Red-shirting study: better mental health

[SKL]

 

I can't imagine such young kids (5 and 6 yr olds) having the attention span and retention to be able to do the things that are expected at K and 1st grade.  For those reasons I think parents are totally justified to hold them back.

 

Who knows, may be if enough people did that - the G-ds would listen and drop the expectations and change the curriculum for those grades.

 

I think it is the other way around.  The more parents put their kids into KG at 6yo, the more they will expct everyone in KG to act like they are 6 / turning 7, i.e., the more of 1st grade expectations they will impose on KG kids.  Eventually more and more parents will be forced to hold their kids back bacause their kids aren't ready for 1st grade at 5yo.  I would rather more parents bucked the trend and sent their kids to school and demanded that the teachers meet them where they are.

 

[lea_lpz]

Hmm, I can't agree that it's a nonissue homeschooling. I wouldn't feel comfortable skipping a year of math later on to advance my kid into the grade or book he "should" be in had I red-shirted. You could do spread that extra year over the red-shirting years I suppose, but that doesn't sound ideal for all kids either.

 

It seemed the kids in the study didn't feel dumb, actually the opposite. ETA: The study doesn't cover this exact situation, but it does appear that for some, red-shirting is better for them in the long run.

 

Interesting conversation, I appreciate the discussion.

I also feel it's an issue for homeschoolers, too. I am in Ca and we can "homeschool" via being an independent study student through a public charter or private school or you can file a private school affidavit and be your own private school. We chose the former. So we need to do standardized testing. Because if this, and because I also am not sure my son won't need to enter public school at some point, I decided to "red shirt" him so he'd be in the appropriate grade. He's a summer birthday so we opted to classify him as Transitional K at 5. This year at 6 he's in k. It's were he's at academically, socially, and maturity wise in every sense.

 

That said, I agree that delayed starts or red shirting would not be necessary if kindergarten was developmentally appropriate for 5 year olds. I do not think my son is immature or slow but rather not pressured to be performing at an academic level beyond him. His t-k year at 5 looked like kinder when I was younger---counting, learning letter sounds and names, writing his name, coloring, cutting, playing and being read to. This year in k he's learning what I learned in 1st, simple addition and subtraction, calendar, time, counting money, learning to read sight and cvc words, and writing simple sentences.

 

Theoretically he likely would "catch up to grade level" with me not having him classified a grade younger by middle elementary years but my concern is for him to continually score a level below in state testing or to be in a situation he'd need to be enrolled in ps and have him functioning a year below his grade level.

[SereneHome]

I think it is the other way around.  The more parents put their kids into KG at 6yo, the more they will expct everyone in KG to act like they are 6 / turning 7, i.e., the more of 1st grade expectations they will impose on KG kids.  Eventually more and more parents will be forced to hold their kids back bacause their kids aren't ready for 1st grade at 5yo.  I would rather more parents bucked the trend and sent their kids to school and demanded that the teachers meet them where they are.

 

 

Yes, that would be great too   I've never dealt with public school system in US, so don't have first hand knowledge, but some of the moms I talked to say that they have very little say in what happens in school.  That includes academics.

 

And yes, moms of the kids in that music class all said that their children are not the oldest.  Basically, a big portion of K class were 6 yrs old when they started K.    I live in a rural state and it seems that each town kind of makes their own rules whether they allow this to happen, bc the last kid in my kids' music class, who is also 6, had to start 1st grade.  His school wouldn't allow red-shirting.

[Reefgazer]

I'd like to address the bolded.  The bolded doesn't apply to us, even though we red-shirted our son, because if we were not happy with the educational offerings we had the means to walk out the door to homeschool or attend private school.  But the bolded matters very much to most parents because being "the best" in elementary school (or darned close to it) determines whether a child has a fighting chance to escape the zoo-like and inferior public middle school they are zoned for and get into one of the district's magnet or gifted programs.  Attendance on those schools is test-score only, so being able to pull off one of the higher marks means a better middle school and subsequent high school education for the child.  It is not a trivial concern to be dismissed by saying "you can't imagine doing this", as if it were an inferior strategy.  If I were in the position of not having the financial means to go elsewhere, you can bet high scores would have been on my radar.  Is this fair or a good system?  Of course not, and I would love to see this change.  But at the moment, that is the reality in many school districts and parents are playing the game to get their children the best education possible.  I agree that in the long run, this is not good for the public schools.  But it is not elitist to want the best for your child and to work the system for it; this is true no matter what your income or social level. 

