Redshirting getting out of hand?

[Haiku]

What you are describing here has absolutly nothing to do with age, but with the failure of a system.

 

Probably so. But considering that most teachers in the country work within that system, it's pretty harsh to say that it

 

should not pose a huge challenge for a good teacher who knows what he/she is doing.

 

if you are then going to say it's a failure of the system. Asking teachers to deal with these huge ranges of ability in the system they are currently in is, to me, asking the impossible.

 

Tara

[Cera]

I think that if a teacher can't handle an age range of up to 18 months in the early grades, there's a problem. A big one. If you look at top private schools (I mean 'good' ones ftr) you will see that an 18 mos age range is pretty common and should not pose a huge challenge for a good teacher who knows what he/she is doing.

 

That most public schools cannot and do not support this is not a failure of the child's age, but a failure of the inflexible system itself. This inability to accommodate a range learners and ages is a main reason I am a hser. The people I've met in my elementary schooling community are kind and decent, but mostly not creative and not flexible. Most cannot accommodate a range of learners in their classroom. Many are not as educated as they need to be for such a challenging job.

 

I'm not sure the comparison between top private schools and public schools is fair. An 18 month age range in top privates may be pretty common but the ability range that represents is generally fairly small. Private schools use entrance testing and interviews to confirm the ability of students who get in which keeps teachers from being faced with such a wide range of learners. Public schools are required to take all students regardless of ability and in many areas are mandated to mix ability levels which further widens the gap in academics from the top to bottom of the class.

[SusanAR]

The number one reason it occurs here: SPORTS. They want their kid to have an advantage.

I didn't read all the responses, so this may have been mentioned:001_smile: already

[LibraryLover]

Cookie cutter systems fail children. Yep.

 

Good teachers often lack the support they need as well.

 

Probably so. But considering that most teachers in the country work within that system, it's pretty harsh to say that it

 

 

 

if you are then going to say it's a failure of the system. Asking teachers to deal with these huge ranges of ability in the system they are currently in is, to me, asking the impossible.

 

Tara

Edited January 4, 2010 by LibraryLover

[Haiku]

Cookie cutter systems fail children. Yep.

 

Yeah, so I guess I still don't get what you're saying. It's the fault of teachers for not being skilled enough or it's the fault of the system for sucking? It's a problem to have these wide age ranges because the teachers aren't skilled enough to handle it or it shouldn't be a problem because the teachers should be skilled enough to handle it?

 

Sorry if I'm appearing dense, but I'm not really following what you're getting at.

 

Tara

[Stacy in NJ]

Red-shirting is very common in my area because kindergarten is no longer kindergarten. It's full day with an academic focus. Most of the kids leave Kindy knowing how to read. Some parents feel it's too much pressure too soon. An extra fun year at pre-school gives the child some time to mature without the added expectations that come with our local public school.

[Joanne]

I am terriblly confused and surprised at this thread and the setting. :confused:

 

How can a teacher effectively teach kids who come to first grade with 12-16 months' difference in maturity and skills?

 

Are people really that concerned about their kids' ability to succeed?

 

Tara, I honestly thought this question was snarky and sarcastic rather than sincere.:tongue_smilie:

 

IMO:

 

1) Readiness for formal academics varies widely among littles before age 10.

 

2) Boys tend to have more challenges entering formal learning settings at younger ages than girls.

 

3) In the absence of organic learning issues, neglect or abuse, the field is level by mid teens. A minor child who started later should be able to transition into the same acedmic levels as their age peers.

 

4) The institution imposed standards do not serve individuals.

 

5) I'm surprised that "we" as a collective group - at least as represented in this thread - do not support individual families making custom decisions for their children's education.

 

6) This thread shows a "buy into" homogenous age settings.

 

7) This thread buys into the idea that late teen boys are not capable of mature, respectful and appropriate behavior.

 

8) This thread shows we want the public schools to be accomodating to our needs but only in scripted ways we approve.

[Haiku]

 

Tara, I honestly thought this question was snarky and sarcastic rather than sincere.:tongue_smilie:

 

 

Well, it wasn't, and I don't think that I indicated that in anything I said. Having talked a lot about this with my mother-in-law over the holidays, the idea that she is supposed to be teaching just-turned-six-year olds and almost-turning-eight year olds the same things and getting the same results seems silly.

 

Tara

[Mrs Mungo]

Well, it wasn't, and I don't think that I indicated that in anything I said. Having talked a lot about this with my mother-in-law over the holidays, the idea that she is supposed to be teaching just-turned-six-year olds and almost-turning-eight year olds the same things and getting the same results seems silly.

 

Tara

 

Why is ability linked with age in the first place? That's the question. Maybe age-based stratification should be eliminated. It's one of the main reasons I homeschool. My dd's birthday is in December. She would have entered Kindergarten at our local school when she was 5, almost 6. She was reading the Little House books and Roald Dahl at a time when other kids her age were learning their alphabet. They wouldn't allow her to skip a grade, so, we decided not to participate in the system.

