Jump to content

Menu

Why do so many people redshirt their bright, normally-developing kids?


SKL
 Share

Recommended Posts

Interesting... In addition to the "natural" readiness, part of what I read and discussed was that many of the children who were "pushed" to learn to read early (not the ones who chose to or taught themselves) were ahead in early elementary, on par by mid - elementary, and behind by Junior High. I thought that was rather startling. :001_huh:

Yes, I have read that before. I suppose there could be a lot of factors involved in that. What upsets me is the pointlessness of the unready 5 year olds being made to learn to read for hours when there just is no evidence that it leads to any gain long term. It is sad to me. (If anyone's 5 year old is ready and is loving to learn to read don't jump on me--I'm not talking about those 5 year olds!)

 

Two of my friends, whose dds read early, were visibly shocked when dd turned out reading as well as their children. They hadn't believed me when I told them it would happen that way. They fully bought into the "if they learn at 4 they will have 3 years advantage on the ones who learn at 7" line.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 183
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Interesting... In addition to the "natural" readiness, part of what I read and discussed was that many of the children who were "pushed" to learn to read early (not the ones who chose to or taught themselves) were ahead in early elementary, on par by mid - elementary, and behind by Junior High. I thought that was rather startling. :001_huh:

 

Burn out, leveling out, or even skipped development could all factor in on that. But you are right, it is startling.

 

IMLE there is something magical about the time period between roughly 6.5 and 10.5. Something very unique to their development is going on during that time frame to cause some very interesting connections in their learning that just is not there before and harder to access afterwards. It's both comforting and terrifying, and certainly fascinating. Seeing it play out in my own familial test group has led me to school my middles and youngers much differently than I did/do the first three.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As a child (my b-day is in August) I went to K at 5 but I wasnt ready for 1st so i was put in Developmental 1st then 1st and so on. I had never been to day care or preschool if that makes a difference? So I think my mom SHOULD of waited to put me in.

 

For my own children I wouldnt wait, well except L. I think C would of been fine going at 5. L is a bit slower and I think she would benefit from waiting- which is why we are homeschooling K for a 2nd year. ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Seeing it play out in my own familial test group has led me to school my middles and youngers much differently than I did/do the first three.

 

Maybe this is a s/o, but I would love to hear how you went about school with the "olders" vs how you go about it now, with the "youngers."

 

I feel like I am ever evolving in how I approach all of this and I would be so very interested in your journey. :001_smile:

 

(For instance, I didn't start teaching my current 7 y/o to read until this school year. Up until now, it has been all letters and numbers but no "let's learn to read." With my ones who are older, I started actively trying to teach them *reading* at 6, almost directly on the nose. Well, accept alphabet - which we start learning from the start with books and songs and so forth. ;) )

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Interesting... In addition to the "natural" readiness, part of what I read and discussed was that many of the children who were "pushed" to learn to read early (not the ones who chose to or taught themselves) were ahead in early elementary, on par by mid - elementary, and behind by Junior High. I thought that was rather startling. :001_huh:

 

About the "natural" readiness, another very popular school of thought (Maria Montessori et al) believes 4.5 is the magic age - and that if you don't at least give kids the chance to learn, you miss an opportunity. That said, at 4.5 it's not about sitting at a long table drilling and copying all day.

 

About the kids who were "pushed" and ended up behind, maybe these facts both have the same reason behind them. Maybe the child was not going to pick it up as easily as other kids in any case. Working with the child so he doesn't fall behind in all other areas (including socially) sounds reasonable to me, assuming it is done in an age-appropriate and compassionate way.

 

I'll have to agree to disagree with the "better late than early" folks. I think it's healthy to stretch the mind, academically and otherwise. But I do agree that putting 1st / 2nd grade work into KG is not the way to do it. There are better ways to get information across in a way that "sticks" without being painful.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

About the "natural" readiness, another very popular school of thought (Maria Montessori et al) believes 4.5 is the magic age - and that if you don't at least give kids the chance to learn, you miss an opportunity. That said, at 4.5 it's not about sitting at a long table drilling and copying all day.

