"Red Shirt" Vent

[princessmom29]

I can understand where the mom is coming from. We didn't hold our son out but we should have, and we ended up doing something similar to the changing schools (we homeschooled several years when he was crying and making himself sick over having to go to school, and then had him placed according to his counselor's and reading specialist's evaluations, which put him where he would have been if we'd held him out).

But despite knowing that he's right where he should be academically and socially, I did worry about him being so much bigger than his peers when he was younger. That's the kind of thing kids tease over, and my son's a big kid even with kids his own age (5'5" and 140# at 12). I'm sure there are other parents who are annoyed that my son will be playing football with their much smaller boys, though it hasn't come up yet because he's still in age-division rec ball; school teams don't start until 8th grade. But you know what, I just don't care what they think - they have no idea what we went through with the kid to get him to this point, and opinions formed from only part of the picture just aren't worth worrying about.

So would be ok with your child having serously hurt another child due to being so much bigger than them? I am not trying to be ugly here, but I have seen it happen quite often in our school leagues. A child who never should have been playing on that team injures a smaller child, not on purpose, but just because they are so much larger. We had a 1 st grader on our 1st and 2nd grade team get a concussion this year when he was atkled by a should be 3rd grader. He didn't MEAN to hurt him, but he had several inches and about 20# on him. He just hit him and slammed him to the ground. You may have a weight limit issue when he gets to middle school as well. Here, if you have a 6th grade team, those boys cannot exceed 150#. If they do, then they cannot play! A lot of our extreme redsahirts end up sitting out 6th grade. Also, If they reach age 19 during football season in high school, they become ineligble.

 

[princessmom29]

I believe football has more of an age/weight requirement and doesn't go by grade.
And I know you don't care - but I have to say that I would care. Absolutely. If your child is a year or 2 older, and as a result a year or 2 larger, but is allowed to play on the team with younger/smaller kids because they're in the same grade, I would absolutely have a problem with that if I were one of the other parents. It bothers me because it not only gives one child an unfair size advantage over the others, but it could discourage the kids that are age/grade appropriate but now compared to the older kid.

And if any of the younger & smaller kids got hurt because of being hit/tackled/tagged/fouled/whatever by a kid that is older and bigger and should be on a different team, I would be absolutely furious.

no, she is right. Here CYO ball goes strictly by grade, with a weight limit, and all middle and high school ball is strictly by grade. ITA with you. It is dangerous for those older/ bigger kids to play with the smaller kids. It leads to injuries.

 

[Mkrop]

I realize my opinion is unpopular. I just believe that you and yours have he right to do what you think best, as do I and mine. If you don't like the way your school deals with it, I'd find another school. If my kid was put in the wring math class, I'd have it changed. If my kid needs more help, I help them. There are just games I dont play.

You dont live in a bubble, so although you are entitled to do what is best for you and yours, dont think it doesnt affect others. There are rules, some strict, and there are guidelines, in school, in the job market, in life. You cant live your life thinking there is no affect in any decision that you make that wont affect other students, employees etc. So some people will be annyoed by your decisions and they are entitled to the feeling, right or wrong.

I believe football has more of an age/weight requirement and doesn't go by grade.
And I know you don't care - but I have to say that I would care. Absolutely. If your child is a year or 2 older, and as a result a year or 2 larger, but is allowed to play on the team with younger/smaller kids because they're in the same grade, I would absolutely have a problem with that if I were one of the other parents. It bothers me because it not only gives one child an unfair size advantage over the others, but it could discourage the kids that are age/grade appropriate but now compared to the older kid.

And if any of the younger & smaller kids got hurt because of being hit/tackled/tagged/fouled/whatever by a kid that is older and bigger and should be on a different team, I would be absolutely furious.

Now see I am not a fan of red shirting but I hate to say it at the higher grade level there is such a WIDE variance in sizes amongst the boys, some have had growth spurts others have not, esp if they haven gone thorugh puberty yet. It is hard to have a school team and not have it vary in sizes unlike a rec league.

DS13 plays for his school in football and basketball with 7th and 8th graders this year. The majority of the boys I know so most are there correct age except for the one boy I mentioned for speech earlier, he should be in 8th. Anyway, the sizes of these boys is all over the board. I dont think the redshirting would matter. You have some 7th graders who are taller and bigger than the 8th graders and they all play on the same teams. It is up to the coaches to keep them safe.