[Haiku]

The main reason that we chose to homeshool is because, as has been stated in this thread many times, a one-size education doesn't work. It just seems to me that this extreme redshirting of kids makes a teacher's already Herculean job even more implausible.

 

Tara

[Mrs Mungo]

The main reason that we chose to homeshool is because, as has been stated in this thread many times, a one-size education doesn't work. It just seems to me that this extreme redshirting of kids makes a teacher's already Herculean job even more implausible.

 

Tara

 

But is the reason age or ability? Are these 7-8 year old first graders performing at first grade level?

[mcconnellboys]

Well, what I was told with my older son in looking at numerous private schools was that they wanted the children to be able to sit still and follow directions, be ready to write quite a bit (in my opinion, even for K), and then individual teachers had their own weird criteria. Boys generally tend to be behind girls a couple of years in these areas, although some girls with strong ADD characteristics tend to profile more like boys.

 

My son's K teacher wanted all the kids to be able to put detailed faces on their stick figure drawings, including eyebrows, eyelashes, etc. That was her measure of maturity. Because my budding artist of a son was at that time interested in drawing animals rather than people, and wouldn't color at all, she thought he needed to be held back. She was a wonderful teacher, but couldn't seem to get past this strange idea. We had to get IQ testing done to convince the school that it was not in his best interest to be held back....

 

It was teachers at this same school who first told me that they routinely kept back all the boys they could so that they would do better in high school when it was time to do ACT/SAT testing.

 

In public schools where we now live, I was told this past year that boys are being held back TWO years in many cases, especially if it's thought that they will make good football players, so that they will be bigger and stronger during their junior/senior years. Colleges also sometimes hold back their freshmen players from play for a year in order to grow them bigger/stronger before they begin to play them.

 

For larger classroom situations, I believe teachers just want older students in hopes of having a quieter, more compliant student body so they don't have to bother so much with reprimanding students constantly.

[Haiku]

Are these 7-8 year old first graders performing at first grade level?

 

According to my mother-in-law, no. That's the reason it's such a problem for her. Her six year olds are learning phonics and most of her almost-8-year-olds are ready for more challenging material. Their coordination is better, their conflict resolution skills are better, their skills in synthesizing the material taught are more advanced ... these are things my mother-in-law mentioned. She said she's almost having to teach two separate lessons on many things, because they 6 year olds can't keep up with the 8 year olds, and the 8 year olds are bored with the 6 year old material.

 

Tara

[mcconnellboys]

I think the problem is that most states are moving to make mandatory school age lower, rather than higher. I would be all for allowing students to start school at age 7 or 8, as other countries do, but what I'm afraid they're moving toward is warehousing and boring our children endlessly before they really begin to get down to any sort of meaningful work. This will only make a bad situation worse as so many, many children are already made to hate the thought of education due to being bored to death. So let's bore them even more for a couple more years before we get down to work with them. That's only going to alienate even more children within the system, I'm afraid......

[Mrs Mungo]

According to my mother-in-law, no. That's the reason it's such a problem for her. Her six year olds are learning phonics and most of her almost-8-year-olds are ready for more challenging material. Their coordination is better, their conflict resolution skills are better, their skills in synthesizing the material taught are more advanced ... these are things my mother-in-law mentioned. She said she's almost having to teach two separate lessons on many things, because they 6 year olds can't keep up with the 8 year olds, and the 8 year olds are bored with the 6 year old material.

 

Tara

 

Maybe she should fight to have those kids moved up a grade? I don't really know much about dealing in the public school system, other than what I experienced as a student. If that's not a possibility then maybe she could investigate some of the homeschooling curricula that allow teaching the same thing to students at different levels. I realize she couldn't necessarily implement them but I bet she could get some good ideas.

 

The bottom line here is-the system is extremely faulty.

[Happy]

We held my youngest son out an extra year. He would have turned five the day before kindergarten started. No way. He had an extra year of growing, fun, and preschool and went to his first day of kindy on his sixth birthday.

 

We started homeschooling him in third grade, so age, grades, and peers didn't matter quite so much. Yes, he was often the oldest in his grade group. He was the first of his friends to drive. And he was 18 years old at the beginning of his senior year. We had no more problems with him concerning his studies or his attitude than anyone else has with their son and far less than we had with his older brother.

 

The most 'awkward' it got was at the end of his junior year. We all realized that some of the kiddoes graduating that year were born within a few weeks of his birthday. I explained, as I had all during his life, why we chose to wait a year. Since we homeschooled, he had the option prior to his junior year of accelerating his studies and graduating a year 'early.' He chose to play baseball one more year.

 

I believe it is in boy's best interest to grow and mature an extra year or so. Would my son have done well in school if I'd sent him that first year? Knowing him now, yes, he would have. But I didn't know that then. I'm glad we erred on the side of caution.

[Ellie]

Oh please.