 

About the kids who were "pushed" and ended up behind, maybe these facts both have the same reason behind them. Maybe the child was not going to pick it up as easily as other kids in any case. Working with the child so he doesn't fall behind in all other areas (including socially) sounds reasonable to me, assuming it is done in an age-appropriate and compassionate way.

 

I'll have to agree to disagree with the "better late than early" folks. I think it's healthy to stretch the mind, academically and otherwise. But I do agree that putting 1st / 2nd grade work into KG is not the way to do it. There are better ways to get information across in a way that "sticks" without being painful.

I agree with you about stretching academically. However, making a child write for a year or two earlier than it is comfortable, makes no sense to me. A 6 year old can learn to write so much quicker and easier. The hand muscles can be developed in other ways than holding a pencil. There is also a change that happens when a child is really ready to read. I have seen it so often. A child taught before moves slowly before that point and than all of a sudden takes off with reading. A child who is taught at that moment just takes off right away. It's a brain thing not an instructional thing.

 

My final year in the classroom, when mandated testing began, I had to "push" reading. I had a couple of boys who were clearly not ready and it was painful for them, day after day. It broke my heart because I'd seen time after time that this same "type" of child learned so quickly, with joy and not stress, when we could wait a few months. Again, providing the tools early is not the problem it's "how" the tools are provided that bothers me and "that" it is mandated in K. In this we agree.

 

And for reference, this was a school where the average test scores were very high before and after the "pushing" began. Previously, they hadn't been tested until third grade. While the first grade test scores went up after testing began (the first year we tested after an old style, non-pushing year) there was no difference in the third grade tests.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A child taught before moves slowly before that point and than all of a sudden takes off with reading. A child who is taught at that moment just takes off right away. It's a brain thing not an instructional thing.

 

 

Then again, it depends on how we draw the line between "reading" and "not reading." Reading is a combination of skills that may not all be acquired in the same order or along the same general timeline. For example, my visually-challenged kid got a 93rd %ile on reading comprehension when tested, but below average on word analysis. Yet we usually mean "fluent word analysis" when we talk about "reading."

 

Over time, both decoders and non-decoders develop other skills that ultimately contribute to real "reading." If the decoding clicks last, that doesn't necessarily mean that waiting was better for that child. It just means that decoding clicked last. It is similarly unhelpful to make generalizations about kids who master decoding early, but don't seem to make much of the skill yet. It doesn't mean there was something wrong with introducing the skill at that age.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Shouldn't the child have meaningful learning activities (vocabulary development, listening skills, thinking skills, etc) to get them to that brain maturation point, whether self-initiated or instructor initiated? The Romanian orphans and the feral children's experiences seem to say that doing nothing is detremental permananently.

Yes, but those experiences can be listening to stories read aloud, nursery rhymes, oral storytelling, shared experiences (vacations, field trip-like experiences, walks in the woods) that are then discussed with the child. None of it has to be done while sitting still. Romanian orphans/feral children lack relationship where all that happens naturally. So do some children living in poverty in this country. Going to K can replace/enhance what isn't in the home and can and should be more organic (like it used to be.) Children from those types of backgrounds, who now have to sit and do seatwork, instead of having real experiences in order to recognize short term gains have, in my opinion, long term deficits.

 

I am more talking about "seatwork." I am talking about drilling a child with sight word lists for months when they are not ready for it. All the child who's not ready learns is that he/she is stupid and can't do it. If the teacher had the ability, as we used to, to put the drills aside until the child was ready, he/she doesn't feel stupid. I don't see the brain stimulation of that kind of activity.

 

I don't see any gain from making a child whose hands are not ready write and write and write, either. I have 2 boys who struggle/ed with fine motor. We do work on handwriting but lightly. We work on fine motor in other ways. Neither of them would have thrived in modern day K and yet both of them are very gifted learners. What would have been gained by frustrating them in this way at 5? My sixth grader writes and forms letters just fine and I am sure his 7 yo brother will end up the same.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Then again, it depends on how we draw the line between "reading" and "not reading." Reading is a combination of skills that may not all be acquired in the same order or along the same general timeline. For example, my visually-challenged kid got a 93rd %ile on reading comprehension when tested, but below average on word analysis. Yet we usually mean "fluent word analysis" when we talk about "reading."