 

[Colleen27]

So would be ok with your child having serously hurt another child due to being so much bigger than them? I am not trying to be ugly here, but I have seen it happen quite often in our school leagues. A child who never should have been playing on that team injures a smaller child, not on purpose, but just because they are so much larger. We had a 1 st grader on our 1st and 2nd grade team get a concussion this year when he was atkled by a should be 3rd grader. He didn't MEAN to hurt him, but he had several inches and about 20# on him. He just hit him and slammed him to the ground. You may have a weight limit issue when he gets to middle school as well. Here, if you have a 6th grade team, those boys cannot exceed 150#. If they do, then they cannot play! A lot of our extreme redsahirts end up sitting out 6th grade. Also, If they reach age 19 during football season in high school, they become ineligble.

As I said before, school sports don't start until 7th or 8th grade here (basketball & track in 7th, baseball & football in 8th), which I think makes sense given the age/size differences in the younger grades. Up until that point, it is all community-based and sorted by age. And in our football program most 1st/2nd graders aren't even old enough for full contact ball - 8 is the minimum age for tackle football, before that it is flag/touch.

The thing is, what you're describing can happen in football any time even if all the kids are the exact same age. DS is easily 4" taller and 25# heavier than his same-age (not grade) friend across the street. I think that's something parents have to consider when they're choosing sports for their kids. My DH was the little kid in school and you know what? He didn't play football because it isn't the right sport for a 5'4", 110# high schooler. That's just life; not everyone is cut out for everything.

My DS is in 6th grade and the 12-13 age bracket for football, which made him one of the youngest on his team and he was still on the bigger side. He's comfortably below weight limit for our league, and I'm not sure the school program even has weight limits. He will be allowed to play through his senior year too (he'll turn 19 in January of his senior year), and I'm very glad our athletic association doesn't disqualify kids like my son because right now football is the biggest motivator we have with his grades. It seems really petty to take a kid who has been held back and struggles academically and take their senior year extracurriculars away from them too.

 

[mjantz]

Regardning height: my DS would be one Of the tallest even if he was in his grade level. He's in a mixed choir (7th and 8th grade) & he's still probably in the top 5 for height. When we go to the doctor for his yearly checkup he's almost off the chart. The boy is just really tall & moving him up a grade level (where he could have been) might have made it a little less noticeable, but probably not much.

 

[sam_gordon]

There's no good solution to this. Kids are going to develop at different ages. My DD plays softball. The organization she plays for bases groupings based on girls' age on January 1. So someone born January 1, 1998 will be in the same age group as someone born Dec. 30, 1998, but there's a year developmental differences.

My DS's soccer league on the other hand uses October 1 as their break point. His birthday is October 5, so he's "older" than most everyone in his age bracket. He's also bigger than many in his age bracket.

Now, DS is only 7, but he's bigger than some of DD(12)'s classmates.

DD played BB for her middle school this year as a 7th grader. There were 6th graders playing on the 7th grade team and 7th graders playing on the 8th grade team. In HS, there will be freshmen playing with seniors on varsity. In college, there will be 18yo's playing with 21yo's.

To me, parents need to make the choices that are best for them. I would hope the priority would be given to academic capabilities and kids aren't held back in elementary school just to be a little bit bigger/stronger in athletics. I'm sure it happens, but I wouldn't be concerned about it. It's very possible "larger" kids simply hit a growth spurt before smaller ones, despite them being the same age.

As far as 2nd graders suffering because they're "compared" to someone who's been through 2nd grade already? Who cares? That would only apply for one year and I don't think 2nd graders are graded on a curve. Either the kids know the material or not. Some will get it earlier than others (even those not held back).

 

[brymolmom]

There's no good solution to this. Kids are going to develop at different ages. My DD plays softball. The organization she plays for bases groupings based on girls' age on January 1. So someone born January 1, 1998 will be in the same age group as someone born Dec. 30, 1998, but there's a year developmental differences.

My DS's soccer league on the other hand uses October 1 as their break point. His birthday is October 5, so he's "older" than most everyone in his age bracket. He's also bigger than many in his age bracket.

Now, DS is only 7, but he's bigger than some of DD(12)'s classmates.