[FairProspects]

It sounds like your MIL may be teaching at a school with age-appropriate expectations. Around here the expectations are not. They want 6 y.o. boys to sit and journal for the last 45 min of the day in their seats. There is NO WAY my ds could that next year. This greatly impacts our decision to hs and redshirt as partial enrollment is allowed here and ds may be in school to some degree at some point.

[KidsHappen]

My youngest was very close to the cut off date. She would have done much better to go to the lower grade with the younger age group but because she made the cut off she went to the higher grade. Since this is her first year in PS and she is adjusting to so many things, she is having a hard time keeping. She would have been better served to be exceeding in the lower grade than struggling in the higher one. I really wish we had insisted on the lower of the two grades.

[8circles]

There is not a shred of evidence or documentation that shows age ranges in classrooms to be a hindrance. (I would agree that lack of training and education given to most teachers is a hindrance when an age range is involved).

 

We know that children do not children learn better or faster or are happier or more 'productive' when all 6 yr olds are together or all 10 yr olds are together.

 

That most teachers would find is easier to teach a group of exact-same learners of the exact same age is not a benefit to real children.

 

I haven't finished reading all the responses. But this one I wanted to respond to. I don't think that a wider age range hinders learning or teaching except when it comes to bullying. From my experience, the PS's do not know how to appropriately handle bullying, especially when it can be exacerbated by greater age differences which often means greater size difference or difference in "social interests".

 

My son started K after turning 5 in June. About 1/2 of the boys in his class had been held back & it created huge problems including bullying. For us, it was one of the main reasons we decided to HS. I am generally an advocate of multi-age classrooms. However, one has to have one's eyes opened to what other issues may arise so they can be addressed properly. At this point, I think the PS's are sticking their heads in the sand as they sing the praises or red-shirting.

[AngieC]

Why is ability linked with age in the first place? That's the question. Maybe age-based stratification should be eliminated. It's one of the main reasons I homeschool. My dd's birthday is in December. She would have entered Kindergarten at our local school when she was 5, almost 6. She was reading the Little House books and Roald Dahl at a time when other kids her age were learning their alphabet. They wouldn't allow her to skip a grade, so, we decided not to participate in the system.

 

I'm so glad to read this. Every time I read a thread on any forum about redshirting, I cringe. My daughter has an August birthday and where I live she will not be eligible for K until next year - starting the day after she turns six.

 

She is already ahead of K curriculum at our local PS and I can't imagine making her sit through it -- I can't imagine how long it would take before she would "level out." Why is it so many people are for holding kids back, but no one ever advocates for those who should go early (not that starting K at the same time you turn 5 is early in my book, but according my school district, it is.)

 

(BTW, we will almost certainly be homeschooling!)

[8circles]

IMO:

...

5) I'm surprised that "we" as a collective group - at least as represented in this thread - do not support individual families making custom decisions for their children's education.

 

6) This thread shows a "buy into" homogenous age settings.

...

8) This thread shows we want the public schools to be accomodating to our needs but only in scripted ways we approve.

 

I can only answer for me, but:

I fully support individual families making educational decisions for their children.

I don't buy into homogeneous age settings but feel classrooms should be more ability-based.

I don't want the public schools to accomodate my needs but I'd like them to stop making it harder & harder to HS my children.

 

Yet I'm very much against red-shirting as it has come to be in my area & with the fallout that it has had in the public schools.

[Tidbits of Learning]

I think red-shirting a child that truly needs to have that extra year of maturity or to gain more educational skills is a good idea. However, I have seen the trend that they redshirt for no real reason.

I do believe that kindergarten is the new first grade. My son is 2 grades below my middle daughter. In those 2 years, they revamped the kindergarten here and now it is tough. I doubt my dd's would have done well in such an intense academic environment with full on test prep.

They wanted to hold my son back. Not because of academics, but b/c he didn't do well with 3 phonics programs and switching classes for art, extra phonics (for all not for those behind), and a reading resource teacher that called him a failure. Believe it or not he wasn't the oldest in his class and he was 6. He has a Dec. birthday. One of the twins in his class was playing pitching machine which you have to turn 7 by April to play that summer. He passed public school kindergarten and we brought him home. He is doing great with 1st and 2nd grade work.

It is out of hand when you have 20 kids and some just turned 5 and some are 7 and aren't delayed in any way. My kids all made the cutoffs except ds and went to school on time. They were all the youngest in the class with friends turning 2 years older than them. There were girls in the 3rd grade hitting puberty as well as boys hitting puberty and then there was my 8 year old.

There is a different dynamic between 8 year old girls and 10 year old girls. I'm sure it is the same with boys. They are just interested in other things and if they are exposed to the more mature things early it doesn't bode well either. My dd9 would have moved out of elementary school this year and we brought her home. The 2nd elementary school (not middle school) is for 4th and 5th grade. There are 14 year old boys attending and not all b/c they fail or are held back. They have a great football team.