 

Over time, both decoders and non-decoders develop other skills that ultimately contribute to real "reading." If the decoding clicks last, that doesn't necessarily mean that waiting was better for that child. It just means that decoding clicked last. It is similarly unhelpful to make generalizations about kids who master decoding early, but don't seem to make much of the skill yet. It doesn't mean there was something wrong with introducing the skill at that age.

No, I agree, there is nothing wrong with introducing the skill at that age at all. What I have issue with is the pressure cooker environments K seems to have become in many places. When we teach at home we can keep the situation at a non-stressful level, introducing the skills and backing off if the frustration level becomes to high. That is not what is happening in many schools. When I taught, reading skills were introduced in K, absolutely, but there wasn't all this drilling of sight words, required writing levels, etc. Reading was seen on a continuum just as learning to talk. Learning Disabilities were identified and addressed as they came up. Outside of LDs all the children learned to read and think at a very high level.

 

This is what I don't get: If there is no long term benefit why spend hours and weeks teaching a skill when, if you waited a year, it could be taught in a day.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

preK and K here does not involve seatwork or sightword drill except that children have the option to sit at a table when they use clay rather than stand or work on the floor. They can position their bodies any way they want as long as they aren't disturbing a neighbor. The writing is with large chunky markers on big paper; beyond that it's all other multisensory techniques. The vocab development is the same as at home -- read alouds etc. Sounds like ed school and K in your area is compeltely different than it is here. And yes, this area has very very high poverty areas w/high drug use in the bioparents.

 

I'm not sure what 'drilling a child with sight words when they are not ready for it' means? What is the criteria for deciding what 'ready' means? Most 2 year olds can learn sight words from the environment...why can't a kinder? I can understand that children with memory deficits need to go through decks of words many times in order for it to stick.

I'm glad to hear that that is what it looks like in your area. That is encouraging.

 

I don't see the point in going over and over a deck of sight words as a 5 year old. Most 2 year old ime cannot learn sight words from the environment. Children with memory deficits will need to review them constantly at any age. A child whose brain is ready will learn the sight words extremely quickly (day or two.) Requiring parents to spend time drilling a 5 year old who has been in school all day (and maybe aftercare) instead of reading or cuddling makes me sad. That is what I've seen.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

How much text is in your environment? Repeated exposure makes a huge difference..rare for a 2 that lives near a McDonald's and sees the sign daily for example to not recognize the McDonald's sign in print. Same for the grocery store sign and STOP sign.

 

Practice reading words in isolation at home...I can see that as hw if the teacher wasn't able to get sufficient effective practice in at school. I can't imagine spending more than five minutes on it if the child learned at school and is cooperating. It shouldn't be replacing the nightly read aloud.

 

One of the reasons that sight words are used is to improve visual discrimination.ime A child that learns the Dolch sight words in a day or two is past ready and is likely using phonics knowledge rather than solely sight.

See, I disagree with this. I think that the best time for Dolch words is when sounding out has started to come easily. Then it supports the "take off" of reading.

 

I see recognizing the McDonald sign as pre-reading. They are recognizing symbols that have meaning for them. The first letter my children recognize is the first letter in their name for the same reason.

 

The stressed parents of children who need to review sight words at night ime are the parents of the ones who are "behind." I don't think a child who has trouble picking up sight words in K is "behind." LDs aside, they will "catch up" in first grade. Meanwhile, there is a lot of stress going on.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think that the best time for Dolch words is when sounding out has started to come easily. Then it supports the "take off" of reading.

 

 

It's not a sight word if it's part of phonics instruction. The take-off you are speaking of is 'cracking the code', and they zoom up to their vocab level when that happens.

Okay, I guess I don't really understand why you think kids who aren't at the "cracking the code" stage should have to go through sight words endlessly?

Do you see "cracking the code" as a stage you get to through/because of reading instruction? I see it more as a brain readiness issue that is developmental. Maybe that's where we differ.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I wanted to start my son in Kindergarten at 4 1/2.