DD played BB for her middle school this year as a 7th grader. There were 6th graders playing on the 7th grade team and 7th graders playing on the 8th grade team. In HS, there will be freshmen playing with seniors on varsity. In college, there will be 18yo's playing with 21yo's.

To me, parents need to make the choices that are best for them. I would hope the priority would be given to academic capabilities and kids aren't held back in elementary school just to be a little bit bigger/stronger in athletics. I'm sure it happens, but I wouldn't be concerned about it. It's very possible "larger" kids simply hit a growth spurt before smaller ones, despite them being the same age.

As far as 2nd graders suffering because they're "compared" to someone who's been through 2nd grade already? Who cares? That would only apply for one year and I don't think 2nd graders are graded on a curve. Either the kids know the material or not. Some will get it earlier than others (even those not held back).

Yes, of course there will be natural differences between children. What I, and I believe other anti-redshirters desire, is for those differences to be as 'fair' as possible and all kids given as even a playing field as possible on day 1. Yes, with 12 month age span and even no age span at all you will have bigger kids and shorter kids...you will have more advanced academically kids and kids who need a bit extra help. But, with a 12 month span, what you get is a 'natural' bell curve for these - with a few at the high end, a few at the low and most in the middle. When you shift the average age in that classroom to older due to multiple kids being held back - that natural curve shifts...and no longer do you have most in the middle - you have more taller and seeminly more advanced students in the classroom. And while it is still difficult to handle the various sizes and abilities in one class even with a 12 month diffference, it can get even more difficult to handle now that you are unnaturally offsetting the curve to the higher end. Now the kids on the low end look way behind their 'peers', even though many of the kids aren't actually advanced, but are older, so of course know the younger kid curriculum already. Same thing in gym class or sports teams - bigger kids are now more prevalent and make it more difficult than if most are 'somewhere in the middle'.

It is my belief that while it doesn't completely eliminate the problems, it is the most fair to all kids and teachers to ensure a 12 month age difference by enforcing cutoffs dates.

And I most often see the parents that you refer to giving academics the priority - most want their kids to be the 'smartest' in the class.

 

[sam_gordon]

It is my belief that while it doesn't completely eliminate the problems, it is the most fair to all kids and teachers to ensure a 12 month age difference by enforcing cutoffs dates.

I think that's fine for out of school organizations. But, for example, my DS's 1st grade (I think 2nd grade does it too) has a "mini" basketball tournament between the four classrooms. Should the child who was held back (whether starting late, or repeating Kgarten or 1st grade) not be allowed to play? Or should he be allowed to play if he's "small" enough?

And I most often see the parents that you refer to giving academics the priority - most want their kids to be the 'smartest' in the class.

Then the parents are the ones who need educated. Holding someone back would only potentially make them the 'smartest' for one year... because they're "learning" stuff they already know. The next year... they're on the same footing as all their classmates.

 

[mom2aredhead]

I think that's fine for out of school organizations. But, for example, my DS's 1st grade (I think 2nd grade does it too) has a "mini" basketball tournament between the four classrooms. Should the child who was held back (whether starting late, or repeating Kgarten or 1st grade) not be allowed to play? Or should he be allowed to play if he's "small" enough?

Hmmmm...the school could set a grade or age requirement for the tournament. Then, (based on many of the comments here), parents can either adhere to the requirement, or choose to have their child play up a grade, down a grade, at grade level, with another class, or in another school. Because as long as they are doing what they feel is best for their child, it really doesn't matter much what's "allowed" and if their decision will effect anyone else.

 

[thebeesknees]

My 1st grade DD has a girl in her class that turned 8 in October. The girl's mom complains that she struggles socially at school because she is so much older. I think this is probably due to the face that the rest of the girls in class are 6, and 2 years makes a huge difference in the things they like to do and play. I do feel bad for this little girl. I hope the playing field gets more even for her in the next few years.

 

[Mickey Fliers]

I have 4 children....1 July Birthday, 2 Sept. birthdays and 1 November birthday. All of my children will go to school at a time that allows them to be 18 when they graduate high school (except for July birthday who will turn 18 right after graduation).

It is way more important to us to have our children mature enough to go away to college than to worry about anything in the 2nd grade.

