemed to be over the hurdle.
She is 13 and a 7th grader now. Still an A student and she's been placed in the advanced classes for english and math. There may be a genetic factor of some sort involved (my dad can't spell either), and I've wondered from time to time, but she never seemed to need intervention so we let it ride.

 

[GinnyEmma]

Indi, some of the smartest people I know can't spell. One of the kids I mentioned was a young man who was in need of a behavioral assessment. We managed to get him through until it clicked, and he sped ahead of his classmates and has tenure at a tier one college. You can't make someone learn what they aren't ready to learn it. Patience can be a virtue when parenting.

 

[princessmom29]

Really great points, Jennabeth! And of course K only recently became an all day affair...it used to be a half day, which really boiled down to 2.5 hours -- and I recall that including a nap!

I see a lot of people say this and it must be a regional thing, becuase as long as our school system has offered K, about 50 years, it has ALWAYS been full day 8-3 just like every other grade. I don't know of any place inthe area that has ever offered a half day K. Some private schools offer 1 class of half day K, but that is the extent of half day K in our area.

 

[jodifla]

I see a lot of people say this and it must be a regional thing, becuase as long as our school system has offered K, about 50 years, it has ALWAYS been full day 8-3 just like every other grade. I don't know of any place inthe area that has ever offered a half day K. Some private schools offer 1 class of half day K, but that is the extent of half day K in our area.

I went to K in rural Minnesota in 1966, and it was a half day. My son was in K in 2007, and it was a half day program as well, in Michigan. You could pay to have an all day program. It didn't go all day here until 2008, and in surrounding districts, it's still a half day.

 

[Colleen27]

I went to K in rural Minnesota in 1966, and it was a half day. My son was in K in 2007, and it was a half day program as well, in Michigan. You could pay to have an all day program. It didn't go all day here until 2008, and in surrounding districts, it's still a half day.

Even within my area it depends on the district. I went to a half day program in the 80s here in Michigan, and that district still runs half day. The district my kids started school in was a full-time K, but where we live now is full day part time (all day, but only 3 days/week - either M/W/F or T/Th/F).

 

[design_mom]

Even within my area it depends on the district. I went to a half day program in the 80s here in Michigan, and that district still runs half day. The district my kids started school in was a full-time K, but where we live now is full day part time (all day, but only 3 days/week - either M/W/F or T/Th/F).

Our district is the same -- whole days, but not every day. My kids went Tu/Th and every other Friday. I know two other high-performing districts in our area that do half day Kinder, too. I have heard full-time Kinder is going to be required statewide soon, but since my kids are older now, I haven't paid attention to all the details.

 

[pacrosby]

Just to lay out the facts:

According to a 2009/10 report only 12 of 50 states require their school districts to offer full day kindergarten. Only 2 of 50 require their students to attend full day kindergarten.

So there you have it. Half day kindergarten remains alive and well in this country. I, for one, prefer it. To each his own.

 

[Leajess99]

Really great points, Jennabeth! And of course K only recently became an all day affair...it used to be a half day, which really boiled down to 2.5 hours -- and I recall that including a nap!

My son was in full day Kindergarten 12 years ago. The half day kindergarten class I was a TA in did not do naps as there was no time. That was 8 years ago.

Actually all of my kids have done full day kindergarten in different schools over the past 12 years. Middle daughter is in 7th grade now. I honestly don't consider full day kindergarten to be a recent thing especially since my oldest is graduating in a few short months.

 

[Leajess99]

Just to lay out the facts:

According to a 2009/10 report only 12 of 50 states require their school districts to offer full day kindergarten. Only 2 of 50 require their students to attend full day kindergarten.

So there you have it. Half day kindergarten remains alive and well in this country. I, for one, prefer it. To each his own.

I honestly feel sorry for the kids and teachers in half day Kinder. They try to cram so much in so little time that it can be overwhelming for some kids. In the class I was a TA in, there were a couple of kids that would get so frustrated as they never had enough time to complete their assignments and they were not playing around. They were just slower kids as in they took a lot of time to get things done. The one mom was frustrated as well because her child loved learning but was hating school. I never saw that in my older 2s classes. That school district has even gone to full day kindergarten and we left there 8 years ago.

 

[GinnyEmma]

eh, mine did half day and seemed to survive, and learned what was expected of them. They had the basics, snack, recess and a rest. Our district is in the pack as far as test scores etc. I guess it just depends on the curriculum, teachers and parental support. A lesson at that age only takes 15 minutes or so anyway.

 

[mom2aredhead]

A lesson at that age only takes 15 minutes or so anyway.

Then presumably all of the "my kid can't sit still for too long" justifications are really a moot point?

We have full day kindergarten - 8:15-2:45. We also have free Universal Pre-K, which is a 1/2 day. Kindergarten is not their first exposure to a classroom environment.

 

[GinnyEmma]

It isn't a moot point if the child can't sit and concentrate for 15 minutes, is it? I've known kids in 3rd and 4th that still had issues with this.

And it isn't a moot point if the teacher doesn't have the basic understanding that lessons need to be short and sweet, either. An issue for many who think they can make someone learn that isn't ready.

 

[GinnyEmma]

As I've said before most of this stuff that young moms think are such a huge deal, and spend so much time worrying about winds up being not a big deal. Nearly everything evens out. The moms who freak over all the little stuff find that the kids raised in all of "those" homes turn out pretty much the same as their perfectly raised dears.

How much nicer life would be if everyone would just allow parents to raise their kids the way they see fit. Mind their own business and accept the consequences thereof.