My kids are in music class with 6 kids who are in public school.  5 out of 6 are in K even though they are 6 yrs old.  Moms were very open about their reasons - they wanted their kids to be the "oldest" so they would be "better".  4 out of those 5 kids are girls.  All 5 of those kids have summer bdays.

 

I am probably more judgmental than some of you, but I can't imagine holding my kid back a year just so he is "the best" in his class.

 

That being said, I think it's crazy that school starts this early in US.  I've mentioned this before, where I am from, 1st grade started at 7 and even then you weren't expected to know ANYTHING academic.  Our schools started slow but then definitely made up for it quite nicely at the higher grades.

 

I can't imagine such young kids (5 and 6 yr olds) having the attention span and retention to be able to do the things that are expected at K and 1st grade.  For those reasons I think parents are totally justified to hold them back.

 

Who knows, may be if enough people did that - the G-ds would listen and drop the expectations and change the curriculum for those grades.

 

Edited November 19, 2015 by reefgazer

[Bootsie]

When DD was in first grade, there was a boy in the class who was continuously praised for his good behavior and maturity.  The other children in the class were always compared to him--especially the boys.  The teacher once told me, "If I could only have a class full of Roberts..."  The boy was over 7 1/2 years old when starting first grade--sure he was more mature than the 6 year old boys.  But, it didn't seem fair to me to be comparing a 6 year old with a 7 1/2 year old.  The same boy turned 18 early in 11th grade and 19 early in 12th grade.  But then, he was so mature for a high schooler--let's send him to "early" college.  So, it is having an impact at both ends of education.

 

I was visiting a friend in Austria who was talking about her son finishing first grade.  A typical six year old boy, he has lots of energy and loves to run, hike, ski, jump on the trampoline.  The mother said, that some of the girls in first grade already knew how to write all of their letters and her son was just learning to recognize all of them.  She wasn't worried that he had started first grade not knowing how to read (or that he was FINISHING first grade not knowing how to read). He was exploring the world around him and learning at his own speed--just like he had learned to walk at his own speed, learned to talk at his own speed, cut his teeth at his own speed, etc. 

 

I think that in many places in the US, education is developmentally inappropriate for many of the children.  Instead of focusing on what we want for a child at the end of primary education, we focus so much on everyone being at the same milestone at every point in time during their education. 

[BooksandBoys]

I don't know how I feel about this -- ie, I'm not sure if I regret our decision or not. Our daughter has a September birthday and her preschool teachers were heavily in favor of redshirting all kids with September birthdays. We were surprised and just dumb, at the time. We went along with it because we allowed ourselves to think the idea of giving our child "the gift of time" was a good one. However, it became very evident in kindergarten and then even moreso in first grade, that my dd was miles ahead of her classmates, both socially and academically. We ultimately pulled her and her sister out to homeschool in the second half of her first grade year.

 

Having homeschooled ever since, I just don't place that much importance on grade level. I still call her an 8th grader, even though the work she does is far more advanced. It doesn't really matter when we homeschool, so I haven't worried too much about it up to this point. I'm not sure what to do with her for the future though....early high school graduation? Or take an extra year to explore more deeply before college? Both options have their appeal. I'm still not sure if we did the right thing to hold her back a year. Time will tell.

This is one of the countless reasons I homeschool. My boys are smart (aren't all kids), highly inattentive, and excessively wiggly (results of evaluations are pending...there are issues here). At nearly 8, my oldest is just now reaching a point where I think he would be able to handle the attention and sitting required in a kindergarten classroom, yet most of his academic work is several grades ahead for his age. My second is shaping up to be even more asynchronous. I would have had to red-shirt them to give them even a bit of chance in school, but they would be bored out of their minds academically. I'm so grateful that we've been able to keep them home. I can absolutely see how giving kids a bit more time to mature before making them sit and study all day would help them show fewer signs of behavioral problems.

