red-shirting

A significant number of kids in DS's class were red-shirted. They are
normal kids whose parents wanted to give them a leg up. I hardly think this
is fair. DS is competing against children who are a whole year older than
he. They are going to be 7 yo and in kindergarten. As DH said, that's an
embarrassment. His sister was 7 yo when she started 3rd grade. DS is doing
well against them, but some younger kids aren't faring as well. It makes
the 4yo's feel like failures because they can't measure up to the 6 yo's.
The teacher's and parent's expectations of normal 5 yo's abilities end up
being skewed. I'm told the 4 yo's will catch up, but why should they start
out feeling like they have to? Why should they be measured against someone
who should be a whole year ahead? Are these parents fooling themselves into
thinking they have the best and brightest kids in the class when in reality
their kids are really behind? Can you all weigh in on this? It's a sore
spot for me. Maybe I can be enlighted to the other side of this. If the
kids are especially slow learners or something, I understand, but
red-shirting an average kid? Like I said, it's not hurting DS, but it
bothers me nonetheless, because I see the little ones struggling.

Hi --

I've long felt that schools and districts should set policies for BOTH
ends of the age spectrum to avoid situations like this. For example,
set a cut-off date, be very flexible with children whose birthdays are
within one month of the cut-off date, and require lots of hoops to jump
through for children beyond that.

Alternately, be very, very flexible, not only with school-entry ages,
but mix grades in the same classroom so that there is a very wide range
of ages in each room. There are advantages to mixing the ages.

A final thought, if your school has multiple classrooms for each grade,
is to age-divide the classrooms. Divide each *classroom* by birthdate
for the first year or two, then gradually change the division of kids in
each classroom so that you're looking at other needs than simply
birthdate.

You can suggest any of these things to your school and see what they
say.

--Beth Kevles

http://web.mit.edu/kevles/www/nomilk.html -- a page for the milk-allergic
Disclaimer: Nothing in this message should be construed as medical
advice. Please consult with your own medical practicioner.

NOTE: No email is read at my MIT address. Use the AOL one if you would
like me to reply.

I did redshirt my son because at the time (30 years ago) it was
considered that boys developed more slowly than girls into school
readiness. He wasn't 7 in kindergarten however, he was 7 in first
grade (his birthday is in January so when he graduated from HS he was
18). My dd#1 has redshirted her youngest son also because she doesn't
(didn't) think he was ready for school based on her experience with
his older brother. He was also 7 in first grade. His birthday is in
late August so it is near to the cut-off date. He will be 18 for his
whole senior year in HS.

OTOH, my dd#2's daughter was put into first grade a year early (she
turned 6 in October in her first grade year) and is doing fine. She
will be 17 when she graduates from HS. My sister skipped first grade
(she was five years old in kindergarten and 6 years old in second
grade), and also did fine. She was just barely 17 when she graduated
from HS - her birthday was in early June right around the time of
graduation. I was one of the youngest in my class because the cut-off
was the week after I was born (my birthday was in November), and I
also did fine. I was also 17 when I graduated from HS.

So I think it totally depends on the child, and it is also probably
better evaluated by the parent and not by a some arbitrary system. I
would blame the parents who put the child into the system early and
without the skills that they need rather than the system.

"toypup" wrote:

A significant number of kids in DS's class were red-shirted. They are
normal kids whose parents wanted to give them a leg up. I hardly think this
is fair. DS is competing against children who are a whole year older than
he. They are going to be 7 yo and in kindergarten. As DH said, that's an
embarrassment. His sister was 7 yo when she started 3rd grade. DS is doing
well against them, but some younger kids aren't faring as well. It makes
the 4yo's feel like failures because they can't measure up to the 6 yo's.
The teacher's and parent's expectations of normal 5 yo's abilities end up
being skewed. I'm told the 4 yo's will catch up, but why should they start
out feeling like they have to? Why should they be measured against someone
who should be a whole year ahead? Are these parents fooling themselves into
thinking they have the best and brightest kids in the class when in reality
their kids are really behind? Can you all weigh in on this? It's a sore
spot for me. Maybe I can be enlighted to the other side of this. If the
kids are especially slow learners or something, I understand, but
red-shirting an average kid? Like I said, it's not hurting DS, but it
bothers me nonetheless, because I see the little ones struggling.

"toypup" wrote in message
et...
spot for me. Maybe I can be enlighted to the other side of this.
If the kids are especially slow learners or something, I understand,
but red-shirting an average kid? Like I said, it's not hurting DS,
but it bothers me nonetheless, because I see the little ones
struggling.

I live in an area where not a lot of red-shirting really goes on.
(Where did that term come from?) Of all the birthday parties DS goes
to, only one kid is older than what you'd expect, and he's
substantially older -- at least 6 months before the cut-off date. I
don't know him or his family well enough to understand why he was held
back, or whether I would have done the same in those circumstances.