 

[QVCshopper]

I know this isn't the case in the OP's situation, but my DD just turned 6 and is 51.5 inches tall. She is an "Amazon child," and a Nov. b-day. I did not hold her back; she started Kindergarten at 5 and just turned 6, but I'm sure everyone thinks she's much older (cut off here is Sept. 1). Today was her holiday concert and she is taller than EVERY other kid in the whole Kindergarten class by at least 4 inches. And you know what I tell her? She's lovely, beautifully, and gorgeously tall. My sister was tall, too, and used to walk slumped over; I always felt so bad. So, I totally get the mom who was commenting on her son being tall, whether or not she "red shirted" him.

 

[princessmom29]

I have 4 children....1 July Birthday, 2 Sept. birthdays and 1 November birthday. All of my children will go to school at a time that allows them to be 18 when they graduate high school (except for July birthday who will turn 18 right after graduation).

It is way more important to us to have our children mature enough to go away to college than to worry about anything in the 2nd grade.

Why on earth? I think both are important.They can always wait a year to go to college if they are not ready to leave home. A child who is bored and fustrated with school in second grade is likely going to end up not liking school much, and that isn't likely to magically change when they get to high school. I have seen it many times in the students I teach. Bright kids who got borted early on and never found joy in learning. Most of them want to get as far away from any kind of school as possible when they graduate. For that matter, waht is to say a child is not mature enough for college at 17? I went at 17 and was absolutely mature enough. How can you secide how mature a child will be at 17 when they are 5 anyway??

 

[Leajess99]

There's no good solution to this. Kids are going to develop at different ages. My DD plays softball. The organization she plays for bases groupings based on girls' age on January 1. So someone born January 1, 1998 will be in the same age group as someone born Dec. 30, 1998, but there's a year developmental differences.

My DS's soccer league on the other hand uses October 1 as their break point. His birthday is October 5, so he's "older" than most everyone in his age bracket. He's also bigger than many in his age bracket.

In all of the soccer leagues we have been in, parents can request early move up of their child. Although some will not do this because they want them to be the biggest and the best in that league, many do request their child be moved up early due to their size and fear that the bigger child may inadvertantly injure a smaller child. My 7 year old plays in the under 10 league by choice because of her speed and ability. While she is one of the younger ones in the league she is not small by any means. I used her size comparison to boys who were on her Under 8 team that were moving up due to age to under 10 and in comparison she was the same size.

I know we had a girl when my middle one was younger that would not play to her full ability because she was scared to hurt someone if she kicked the ball hard. It was quite detrimental for her in that age group but once she was moved up she gave 100% because the kids were closer to her size.

 

[Leajess99]

Why on earth? I think both are important.They can always wait a year to go to college if they are not ready to leave home. A child who is bored and fustrated with school in second grade is likely going to end up not liking school much, and that isn't likely to magically change when they get to high school. I have seen it many times in the students I teach. Bright kids who got borted early on and never found joy in learning. Most of them want to get as far away from any kind of school as possible when they graduate. For that matter, waht is to say a child is not mature enough for college at 17? I went at 17 and was absolutely mature enough. How can you secide how mature a child will be at 17 when they are 5 anyway??

Right now I deal with this with my 2nd grader as she is bored in Math. Basically this is her 3rd year dealing with addition and subtraction and she is bored doing it. She is actually doing multiplication and division at home. The everyday Mathmatics program stinks for her and she loves Compass Learning and the other math programs I have for her. She started on time (January birthday) but is naturally a learner like her sister.

 

[kayrosek]

I find this very interesting. I had no idea there where places where people could choose. In Missouri they have always (as far back as I know) had an exact date, and it is for public and private schools. When I was a kid the date was in Oct., I had an August birthday and went when I turned 5, I was always one of the youngest. The date is now July 31st, I would not have been allowed to go now days. My DD has a March birthday so she went at 5 1/2. DS has a Sept. birthday and had to wait until he was almost 6. In a way I suppose it is good since he takes after me and is very small. I can't believe some places let parents choose, and have 7 and 4 year olds in kindergarten together. Here it is a mix of 5 and 6 year olds only (unless a child has failed and is held back).