 

He had already completed a private, fully accredited kindergarten program, because his preschool had said he was so bright that he was going to go crazy in another year of preschool, so we plopped him into Kindergarten, and he did well-- they told us he was pretty much in the head of the class (whatever that means, in kindergarten :lol: that he didn't eat the paste?? I think it meant he didn't struggle despite his young age, starting at 4 1/2).

 

Anyway, ALL of our friends and family, and even unsolicited friends of family members told us we HAD to wait until he was 6 1/2 to start first grade, "to give him the gift of time" because he would be miserable in first grade, as he was sooooo little. Inexperienced parents, we listened to them instead of to ourselves.

 

What a mistake that was. We placed him in Kindergarten at 5 1/2 instead of in first grade. We did NOT give him "the gift of time." We gave him the gift of stultifying boredom and senseless rules that, little rule-follower he was, he followed to the letter. As in, already a reader at a 3rd or 4th grade level, and an advanced speller, he was instructed to not worry about how to spell words, but to only spell words how they sound. He interpreted this to mean, don't spell words correctly any more, even if you know how to spell them. It was years before he began spelling correctly again, because his teacher, who of course knows all, told him not to.

 

Do over again, I would put him in first grade.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't think they should go through endlessly, but I do see the value in it as a visual discrimination exercise. I think there are other ways, but this way does work for many children, doesn't resemble preschool, and is inexpensive. ime Many parents do need instruction in how to use flashcards effectively for spaced repetition to be effective.

.

 

Yes, there's plenty of space between the two extremes.

 

My eldest daughter actually gained a lot of confidence from learning sight words. For her, it was easier than phonics and she was able to stay ahead of her class despite a very daunting vision problem. We need not assume that flash cards involve tying a child down and going over meaningless words numerous times. For us, it was never more than a few minutes at a time - usually about a minute per day. It made her happy to remember the assigned words when she got to school - something that she could not have done without some practice.

 

My other kid never needed a flash card of any kind (so far). She has her own ways of obtaining knowledge. That doesn't mean her way is best for every kid.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Gifted testing is scored by AGE not grade (as are all intelligence tests) so students are being compared to their same aged peers, not same grade peers. It might be that older students are referred more often for gifted testing because they seem more advanced. If all students in a grade are tested then there is no advantage of being older; in fact an older student would have to get a higher raw score than a younger student to have the same IQ score.

 

 

That's only the case if they're actually using IQ tests, though. One of my friends is a GT self-contained teacher in FL, and in her school, the only kids in her class who actually are ID'd for her class by FSIQ are those who are 2e or who have been privately assessed. All the rest are simply there because they scored high enough on state testing-and it's easier to sit and focus on the 3rd grade FCAT if you're 9 or 10 vs just turned 8.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

CA STAR test results are a big factor how our school places kids in GATEs in addition to one more test (I don't know which one we use here). Yes they test everybody here.

 

It's interesting how different each district the same state can be. In our district, they use an IQ test as the sole indicator of giftedness. If the child misses the cutoff on the IQ test, but then scores "advanced" on the STAR test for the following two years, the child has the option of retesting using the same IQ test the following year. So, here, it's the IQ test, not the STAR test, that determines eligibility for GATE.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

I'm not sure if we red-shirted or not. I know that sounds odd, but our state is a September 1st cut-off. My dd's birthday IS Sep 1. When I asked at the school I was told that she missed the cut-off as she had to be 5 BEFORE Sept 1 and I didn't pursue it further. But then I read the website of the larger, neighboring school district (also with a Sep 1 cutoff since it is within the same state) and it explicitly said that that the law means ON or BEFORE Sep 1 and she should have been sent the previous year. Huh... I honestly believe the second school district since it is a huge district with all the rules and "legalese" explicitly spelled out, where our district is a smaller suburban district that seems less organized. So basically my dd is literally right on the border of the cutoff.