When I was in the 5th grade, you would be 10 or 11 not 11 turning 12 or almost 13 and in some cases going to be 14 by the end of the year.

I can't imagine trying to live up to or fit in with kids that would have been in 6th or 7th grade when I was a kid as a 4th or 5th grader.

My children had trouble at field days b/c they were competing with kids way older than them. They did poor and then felt bad about it. They were called midget and picked on because of height. They were told that they couldn't be in the grade they said by other kids b/c they didn't look "old" enough. This started in 1st grade with dd9. She was miserable b/c everyone was older than her. She did fit in in 3rd grade, but she was acting like she was 11 not 8. It isn't a good situation for teachers or kids that aren't red-shirted.

[FairProspects]

I'm so glad to read this. Every time I read a thread on any forum about redshirting, I cringe. My daughter has an August birthday and where I live she will not be eligible for K until next year - starting the day after she turns six.

 

She is already ahead of K curriculum at our local PS and I can't imagine making her sit through it -- I can't imagine how long it would take before she would "level out." Why is it so many people are for holding kids back, but no one ever advocates for those who should go early (not that starting K at the same time you turn 5 is early in my book, but according my school district, it is.)

 

(BTW, we will almost certainly be homeschooling!)

 

That's the issue itself. Kids abilities vary soo much at 5 & 6, and some of it is even a boy/girl issue. My ds (who is very bright) just would not do well in a formal academic setting, even when he grasped the material. He may even struggle at 6, and not with the comprehending, but with the sitting still, following directions type stuff that many girls don't even bat an eye about. Ps readiness is a lot more than just academic ability, and that is the crux of the issue.

 

FWIW, I remember kicking the boys butts in early elementary school because I followed the rules & did the work, but by 5th/6th grade I was thinking, "Where did all these smart boys come from?" They had been there all long learning, but it wasn't obvious because they were always in trouble for being out of their seats & such.

[gardening momma]

AFAIK our school system is very rigid about birth dates and grade level.

Both of my dd have birthdays less than a month past the cut-off date for our state. If I wanted to, I could legally start them in Kindergarten in the ps system in the year they turn 7. Then they'd turn 8 just after starting 1st grade. The school system would have no control over that. Is that what Tara is referring to--when the parents choose to start their kids? Legally parents usually have a range of 2 years in which to choose to start their kids in K.

 

ETA: I haven't read the whole thread yet, so someone may have already mentioned this.

Edited January 5, 2010 by gardening momma

[LibraryLover]

It's both. However, there are some very educated & gifted teachers who are able to handle an 18 mos age span in their classes.

 

 

Yeah, so I guess I still don't get what you're saying. It's the fault of teachers for not being skilled enough or it's the fault of the system for sucking? It's a problem to have these wide age ranges because the teachers aren't skilled enough to handle it or it shouldn't be a problem because the teachers should be skilled enough to handle it?

 

Sorry if I'm appearing dense, but I'm not really following what you're getting at.

 

Tara

[LibraryLover]

Exactly.

 

It's a poor system that has all 7 yr olds reading Go Dog Go, or assumes all 5 yr olds can decode Go Dog Go (or they are special needs). Lots of 7 yr olds, and lots of 5 yr olds can do so much more. Lots of wonderul and bright 7-10 yr olds need more time to gain mastery. It's no shame. Most schools can't handle it. I hate to say it...I really do. I know some very fine and thoughtful teachers, but the system itself is often rotten to the core.

 

This single age classroom thing is a sham. The idea that letting a child start kindergarten at age 6 instead of age 5 is a huge problem within this system is one big fat red herring.

 

But is the reason age or ability? Are these 7-8 year old first graders performing at first grade level?

Edited January 5, 2010 by LibraryLover

[Tidbits of Learning]

I used to teach at a small, private Montessori school (many years ago:001_smile:). My first year I taught a combined class of grades 4, 5 and 6 and the following year I taught the combined class of grades 1, 2 and 3. In Montessori schools there are usually at least two teachers. When teaching the class of the primary grades there was myself and the head teacher (she was Montessori trained and at the time I was just starting my training) who were both full time teachers as well as a part time teacher who worked with some children with special needs. This was one of the real benefits of this type of school. Our students could be working at whatever level they needed in any subject. So our school had four classrooms grouped with Preschool through K (so our K students stayed with the preschool students), then 1st-3rd, 4th-6th and then a Middle School class for grades 7-8. Our school stopped at grade 8.

 

Montessori is great and set up for multiple ages, but public school is set up for one mode only. It is one size fits all for that particular grade. My ds did great in a multi-age classroom at Montessori, but those same age groups lumped together at a ps kindergarten was awful and the teacher was stressed b/c she had to teach what they told her to no matter where the kids were really at academically, emotionally, maturity...

[Donna]

I don't see any problem with parents making the decision to hold their children back in K. I have seen an entirely different type of redshirting where I live. It is becoming in vogue where I live for parents to home back their 8th graders (having them do 8th grade twice) from high school for sports reasons. That type of redshirting I do see as ridiculous. Often these kids have already been late starting K and now are up to 2 years older than their grade peers.