I understand your frustration. DD was born just before the cutoff, so
even without red-shirting, she was competing with kids almost a year
older. She was fine in academics, but her social development was
behind, and her fine motor skills -- particularly being able to write
neatly -- as well.

But it is true that after a couple of years, those differences do seem
to disappear. In most cases, I can't tell who is older and who is
younger, and if I guess, I guess wrong.

Does anyone know if the practice is still on the rise? Or if it has
leveled off or started to go down?

Bizby

And then there's the other side-the child who may BE ready, but isn't
allowed to move on because of the birthdate. If you even attempt to place
your child in another age group, you're automatically a pushy, hothousing
parent who wants to create some sort of little genius. We have an October
cutoff here for kindergarten, and the result is that every single program
uses that cutoff for age if they have an age cutoff at all. My daughter has
a November birthday. Right now, we have two groups of activities. Ones which
have a multi-age toddler grouping, where she's one of the youngest (like in
the church toddler nursery, which is very flexible on grouping and where we
seem to have had a gap of about a year between new babies, or Kindermusik
class where the toddler group is considered to be around 18 months to
somewhere between 3 or 3 1/2), and her MDO program which uses a birthdate
grouping, where she is absolutely the oldest. With older children, she acts
like an older child, and does beautifully. With younger children, she acts
like a younger child, and regresses on behaviors she shows without problems
in other settings. It doesn't matter if I'm there or not. I've seen this
happen no matter where we goes. I don't know if that shows good social
skills, since she picks up on what is expected, or if it shows a scary need
for conformity, but I tend to feel that at least at this point in her life,
she does better when a group has at least some older children for her to
model on.

And, contacting various programs to try to find something different this
year, or even next year, leads to the same thing. She won't be eligible for
a 3 yr old preschool because of her birthday in the fall (which takes her
out of the only available multi-age program for another year, because both
local montessoris start with a 3-5 yr old grouping). She can't move to a 2
yr old program when she turns 2 in November due to cutoff dates, even though
she'll BE 2, because due to cutoffs, she's too young.

It may not be an issue when she's 5, and it may be that the extra few months
will benefit her in school given what is being asked of kindergarteners
these days, but I really wish that there would be some flexibility. It is
insane to me that we could drive into a neighboring state, and have a cutoff
which is two months later, where my daughter would automatically be placed
with older children, but there's no budging here if I feel, as a parent,
that at this time of her life she's better served by being the youngest in
the group instead of the oldest.

"bizby40" wrote:


"toypup" wrote in message
. net...
spot for me. Maybe I can be enlighted to the other side of this.
If the kids are especially slow learners or something, I understand,
but red-shirting an average kid? Like I said, it's not hurting DS,
but it bothers me nonetheless, because I see the little ones
struggling.

I live in an area where not a lot of red-shirting really goes on.
(Where did that term come from?)

It comes from the NCAA - primarily football. Each college student is
allowed to compete in college athletics only 4 years. If they do not
compete as freshmen, they have 4 more years to compete, thus allowing
more physical and skill development (they can practice with the team -
just not compete) and also allows them 5 years to complete their
college degree (or not).

I don't know where that term came from originally as the only other
uses of red-shirt are in the Navy (where the people who handle
ammunition and explosives wear red shirts), or from Star Trek.

Of all the birthday parties DS goes
to, only one kid is older than what you'd expect, and he's
substantially older -- at least 6 months before the cut-off date. I
don't know him or his family well enough to understand why he was held
back, or whether I would have done the same in those circumstances.

I understand your frustration. DD was born just before the cutoff, so
even without red-shirting, she was competing with kids almost a year
older. She was fine in academics, but her social development was
behind, and her fine motor skills -- particularly being able to write
neatly -- as well.

But it is true that after a couple of years, those differences do seem
to disappear. In most cases, I can't tell who is older and who is
younger, and if I guess, I guess wrong.

Does anyone know if the practice is still on the rise? Or if it has
leveled off or started to go down?

Bizby

Donna Metler wrote:
And then there's the other side-the child who may BE ready, but isn't
allowed to move on because of the birthdate. If you even attempt to place
your child in another age group, you're automatically a pushy, hothousing
parent who wants to create some sort of little genius. We have an October
cutoff here for kindergarten, and the result is that every single program
uses that cutoff for age if they have an age cutoff at all.

Seconded. DS has a late October birthday and was premature, so I was
treating redshirting as a viable option, but now that it's turned out
that his academic skills are probably advanced he's going to have to
start kindergarden right before he turns 6, since the cutoff date in
our new district is September 1. I'm thinking he'd do better with this
year for preschool and next year for kindergarden... but it is no
longer an option.

--
C, mama to three year old nursling

"toypup" wrote in message
et...
A significant number of kids in DS's class were red-shirted. They are
normal kids whose parents wanted to give them a leg up. I hardly think
this
is fair.

My oldest is now a senior in high school, so I've seen both ends of this. I
started my daughter when she was eligible. She tested as ready and has done
fine academically throughout her career. She has struggled on friends from
time to time, due to her being on the young side in her class. (She turns
17 this month, so will start college at age 17...) But all in all it worked
itself out.