 

Before she started kindergarten we moved to India (for two years, so temporarily). We are still there now and will be returning to the US at the end of this school year. We enrolled her in the equivalent of kindergarten even though she was the oldest and already reading quite well. Two months in, they asked me to move her up to first grade. Academically it made sense, but K was half day and 1st is all day. She was already stressed by being in a new country and had started several afterschool activities that, although she could have stayed in if she moved to first grade, she would simply have been too tired for. We decided to keep her in K and I did aftershooling in her free time in the afternoons and then took her to her activities later in the day. She learned nothing academic in K, but she got used to the school, met lots of kids, and had fun in her other activities without being too stressed or tired. She is now in all day 1st grade and the level is still too easy, but again, she seems generally happy with it since this school has lots of varied activities during the school day and she still does several things afterschool.

 

The question becomes what to do when we move back to the US next year. I'm sure I could walk into our school and put her in either 2nd or 3rd grade and she would do fine. My dh is definitely gifted and I was labeled gifted in school (although I bet I'm more of the bright and compliant type than truly "gifted") so it's not surprising that DD is quite bright and academic. She was a very early reader. She also has a very glass-half-empty personality, and although she is quite compliant and generally happy at school, she likes to complain at home and frequently complains about the speed/ignorance of the rest of the class. I don't know whether it is best for her to be the oldest or the youngest. I have the feeling that the she could handle the material in either just fine, but that the pace of either class will be too slow for her, so neither is a great fit. So I'm not sure what to do.

 

So in our case I'm not sure if red shirting is best or not (or even if we are actually doing it). It both creates and solves problems for us. Malcolm Gladwell's book Outliers talks about it and although it's been a while since I read it, I think it was mostly about sports and that statistically if you didn't red shirt, your kid had little chance to succeed in sports, even at the adult/professional level. It's worth it to read the book just for that part. It's really interesting that the effects snowball into adult life. I can't remember if that also applies academically as well. Maybe I'll have to dig the book out again.

 

I guess I tend to think that kids who are bright but not ready to sit could easily be labeled difficult or "not smart" based on behavior and not intelligence. I worry that that label could follow a kid. I think a lot of the parents who red shirt don't want their children labeled that way and so wait a year so it's less likely to happen. Their kid is more mature, sits better, listens better, has more coordination and is labeled a good student in comparison to the younger kids in the same class. Individually it's probably a good decision, but I'm not sure it's a good decision for the group as a whole.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We are in the process of redshirting our eldest. He turned 5 in May and technically could have started Kindergarten, but we're keeping him out until next year. A few things went into that decision. First, he has a few health issues that, while not serious, have left him small for his age and emotionally immature. Second, he would have been among the younger kids in his grade. Third, when we spoke to his future principal, she said that her preference would be that all boys start Kindergarten after they turn 6. She said most boys just aren't ready emotionally and spend the entire year being told "no" and "sit down" and "be quiet" until they start hating school. She said the 6 year-old boys do much better and seem happier.

 

That said, I'm really struggling with this decision after-the-fact. My son is smart and social and very interested in going to school. He's sad that the other kids his age are in school when he's not (no playmates at the park!). He gets a little melancholy when the school bus goes by in the morning. I'm also worried that he'll be too advanced for Kindergarten because he LOVES to do "school work" with me. We're trying to slow him down by doing piano lessons, art classes, gymnastics, and other activities during the day, although it's not really working to slow him down. But mostly, I'm relying on the fact that - if he finds Kindergarten too easy - we can always skip him up to First Grade (or skip First Grade and go to Second at the beginning of the next school year).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But mostly, I'm relying on the fact that - if he finds Kindergarten too easy - we can always skip him up to First Grade (or skip First Grade and go to Second at the beginning of the next school year).

 

Is this something that the principal indicated was a possibility? Because in our district, grade skipping is difficult at best and frowned upon by the administration.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Is this something that the principal indicated was a possibility? Because in our district, grade skipping is difficult at best and frowned upon by the administration.

 

No, this idea didn't come from the principal. But I'm going to pretend you didn't mention it because it's one of the things that's keeping me sane this year. :tongue_smilie:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Is this something that the principal indicated was a possibility? Because in our district, grade skipping is difficult at best and frowned upon by the administration.