[Renee in NC]

The main reason that we chose to homeshool is because, as has been stated in this thread many times, a one-size education doesn't work. It just seems to me that this extreme redshirting of kids makes a teacher's already Herculean job even more implausible.

 

Tara

 

Actually, in my now 7yo's case, it would have been a BLESSING to a teacher for me to red shirt him. The year he was to start K, the cutoff was October 15th (they have since moved it to August thankfully!) He would have been 4 years old and turned 5 at the beginning of October.

 

There is NO WAY he could have gone in to a K setting. We have since discovered that he has the same language issues as his 8yo brother (possibly worse) and that would have compounded the problem. I did not send him to school, but if we had, it wouldn't have been until the next year.

 

BUT, I see this as a failure of the system. My oldest ds would have had a much easier, less stressful first 5-6 years of school if he had been allowed to wait a year for K. However, now at 16 and a junior, it would be a disservice for him to have to wait to graduate. So, on this end, I am glad we waited.

 

One of the reasons I homeschool is to get AWAY from the grade restrictions. In reality, school doesn't take 13 years to finish.

[LibraryLover]

I agree that this is probably not fully serving the children. But with private US college tuition and board at nearly 50k a year, I can see why parents with children who excel in sports might want to give their child an edge for sport scholarships. Sports scholarships are far, far more lucrative than academic ones.

 

This is a symptom of something bigger.

 

I don't see any problem with parents making the decision to hold their children back in K. I have seen an entirely different type of redshirting where I live. It is becoming in vogue where I live for parents to home back their 8th graders (having them do 8th grade twice) from high school for sports reasons. That type of redshirting I do see as ridiculous. Often these kids have already been late starting K and now are up to 2 years older than their grade peers.

[Rosie_0801]

People in high school are NOT treated like mature adults, they are often treated very condescendingly, and I can certainly imagine that a 19 or 20 year old in high school feeling extreme frustration at being treated like a child.

 

That was the situation with the guys I went to school with and they were all graduating at 17 or 18. I daresay that's the reason they all drank and smoked pot.

 

Rosie

[tatertotschool]

I have a relative who redshirted his kid to give him an advantage in sports. He's a big kid anyway, so in his class he is a giant. They live in a place that at 8 year olds they play tackle football. His little sister is nearly 2.5 years younger and only a year behind him in school.

[chaik76]

I'm so confused by all of it, frankly. I'm not sure what age has to do with anything. Wouldn't it be best to base these things readiness, ability, maturity? I had children who were more advanced than the grade they were placed in - and went through some serious bs before I finally pulled them out. Bored children don't fare well in school. On the flip side, there are several children who are simply not ready. I really don't understand the birthday/age thing at all.

 

And in addition, if so many districts are advocating 4 year old Kindergarten, that must mean some would be in K for what - 3 years? (Okay, I have to assume this is just me not thinking this through...)

I've never heard it called redshirting before. Our oldest started kindergarten at age 6. Academically, he was years ahead. Socially, he was not. He's eight now and in second grade and perfect in the grade he is in. We will reassess in seventh grade and make the decision as to whether we want to skip eighth and have him be a fourteen-year old ninth grader, or to keep him on the path he is on now and have him be a fifteen-year old ninth grader (and how we feel he will act as an eighteen-year old senior will have a lot to do with that). We based our decision strictly on readiness. Academically ready, but not socially. And honestly, yes, size did have something to do with it for us. Not because of sports but because our son is barely on the charts for height.

 

Our second son is only two. His birthday is August 28. Eligible for k right as he turns five. And he will probably be a five-year old kindergartner. He's big for his age and socially adept, even at two.

 

For us, it's a matter of what is best for our children. I have never known a parent to regret putting a child in school "a year late" (and I come from a family with 22 cousins, many with late summer b-days), but I have known parents who regretted having a child be young for their grade.

Edited January 5, 2010 by chaik76

[IsabelC]

Isn't it funny how things change?

 

Back when I was at school, I started grade one at 5 years, and started university at 17. I was a bit younger than average but nowhere near the youngest. The holy grail for parents was to get kids skipping grades and coming out the other end younger, so that they would be 'more advanced' for their age. Now it seems things go the opposite way, as parents (or sometimes teachers) want to hold children back so that they will be more mature for their grade.

 

I do feel, though, that the decision should be made on an individual basis with the child's individual personality, strengths and weaknesses in mind, rather than as a universal rule. The vast majority of parents would try to decide in their child's best interest. Although I have heard of parents pushing their kids into school as early as possible for financial reasons.

Edited January 5, 2010 by Hotdrink

[Tidbits of Learning]

For us, it's a matter of what is best for our children. I have never known a parent to regret putting a child in school "a year late" (and I come from a family with 22 cousins, many with late summer b-days), but I have known parents who regretted having a child be young for their grade.