[SereneHome]

I'd like to address the bolded.  The bolded doesn't apply to us, even though we red-shirted our son, because if we were not happy with the educational offerings we had the means to walk out the door to homeschool or attend private school.  But the bolded matters very much to most parents because being "the best" in elementary school (or darned close to it) determines whether a child has a fighting chance to escape the zoo-like and inferior public middle school they are zoned for and get into one of the district's magnet or gifted programs.  Attendance on those schools is test-score only, so being able to pull off one of the higher marks means a better middle school and subsequent high school education for the child.  It is not a trivial concern to be dismissed by saying "you can't imagine doing this", as if it were an inferior strategy.  If I were in the position of not having the financial means to go elsewhere, you can bet high scores would have been on my radar.  Is this fair or a good system?  Of course not, and I would love to see this change.  But at the moment, that is the reality in many school districts and parents are playing the game to get their children the best education possible.  I agree that in the long run, this is not good for the public schools.  But it is not elitist to want the best for your child and to work the system for it; this is true no matter what your income or social level. 

 

Fair enough.  And I am sure if I was faced with that type of situation, I would do whatever I could for my kid, but somewhere deep down I would feel like I am cheating or something.

 

But then again, as I mentioned, it seems that rules are quite arbitrary for ages and grades, at least in my state.  And each town decides what they want to do.  So, may be I am just sitting too high on my horse or something

 

[Farrar]

I'd like to address the bolded.  The bolded doesn't apply to us, even though we red-shirted our son, because if we were not happy with the educational offerings we had the means to walk out the door to homeschool or attend private school.  But the bolded matters very much to most parents because being "the best" in elementary school (or darned close to it) determines whether a child has a fighting chance to escape the zoo-like and inferior public middle school they are zoned for and get into one of the district's magnet or gifted programs.  Attendance on those schools is test-score only, so being able to pull off one of the higher marks means a better middle school and subsequent high school education for the child.  It is not a trivial concern to be dismissed by saying "you can't imagine doing this", as if it were an inferior strategy.  If I were in the position of not having the financial means to go elsewhere, you can bet high scores would have been on my radar.  Is this fair or a good system?  Of course not, and I would love to see this change.  But at the moment, that is the reality in many school districts and parents are playing the game to get their children the best education possible.  I agree that in the long run, this is not good for the public schools.  But it is not elitist to want the best for your child and to work the system for it; this is true no matter what your income or social level. 

 

I basically agree with this - the system is what it is and parents feel pressed to milk whatever they can out of it. And they should. I mean, they have to. I think it's a negative trend. I think it's bad for schools and bad for kids on the whole. But I get it. And I wouldn't blame any parent who did it.

 

I don't think doing whatever you can is elitist, but realistically, I think you have to have money to redshirt. Obviously the truly rich can pay for private school options and live near the ones they choose. However, it still takes money for most families to red shirt. You have to have money to pay for another year of preschool or another year of childcare or another year of someone out of work. Sure, there are families of little means who manage to make it work, but I still think it's by and large an elitist trend, even if that elitism is relative to people who have a whole other level of means.

[Lecka]

I have had it recommended by both my son's K teachers to consider holding them back in K, and we have decided to decline both times. We see their side, but we think it has been the right decision.

 

I know one person who regretted redshirting when her son was younger, but now that he is older, she sees benefits.

 

I think you might see benefits sometimes and downsides sometimes.

 

For a lot of kids, I think the truth is that it doesn't matter too much!

 

If there is a clear bad fit, then that is different. For a lot of kids, it is going to be fine either way, and parents can be satisfied with their decision either way.

 

For a few kids it will seem like one or the other really would have been better.

[Bluegoat]

I think it is the other way around.  The more parents put their kids into KG at 6yo, the more they will expct everyone in KG to act like they are 6 / turning 7, i.e., the more of 1st grade expectations they will impose on KG kids.  Eventually more and more parents will be forced to hold their kids back bacause their kids aren't ready for 1st grade at 5yo.  I would rather more parents bucked the trend and sent their kids to school and demanded that the teachers meet them where they are.

 

 

Six is a pretty common school-starting age in other systems.

[frogger]

Of course, I completely understand why people red -shirt their children. Why would I risk the emotional, mental, and even to some extent physical health of my children by forcing them to stay all day in an institution that is trying to make them do things that are developmentally inappropriate for them. As a homeschooler of course, I don't have to worry about it but think of all the children who are stuck in those situations.

 

Teachers have less and less say over what is taught to children so individual parents can't make a teacher do anything but I do believe that we should be fighting the ridiculously politicized educational system for the sake of all children.