With 20/20 hindsight: Had I held her out a year and started her as a 5 year
old in kindergarten:

She would have had an extra year in dance on pointe, which would have given
her an extra year to get the good parts in the local Ballet. If she were
interested in sports, she would have had an extra year of whatever sport.

She would have been less small going into Junior High and High school, but
in retrospect she still would have probably been the smallest in her class.
(She grew late, and is now average height for women, passed up many of her
friends, and me...)

She would have an extra year of driving at home, including over a year of
driving with people in the car. Right now when she leaves for college she
will have had an unrestricted driving license for 8 months. I worry a
little she doesn't have enough experience, is probably going to walk away
from driving for a few years, and might struggle to take it up again.

On the up side:

She was ready, and still is ready for everything. She spent last summer at
University, taking a college course, and is more than ready to leave the
nest.

Being young helped her pick friends for their personalities and not
looks/popularity. She has a truely great set of friends. (That might of
happened for other reasons, but being on the immature side in Junior High
certainly helped.)

I see other kids from her grade,and their parents, struggling on the "adult
but still at home" front. One moved out when she turned 18, at the
beginning of senior year. Some felt they were so old starting high school
that they should fit into an older crowd, and often the older crowd willing
to take them was not what parents wish. I know of three young men from
local, wonderful families with caring parents that are now, after drug
intervention, in boarding schools.

The scary thing is the older kids that are struggling are often the ones
that were red-shirted because their parents felt they weren't ready at age
5. They were red-shirted, and now left behind by younger kids. But many
kids do blossom when they are red-shirted, so how do you tell, at age 5, how
your kids will do at age 13 among 11 and 12 year olds, or at age 18 among 16
and 17 year olds? It's a tough choice.

"Rosalie B." wrote in message
...
So I think it totally depends on the child, and it is also probably
better evaluated by the parent and not by a some arbitrary system. I
would blame the parents who put the child into the system early and
without the skills that they need rather than the system.

But I think they are in it early and without skills because their skills are
being compared to kids who are a whole year older. That is my problem. I
don't think they are too young at all, if compared with kids their own age.

"toypup" wrote in message
et...
A significant number of kids in DS's class were red-shirted. They are
normal kids whose parents wanted to give them a leg up. I hardly think
this is fair.

This is a huge problem IMO. I'm with you. I read all the studies and
decided that I would send my children at the expected time. They were
5yrs5mos old. The peice of information I did not know, and did not factor
into my decision, was that Hunter was the very youngest boy in his class.
At his b-day party all the kids were nearly a full year older. We decided
to have him repeat first grade - which is an even worse choice when you
read the studies but I simply did not know what to do. He also struggles a
great deal with reading so isn't typical. I felt that he would never be
successful in school if I put him into second grade without being able to
read. That year difference also made the social end of things very hard for
him. The kids were nice but in a group it was painfully clear that Hunter
was not at the same level of development.

My school won't tell me how many entering kindy kids are 6yo versus 5yo. I
freaked out and decided to red-shirt Luke. He doesn't have any of the
academic concerns that Hunter struggles with but he is extremely shy (which
is shocking considering is personality at home). They also told me to keep
the two year spacing between them but that may have just been there way of
saying - wait a year all the other kids are 6yo.

It is a hard choice. I fear I may live to regret it when they are 18yo and
still have a full year of highschool ahead

I recently found out that my school is experimenting with a mixed 1st and
2nd grade. I'm hoping that if Luke seems to far ahead of his class we can
go with that in first grade and then put him in 3rd grade the next year if
that seems more appropriate. That class would not work for Hunter because
the kids have to be able to work more independently then he is capable
of...and catch on quickly etc. He needs a little more prompting and
explanaition.

I think once so many of the kids are red-shirted the teachers start to teach
at a higher expectation, which compounds the issues for kids the 'correct'
age.
--
Nikki, mama to
Hunter 4/99
Luke 4/01
Brock 4/06
Ben 4/06



DS is competing against children who are a whole year older than
he. They are going to be 7 yo and in kindergarten. As DH said, that's an
embarrassment. His sister was 7 yo when she started 3rd grade. DS is
doing well against them, but some younger kids aren't faring as well. It
makes the 4yo's feel like failures because they can't measure up to the 6
yo's. The teacher's and parent's expectations of normal 5 yo's abilities
end up being skewed. I'm told the 4 yo's will catch up, but why should
they start out feeling like they have to? Why should they be measured
against someone who should be a whole year ahead? Are these parents
fooling themselves into thinking they have the best and brightest kids in
the class when in reality their kids are really behind? Can you all weigh
in on this? It's a sore spot for me. Maybe I can be enlighted to the
other side of this. If the kids are especially slow learners or
something, I understand, but red-shirting an average kid? Like I said,
it's not hurting DS, but it bothers me nonetheless, because I see the
little ones struggling.