 

I regretted my children being young for their grade but the kicker was that they were the right age for their grade. I mean they met the cutoff that was required. Even my ds who has a Dec. birthday and turned 6 in kindergarten was one of the youngest in his kindergarten class.

I don't think people are upset that children who geniunely need to wait for k are waiting. It is the people who are waiting for other reasons or such.

My kids were academically ready but often seemed immature in their class because the majority of their peers were closer to 2 years older than them.

[chaik76]

the state standards for K are very high. Kids are supposed to be ready sentences of CVC words by about January of their kindergarten year. One teacher I know who was asked how many in her class would be likely to accomplish this replied, "Probably two." That means that 18 of 20 children in her class are defined as failures! In KINDERGARTEN! This is just plain wrong, but the teachers have no control over this. They have to do as they are told. So more and more parents are holding their kids back a year if they can afford it--saying that they are not 'ready' for kindergarten. The truth is, they may be plenty ready for a developmentally appropriate kindergarten, but they are not ready for this level of kindergarten.

Our kindergarten classes are much like this. Over half of the kindergartners in the k class I visited last year were in remedial phonics....

I regretted my children being young for their grade but the kicker was that they were the right age for their grade. I mean they met the cutoff that was required. Even my ds who has a Dec. birthday and turned 6 in kindergarten was one of the youngest in his kindergarten class.

I don't think people are upset that children who geniunely need to wait for k are waiting. It is the people who are waiting for other reasons or such.

My kids were academically ready but often seemed immature in their class because the majority of their peers were closer to 2 years older than them.

Redshirting for sports is pretty common in our area (as a matter of fact, my cousin, who is a very good football player was told to have his parents hold him back in eighth grade so he would be a GREAT football player...they didn't). However, I honestly think most boys aren't ready for school until at least six, so I don't mind this. I believe that girls mature earlier in academic ways, so it doesn't bother me to see six year old boys and five year old girls in k. We haven't seen the trend of kids being two years older than grade around here, though.

[LibraryLover]

That was the situation with the guys I went to school with and they were all graduating at 17 or 18. I daresay that's the reason they all drank and smoked pot.

 

Rosie

 

Yes. Schools very often treat young children like dirt, and can be absolutely vicious to 15 & 16 yr old boys. . Age is not the reason these kids are bored and unproductive.

 

If you look at elite private boarding schools in the US, it's not uncommon for some 18, 19 and 20 yr olds to participate in in a post -graduate high school year before starting college. Europeans teens commonly do Gap Years before deciding their futures.

 

The fact that only those who can pay the 50k for this PG year on top of college tuition for their not -quite -ready older teens says a lot about how high schools are unable to meet the needs of a lot of really great kids.

[Amber in AUS]

Our cut off here in my state it 30 June. I know one family who has intentionally held all 3 of their kids back a year, 2 June birthdays, 1 May, so that they could be the oldest and smartest in their class. The Mum works hard with the kids at home to 'teach' them stuff before they go to school and the complains that the school isn't catering for her child. All 3 were ready to go for their age year and had not reason to be held back other than the mother wanting it. It is VERY easy to hold kids back here but IMPOSSIBLE to have them go a year early.

[cougarmom4]

My kids were academically ready but often seemed immature in their class because the majority of their peers were closer to 2 years older than them.

 

Bingo. That's exactly my issue with it. For those who DO stick with the guidelines/recommendations...suddenly because so many people are 'redshirting' for any old reason, it just changes the entire 'playing field.'

[LibraryLover]

Bingo. That's exactly my issue with it. For those who DO stick with the guidelines/recommendations...suddenly because so many people are 'redshirting' for any old reason, it just changes the entire 'playing field.'

 

 

That must to be regional.

 

I don't know any public preschools here who will accommodate older kids. Those families who can afford to put off free kindergarten are a tiny minority.

 

It's interesting to me how many hsing parents are worried about schooling families not 'playing the game'. Playing 'The Game' seems to mean sending tiny children to school by the calander regardless of their needs.

[Mabelen]

Obviously redshirting is of no consequence to homeschoolers.

 

Right now I have two children in public school, one in K, the other one in 8th grade. We are new here but I haven't seen a lot of redshirting so far.

 

In the independent private school my children attended before there was quite a bit of redshirting. Now, some kids had been given an extra year for the right reasons and they were doing great being a year older. There were other kids that had been held back and would have done probably better had they been allowed to go with their age mates; these were the kids that were big and smart and were ahead of the class, sometimes getting into trouble because they were obviously older (and into older stuff).

 

I completely agree with parents holding their children back when it is necessary. I don't agree with parents holding their children back so that they can have an unfair advantage; not only does this work against other children in the grade (of grade age or held back for genuine reasons) but sometimes it even backfires.

[LibraryLover]

What wrong reasons have you seen at your private school? Is it a big atheltic school for older teens?

 

Obviously redshirting is of no consequence to homeschoolers.

