How do you feel about "redshirting"

[janinegirly]

This was a topic on 60 Minutes last night, and always a hot topic on the mommy forums.

The whole thing is new to me, and it rubs me the wrong way. I understand the purpose for those who have legitimate reaons to be held back a year, but we are seeing a trend of parents doing it just to have their child be advantaged (or a perception of advantage). It's Keeping Up with the Joneses Kindergarten style!

I have girls so apparently it's less of an issue, but still... why should my little girls, who have fall birthdays, be over a year younger than those in their classes? And if that makes a parent feel like they should hold back just so their kid is the same age as the others (ie not to be advantaged, just to be equal)..then we all will have a bunch of kids at a grade level that is not in sync with their intelectuall capabilities - how sad that we are holding kids back who are ready and anxious to learn!
Curious to hear what others think, especially those with kids in school now who were born just before cut offs, but did not hold back...

 

[mayerling]

I'm afraid I don't know what "redshirting" is

 

[monarch64]

My husband and I were both 17 when we graduated high school and started school early. We somewhat planned our pregnancy with the same sort of timing in mind for our child. Holding back? I dunno...I always thought the kids who were a year older than me were just dunces who weren't smart enough to be in the next grade, so there's that. (Just my light hearted opinion, I'm sure that was not necessarily the case with every child older than me.)

 

[charbie]

Its been my experience that the kids who were older in school often got themselves into some trouble due to boredom.

I think as parents, it is your responsibility to foster an enriching, stimulating environment for your children.

Aubrey was born in September, and I'm not sure yet what we will do. I doubt we will be putting her in school at age 4 so she is really the youngest, but hope developmentally she is able to go to school at 5 and turn 6 right away. I know already she probably will have learning disabilities due to her genetic syndrome, and really hope the other kids don't make fun of her or assume she is a "dunce" or stupidbc she happens to be older if that is what occurs.

I would never hold her back intentionally. Id rather start her in school younger so she has a head start. By 2-3rd grade, kids end up being pretty "even" anyways, and some kids will rise to the tope whether they are born in September and the oldest or August and the youngest.

 

[monarch64]

Its been my experience that the kids who were older in school often got themselves into some trouble due to boredom.

I think as parents, it is your responsibility to foster an enriching, stimulating environment for your children.

Aubrey was born in September, and I'm not sure yet what we will do. I doubt we will be putting her in school at age 4 so she is really the youngest, but hope developmentally she is able to go to school at 5 and turn 6 right away. I know already she probably will have learning disabilities due to her genetic syndrome, and really hope the other kids don't make fun of her or assume she is a "dunce" or stupidbc she happens to be older if that is what occurs.

I would never hold her back intentionally. Id rather start her in school younger so she has a head start. By 2-3rd grade, kids end up being pretty "even" anyways, and some kids will rise to the tope whether they are born in September and the oldest or August and the youngest.

Oh Charbie, I certainly didn't mean to insult you or your daughter with my comment (which I thought I preemptively sort of apologized for). I did know the difference between someone who was learning disabled or had specific reasons for being older and someone whose parents held them back so that they could better compete in sports. (Indiana is basketball country and believe me I saw that happen many, many times.)

 

[janinegirly]

Redshirting is the practice of holding back a child/student for a year and is traditionally thought of as a sports term. More boys than girls are "redshirted" and in the past it was so a boy could be more competitive for sports particularly in light of the fact that boys develop later, or this is the general idea behind it.

What I'm talking about is the increasing trend of parents initiating the "red shirting" or holding back of their child from entering kindgarten at the appropriate age (5) and instead waiting until age 6. This was the topic of 60 Minutes last night. In some cases, and understandably, it is due to delelopmental issues. But increasingly parents are doing this with the goal of giving their child a perceived advantage..they will be bigger, have developed skills already (reading/writing)..ie it's a first grader in a Kindergarten class.

Charbie - our LO's were born around the same time..my eldest made the cutoff by 1 day and is in a 3yr preschool class with all 4 year olds! A coincidence due to her birthdate, but with redshirting..geesh, she might be close to 2 yrs younger than some boys!

 

[monkeyprincess]

I think it is silly that some parents would hold their children back a year just for a perceived advantage in the area of sports; however, I think there are other valid reasons to wait to start a child who is not developmentally or socially ready to start school. My birthday is in the middle of August, and the cut-off was the end of August, so I was one of the youngest in my class. I was ready to go and do not feel like I was in any way disadvantaged. However, I have a nephew who turned five last July, but he will not be starting school until next fall. Socially, he is just not very mature, so my brother and sister-in-law made the decision that he would be better off with another year of pre-school. It had nothing to do with him having a perceived advantage; rather, they wanted to feel comfortable sending him off to school. I have heard that girls are often more ready to start school early than boys, obviously this is a generalization that does not always apply, but I have seen many examples where that is the case.

 

[mayerling]

So in the US it's not mandatory for a child to start school once they've reached a specific age?

 

[amc80]

So in the US it's not mandatory for a child to start school once they've reached a specific age?

Yes, but it's older. I want to say 7 but I could be wrong. It might vary by state as well.

This is an issue I'll bet thinking a lot about. Just found out we are having a boy, and I'm due in mid-August.