Mo. does have a minimum age date. A child who turns five after that cannot enter kindregarten that year, but they do allow "redshirting", I geuss it's called. Any parent can choose to keep thier child from starting school for any reason until the age of seven. My son barley missed the cutoff for his grade so he would have been older by almost a year anyway but then he repeated a year because of learning disorders and other issues. When I expressed concern about him being way older than other kids in the grade the principal told me parents keeping kids from starting kindregarten for one or even two years is quite popular in our district for sports reasons. He was very matter of fact about the fact that many parents he has talked to wait till there boys are 6 or 7 to enter them in school precisley so they will be the biggest kids in thier grade later on.

 

[GinnyEmma]

I am really surprised that so many want a child placed due to sports concerns. I personally think that kids should start school when they are developmentally ready. I don't care if some little boy isn't ready until they are 7. Whatever. It might keep a ton of kids off of ritalin, and not labeled as LD. But I guess that a soccer game is more important.

 

[herdtoDisney]

I'm not personally pro-or-anti- redshirting...I think each parent should decide for their own kids-which is why I'm against changing the cutoff date in my state, CT. Three of my five were 4 for at least part of K. One of these kids ended up in the GT program in elementary (it only runs in elem. in my town).

As far as sports-we aren't huge sports folks, but the kids did/do some recreational stuff, and really, some kids are going to be tall and some short, regardless of age. Dh and I are not tall so a year doesn't make a difference I couldn't imagine holding a child back just due to physical size...my kids are never going to be the tallest regardless of how old they are, LOL!

Really, from having experienced this all the way through (I have a graduate) I have found that, while folks get so worked up over K, it evens out by the end of elem and most certainly by HS. On my ds grad nite this past summer, everyone was grown

 

[Mickey Fliers]

Why on earth? I think both are important.They can always wait a year to go to college if they are not ready to leave home. A child who is bored and fustrated with school in second grade is likely going to end up not liking school much, and that isn't likely to magically change when they get to high school. I have seen it many times in the students I teach. Bright kids who got borted early on and never found joy in learning. Most of them want to get as far away from any kind of school as possible when they graduate. For that matter, waht is to say a child is not mature enough for college at 17? I went at 17 and was absolutely mature enough. How can you secide how mature a child will be at 17 when they are 5 anyway??

It is important to my husband and myself that our children be 18 when they leave for college. I have seen enough 17 year olds who went off to college have complete and utter nightmare first years....several who either dropped out, had emotional issues, or had to move to much smaller schools. Of course, this can happen to anyone, but in OUR EXPERIENCE, it has always been the "younger" freshman.

Now, of course I care about my second grader. However, a bored second grader ( and mine is already 8) can easily be challenged and supplemented at home. In the OP's situation, the "older" child has very little bearing on the academic achievement of her own "young" child. She is just irritated b/c she doesn't want to hear how tall he is.

And for us, I am very, very thankful that my Sept. and Nov. birthday kids are the generally the oldest. We move every 2-3 years and in each state, the cutoffs are much different. If we had started my 7th grader when he was 4 and made the Dec. 1st cutoff (bday Nov. 18) he would now be the way youngest by over a year b/c the cutoff here is Sept. 1st. He would have been surrounded by much older children in Middle School. Not a situation I would have been thrilled with.

 

[brymolmom]

It is important to my husband and myself that our children be 18 when they leave for college. I have seen enough 17 year olds who went off to college have complete and utter nightmare first years....several who either dropped out, had emotional issues, or had to move to much smaller schools. Of course, this can happen to anyone, but in OUR EXPERIENCE, it has always been the "younger" freshman.

Now, of course I care about my second grader. However, a bored second grader ( and mine is already 8) can easily be challenged and supplemented at home. In the OP's situation, the "older" child has very little bearing on the academic achievement of her own "young" child. She is just irritated b/c she doesn't want to hear how tall he is.

And for us, I am very, very thankful that my Sept. and Nov. birthday kids are the generally the oldest. We move every 2-3 years and in each state, the cutoffs are much different. If we had started my 7th grader when he was 4 and made the Dec. 1st cutoff (bday Nov. 18) he would now be the way youngest by over a year b/c the cutoff here is Sept. 1st. He would have been surrounded by much older children in Middle School. Not a situation I would have been thrilled with.

EXACTLY!!! So you can totally see where we anti-redshirters are coming from...It is not a good situation all around so it should not be allowed. If it was not allowed, then this wouldn't happen and all could be happy.