 

:iagree:

Same in our district. That's why we put an advanced 4 year old (turned 5 by Oct.) into K last year despite immaturity. It was the best decision. He is still miles ahead of the class academically and behind in maturity, but it would have been worse if he were starting K this year.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm also worried that he'll be too advanced for Kindergarten because he LOVES to do "school work" with me... But mostly, I'm relying on the fact that - if he finds Kindergarten too easy - we can always skip him up to First Grade (or skip First Grade and go to Second at the beginning of the next school year).

I would check with your state board of education. In my state, K is mandatory. It would not be possible to skip a child to first grade if he had not completed K in a state approved program.

 

As an aside, this year I changed our homeschooling status, and my state now considers my homeschool a private school. The state permits me to teach any grade level but K. If I want to teach a student that is in K, I would need to be a state certified teacher.:confused:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No, this idea didn't come from the principal. But I'm going to pretend you didn't mention it because it's one of the things that's keeping me sane this year. :tongue_smilie:

 

I don't know what the homeschooling laws are in your state, but if you were in my state of WA, I would suggest filing as a homeschooler and declaring him a kindergartener this year. That way, next year (at least in WA), you'd have the choice about whether to enroll him in K or 1st. I would say that doing a year of K next year and then skipping 1st is probably the least-likely-to-be-successful option.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't know what the homeschooling laws are in your state, but if you were in my state of WA, I would suggest filing as a homeschooler and declaring him a kindergartener this year. That way, next year (at least in WA), you'd have the choice about whether to enroll him in K or 1st. I would say that doing a year of K next year and then skipping 1st is probably the least-likely-to-be-successful option.

:iagree:but check with your state.

That approach would not work in my state unless the child was taught at home by a state certified teacher.

 

If I were in the pp situation and planned on utilizing the public schools next year, I would investigate the possibility of enrolling in the K program for the 2nd semester of this year if her state had a policy similar to my state.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would check with your state board of education. In my state, K is mandatory. It would not be possible to skip a child to first grade if he had not completed K in a state approved program.

 

As an aside, this year I changed our homeschooling status, and my state now considers my homeschool a private school. The state permits me to teach any grade level but K. If I want to teach a student that is in K, I would need to be a state certified teacher.:confused:

 

WHAT?? I wonder if they do that to discourage homeschooling. If you "have" to send them to B&M for K, maybe you're less likely to take them out later. Hmm.

 

I agree that I'd put the child in KG (maybe try to find a half-day program if possible) rather than count on a grade-skip later. I did the same with my young kids and honestly, full-day K was a piece of cake for both of them. 1st is proving to be a "worthy challenge" for my eldest, but at least nobody's trying to push her back because she's a little young.

 

ETA: Another benefit of putting them in K this year would be that, assuming they will attend the same school next year, they won't be at a disadvantage as far as knowing the other kids and the way the school runs. KG is relatively gentle; 1st grade, in my experience, is all business, so the less "extra" adjustment/learning needed in 1st, the better, from my experience.

Edited by SKL
Link to comment
Share on other sites

WHAT?? I wonder if they do that to discourage homeschooling. If you "have" to send them to B&M for K, maybe you're less likely to take them out later. Hmm.

 

Isn't it crazy?! My kids are past the K age, but I would not have to send them to a B&M for K however: If I had a child that was K age, I simply would not report them to the state, since the age of compulsory attendance is age 6.

 

I find it humurous that the state does not considered me "qualified" to teach 5 year olds, but teaching all other age groups is fine.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Oh, goodness, you guys are giving me a lot to think about! I think I will look into registering him as home schooled this year (assuming that's even possible/necessary in Arizona) so that we have the option of either doing KG or First Grade next year.

 

As a side issue, when we met with the principal, she said that she would not approve of a child skipping KG because it's important socially and in terms of learning to follow directions, etc. She said that if a child needs to skip a grade, First Grade is the best choice. So she didn't directly say that my son would be able to skip First Grade, but it seems like it is a possibility.