 

Right now I have two children in public school, one in K, the other one in 8th grade. We are new here but I haven't seen a lot of redshirting so far.

 

In the independent private school my children attended before there was quite a bit of redshirting. Now, some kids had been given an extra year for the right reasons and they were doing great being a year older. There were other kids that had been held back and would have done probably better had they been allowed to go with their age mates; these were the kids that were big and smart and were ahead of the class, sometimes getting into trouble because they were obviously older (and into older stuff).

 

I completely agree with parents holding their children back when it is necessary. I don't agree with parents holding their children back so that they can have an unfair advantage; not only does this work against other children in the grade (of grade age or held back for genuine reasons) but sometimes it even backfires.

[Mabelen]

What wrong reasons have you seen at your private school? Is it a big atheltic school for older teens?

 

Most were a combination of wanting the child to be bigger than grade mates to be more competitive in team sports and so that the child will have more of a chance to shine/show leadership in all areas because the child will be competing with younger students.

[LibraryLover]

Most were a combination of wanting the child to be bigger than grade mates to be more competitive in team sports and so that the child will have more of a chance to shine/show leadership in all areas because the child will be competing with younger students.

 

So what did this school do with these 11 or 12 yr old 'more competitive' athletes that didn't fit in with their classmates? Did this school have no academic or social guidelines for placement?

 

So many school do not have child needs at it's core.

Edited January 5, 2010 by LibraryLover

[Tidbits of Learning]

That must to be regional.

 

I don't know any public preschools here who will accommodate older kids. Those families who can afford to put off free kindergarten are a tiny minority.

 

It's interesting to me how many hsing parents are worried about schooling families not 'playing the game'. Playing 'The Game' seems to mean sending tiny children to school by the calander regardless of their needs.

 

I'm not worried about families not 'playing the game' so to speak, but I was a public school parent for 5 years in which my child who was the right age for her grade was tormented by children whose parents chose to hold their kids back in preschool. One even admitted to me that it was so her child would have an edge.

Public preschool isn't a given here. Only Title I schools get public preschool here. And you can put your kid into kindergarten by 7 years old and it is legal. So there are a lot of people choosing that option for reasons other than maturity and academic readiness.

I am posting b/c I have seen firsthand the effects of a public school classroom where the majority of the kids were redshirted. It does hurt the kids whose parents do 'play by the rules'.

[LibraryLover]

Sounds like this school system is ignoring the needs of it's children. It might be that families in your district are frustrated that the needs of their children are not being met with the system as it exisits.

 

It might be time for the system to examine why so many parents are rejecting what the school thinks is best. Perhaps all of these these families are delusional, but perhaps these families have legitimate issues that need to be heard.

 

I'm not worried about families not 'playing the game' so to speak, but I was a public school parent for 5 years in which my child who was the right age for her grade was tormented by children whose parents chose to hold their kids back in preschool.

Public preschool isn't a given here. Only Title I schools get public preschool here. And you can put your kid into kindergarten by 7 years old and it is legal. So there are a lot of people choosing that option for reasons other than maturity and academic readiness.

I am posting b/c I have seen firsthand the effects of a public school classroom where the majority of the kids were redshirted. It does hurt the kids whose parents do 'play by the rules'.

[johnandtinagilbert]

As always, perfect timing on the forums. Just having this conversation with the mom of my extra kiddos. She wants early school b/c it's free daycare for her. The ds (will be 5 in May) and she wants him reading before K (she wants him to start fall '10) In his district, though, he needs the foot up though, b/c the school doesn't do a good job of reaching the very poor population, where most get little support from home. Very low SES at this school. At this point, her son is NO WHERE near ready for K (academically or maturity).

 

And in addition, if so many districts are advocating 4 year old Kindergarten, that must mean some would be in K for what - 3 years? (Okay, I have to assume this is just me not thinking this through...)

Federalized nanny service (4 yo K).

 

:iagree:I was that 17 yr old and feel a mature 19/20 yr old is a much better option.;)

I think with support from home, either way can work, especially with strong foundations in character as well as academics. Kinda why our first college classes will be online while we dual enroll.

 

 

If "red-shirting" is done for sport related reason, it is wrong. That is what the term implies to me because that is where I believe it originated?.

 

But, I think many people are waiting to send their children to school because of academic reasons. Most kindergartens are now almost what first grade was back in the day. That is where children are expected to learn basic addition, subtraction, and reading. By pushing the expectations down a grade level, it has made many children not ready for school. I think what we are seeing is more of a self-correction of a system that has gone haywire.

:iagree: For sports...wow. I had not even considered this.

I do think, however, the boost in K is due to comparison worldwide, along with the philosophy of America (more is more). That said, some are ready for that much in K, others not. I have no problem with 2 years of K, but then everybody would worry about self-esteem issues....remember kids who were in the "stupid" reading group and their parents protested. Schools certainly haven't found a way to serve well a variety of learners in the past.

 

 

I can see where this would be difficult for a teacher in a classroom setting. Having huge gaps in the ages of students could prove challenging.

I agree with Laurie that a talented teacher can do it (many of us do), Ihowever, I'd agree with this too. With 20 or more students, it would be tough. What ps teacher has time beyond paperwork obligations (that we hsers don't necessarily have) to prepare for 3 levels of learning in all areas, particularly one as critical and difficult as reading and all the levels therein. At some point, combining is not the best answer. I cannot combine my 7 and 9 year old for anything w/o the 9 yo paying the price of boredom or lost time. Its too slow for her and an unfair use of her time. I can imagine the frustration as the field changes for the teachers who are stuck with nearly 7yo who are ready to advance, and barely 5yo who still lack the fine motors to write, and not draw, their letters. Must be very frustrating; particularly when your job performance will strongly be evaluated via reading ability of your classroom by the end of the year. The teachers are sometimes victims of the poorly devised system too.

 

Yes, but most families do not have 20-25 kids the same approximate age who are expected to conform to a one-size-fits-all curriculum. Tara

:iagree:

 

Another problem I am seeing is that the kids that are being redshirted are ones whose parents can afford the extra year of day care/ nursery school/ stay at home. With the exception of my own ds, the other boys I know who are not redshirted are coming from homes where getting them in school that first opportunity was important for financial reasons. So some of the kids who had a slight disadvantage to start with socioeconomically are the same ones having to deal with the disadvantage of being younger than their classmates. IOW, some of the ones who are least ready are the ones being sent in that position.

THere are so many like this. Single moms can breathe a sigh of relief as soon as their dc turns 4 in my county....FREE 4yo K. They don't really care if academically their child is ready for anything. They just need to put them somewhere (presumably safe) so they can work and pay the light bill.

 

Well, it wasn't, and I don't think that I indicated that in anything I said. Having talked a lot about this with my mother-in-law over the holidays, the idea that she is supposed to be teaching just-turned-six-year olds and almost-turning-eight year olds the same things and getting the same results seems silly.

 

Tara

Expecting the same results is silly. I remember, waaay back in K (on a military base), we actually did have the older and younger K classes. Perhaps they will start to divide that way again.

 

The main reason that we chose to homeshool is because, as has been stated in this thread many times, a one-size education doesn't work. It just seems to me that this extreme redshirting of kids makes a teacher's already Herculean job even more implausible. Tara

:iagree: Although, I strongly believe if a parent wants to redshirt, they should be able to do what's best for their family, rather than whats best for the system or teacher.

 

 

FWIW, I remember kicking the boys butts in early elementary school because I followed the rules & did the work, but by 5th/6th grade I was thinking, "Where did all these smart boys come from?" They had been there all long learning, but it wasn't obvious because they were always in trouble for being out of their seats & such.

lol. I remember that too!

 

I agree that this is probably not fully serving the children. But with private US college tuition and board at nearly 50k a year, I can see why parents with children who excel in sports might want to give their child an edge for sport scholarships. Sports scholarships are far, far more lucrative than academic ones.

 

This is a symptom of something bigger.

That's a valid point. I have to admit surprise though that people are thinking that far ahead.

 

Our kindergarten classes are much like this. Over half of the kindergartners in the k class I visited last year were in remedial phonics....

That is a sad and sorry statement.

 

Obviously redshirting is of no consequence to homeschoolers.

Here, I would disagree. It is of consequence when our kids will go against these kids for college scholarship opportunity. A year of maturity will make a difference in Algebra grades, etc, and GPA affects scholarships.

 

I'm for it. I wish I had the extra year to grow up (and I graduated at 18) before college. It would have mattered (and I was a great student and extracurric. girl!)

 

One more reason to enjoy our choice to hs. I can red, white, orange, or brown shirt...whatever that means! ;)

[Amber in AUS]

I have just been thinking about this more from a sports POV and over here you compete in your age bracket not in your school grade, so it doesn't matter what grade you are in you are either U12 or not IYKWIM. I guess that makes it a more even keel. With all organised sports you can play up a grade, but you CANNOT play down. My nephew plays up a grade in U16 basketball even though he is 13 and grade 8 (he should be playing U14) but he is not eligable for U12 even if he was still in primary school. I think this is a very fair way of doing things.

[johnandtinagilbert]

I have just been thinking about this more from a sports POV and over here you compete in your age bracket not in your school grade, so it doesn't matter what grade you are in you are either U12 or not IYKWIM. I guess that makes it a more even keel. With all organised sports you can play up a grade, but you CANNOT play down. My nephew plays up a grade in U16 basketball even though he is 13 and grade 8 (he should be playing U14) but he is not eligable for U12 even if he was still in primary school. I think this is a very fair way of doing things.

Not the case here. School sports generally start in middle school (grades 6-8) and you participate with your school. There are outside leagues available and those are usually age based, but getting college scholarships often branches from participation in public school sports.