 

Man, I wish school decisions were easier than this!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Oh, goodness, you guys are giving me a lot to think about! I think I will look into registering him as home schooled this year (assuming that's even possible/necessary in Arizona) so that we have the option of either doing KG or First Grade next year.

 

I am putting off going to the gym to workout as long as possible.:D I googled Arizona's laws and it looks like K is not mandatory in your state. This if from Arizona's Dept. of Education website:

First Grade

According to the Arizona Education Code 15-821 ©, “a child is eligible for first grade if the child is six years of age. A child is deemed six years of age if the child reaches the age of six before September 1 of the current school year. The governing board may admit children who have not reached the required age as prescribed by this subsection if it is determined to be in the best interest of the children. For children entering the first grade, such determination shall be based upon one or more consultations with the parent, parents, guardians, the children, the teacher and the school principal. Such children must reach the required age… of six for first grade by January 1 of the current school year.â€

 

So it looks like in your state, as long as your child meets the age requirement, you can place him in first grade next year.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ds didn't go to K until age 6 because the private school wanted boys to be 5 by June 1. He was never challenged year after year. I pulled him out after 5th, he skipped 6th, did 'middle school' in 2 years, off to high school at age 14 for 9th. He's now beyond ready for college.

 

Despite not being academically challenged all those years, he was still stimulated with sports, music and 2 Chinese adoptions that rocked our world.

 

I can't imagine Andrew being a junior in high school now instead of moving forward into the college universe.

 

Each kid is different.

 

One of Andrew's peers was red-shirted and is now a 19-year-old senior and star running back in our state. Colleges want him. His parents planned this from day one. In the end it will save them thou$and$.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Definitely check with your state. In mine, K is mandatory, and DD had a little girl in her K class who turned 7 before DD turned 5. The parents had homeschooled K, but hadn't bothered to register the child as homeschooled, therefore she hadn't completed an approved K program, therefore she was placed in K.

 

In fact, if you read my state's attendance code, K is the ONLY mandatory grade through 8th. Every single child must attend K (although you CAN register them as homeschooled for K). However, every other grade can be skipped at the discretion of the school administration until you get to high school, where status is determined by credits completed and things get complicated).

 

I've often wondered what they'd do if a 17 yr old who had never been officially registered for school showed up.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Definitely check with your state. In mine, K is mandatory, and DD had a little girl in her K class who turned 7 before DD turned 5. The parents had homeschooled K, but hadn't bothered to register the child as homeschooled, therefore she hadn't completed an approved K program, therefore she was placed in K.

 

In fact, if you read my state's attendance code, K is the ONLY mandatory grade through 8th. Every single child must attend K (although you CAN register them as homeschooled for K). However, every other grade can be skipped at the discretion of the school administration until you get to high school, where status is determined by credits completed and things get complicated).

 

I've often wondered what they'd do if a 17 yr old who had never been officially registered for school showed up.

 

This just seems all kinds of crazy.

 

Folks do give a lot of weight to K for some reason. Last year I was getting a lot of resistance about putting my youngest in K, so I asked about having her accepted into 1st the following year. Everyone said, no way. Flat out no. We don't care how your kid performs; she's too young. But then when her school finally accepted her into early K, everyone else's tune changed. They all said that as long as she's completed K, they'll accept her in 1st regardless of her age. ?? They didn't even want to see test scores or anything.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This just seems all kinds of crazy.

 

Folks do give a lot of weight to K for some reason. Last year I was getting a lot of resistance about putting my youngest in K, so I asked about having her accepted into 1st the following year. Everyone said, no way. Flat out no. We don't care how your kid performs; she's too young. But then when her school finally accepted her into early K, everyone else's tune changed. They all said that as long as she's completed K, they'll accept her in 1st regardless of her age. ?? They didn't even want to see test scores or anything.

 

 

I had the same response-even the cover schools that provide homeschool registration didn't want to consider DD a K student at 4-until she was accepted for early K by an accredited school. Suddenly, there was no trouble whatsoever, from any school, private or public, with listing her as a 1st grader at age 5. I suspect I could have gotten her accepted as a 2nd grader at age 5 in at least some of the schools I talked with-the bar was solely at K.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share


×
×
  • Create New...