 

[missy]

I didn't see the tv show about this but from personal experience I think it should depend on the individual child. I graduated from college when I was 19 because I took a 2 year program in Jr HS (2 year honors SP program- not sure if they still offer this) and then I finished college in 3 years. That worked for me because I enjoyed the challenge and it worked to my advantage.

There are other children who do better when they are a bit older and more mature socially. My sister hated being the youngest one in HS (she also did the 2 year SP program in Jr HS and so she was a full year plus younger when she was in HS) and so for her children (born in Jan and Feb) she held them back so they started nursery when they had already turned 4. It was either that or have them be one of the youngest so she chose for them based on her past experience and also based on the fact that they both have speech issues for which they are receiving therapy for and she wanted them to be more on par with the rest of their class.

So it really should be based on the individual child and not on any blanket rule which would be a disservice for many children. I would have hated being held back for some perceived advantage and am grateful I was not. There is no one size fits all- especially when it comes to children.

 

[janinegirly]

MP, thanks for sharing. I think the problem is parents are determining what they define as immature/sensitive,etc and in some cases are using this very gray area as a way to try to advantage their child. Of course the parent will know their child best, but what we are seeing happening is now the average age in kindergaten is 6. Are all these kids truly develomentally behind and therefore justified in being held back? And it can impact the rest of the class and cause a slippery slope - increasingly older kids in classes they are too advanced for. Or kids being held back now b/c the average age has become a year older and no one wants their kid to be 1-2 yrs younger than others, feel intimidated,etc.

I think they are going to have to start regulating this - ie have a firm range and if not, have parents come up with some medical spport for their belief that their child is not ready.

 

[Pandora II]

We don't have the option in the UK except in the private sector. Our cut off is the 31st August - I was an August birthday and also a year ahead so I was nearly 2 years younger than some of my classmates with September birthdays.

Statistically August-born children do worse that September-born so various selective tests in the UK have birthdate weightings applied to level the playing field. It's not a case just of academic achievement but also emotional and physical maturity.

For example, if you are a super-selective private school and you have 20 children on an assessment day for entry to the school at the age of 7, the September children have a massive lead on the August children - at the age of 6, an extra year is a massive age gap. So they will group children by seasons so as to compare apples and apples.

My brother - a November birthday - started school a year late as he'd been very ill in hospital for months. He found school a lot less stressful emotionally and socially than I did.

We actively TTC for a spring baby and would have actively TTA having a June/July/August baby for that very reason.

If I wasn't aware of this and had had an August baby then I would definitely push for them to stay down a year as it has so many advantages IMO.

ETA: We start school earlier in the UK - the September of the year in which the child turns 5. So, Daisy will start school in September 2013 and will turn 5 in May 2009.

 

[Puppmom]

I went to a private school and the cutoff was much later - January 31st. My poor 5 year old brother entered first grade before he could even sit still in a chair! He had to *repeat* which had a stigma of its own. DS was born at the end of July and I definitely won't be blindly sending him to school because his b-day is before the cutoff. I'll evaluate where he is physically, emotionally and academically (if you can call it that at 5!) and make the decision I think is best for him.

I wouldn't however hold him back to give him an *advantage*. I don't see how it's beneficial to hold a child back so that they can be with children who are younger, less mature and less advanced academically. I don't see how that breeds success.

If it's done strictly for purposes of sports, then I guess it *makes sense* - in an Outliers way. I still wouldn't do it.

PS - is it just me or is so much more expected of children entering Kindergarten nowadays? I remember learning to read IN school. None of my peers knew how to read entering school either. Our parents didn't teach us how to read or write at home. When I was enrolling DD in Kindergarten, they were concerned that she made up words in the rhyming section of her reading evaluation. She was 5! All 3 of my young nephews (one is gifted and the other two are average) knew how to read before they set foot in elementary school.

 

[Puppmom]

Pandora, what you said about birthdate weighting is interesting. I have friend who teaches 7th and 8th grade Language Arts. She said if a student with no known LD is struggling, almost without fail, they have a summer birthday.

 

[amc80]

If it's done strictly for purposes of sports, then I guess it *makes sense* - in an Outliers way. I still wouldn't do it.

My husband and were both late bloomers. I didn't finish growing until my senior year, and he didn't finish until after high school (I think he grew something like 3-4 inches after high school). Being 6'3" versus 6'7", which is what happened in his case, makes a huge difference in sports.

Not saying we'd hold our kid back for sports specifically, but that, combined with having a late summer bday, will definitely give us something to think about.

 

[decodelighted]

Hmmm. I'm an oldest child w/a Sept 1st birthday who went to private school ... turned 5 shortly after beginning K, started college while still 17, graduated college at 20.

In retrospect, I'd say that it was harder being an oldest child (w/no older siblings to model, or stick up for me) than it was being one of the younger people in my class. I think it helped that I've always been tall (and bigger) for my age - and knew how to read before I began school.

I'd guess any *advantage* of redshirting would only apply to kids that aren't really ready for school, either intellectually or emotionally. Because if you hold kids back that ARE ready, then they'll be bored/get into trouble etc.

 

[Haven]

I think this is just an example of parents making way too much of a handful of research results without *really* thinking about what it takes to support their child's success in school and life.

Outside of the research Gladwell used, there is different research that also shows older children are more likely to drop out, become behavior issues, or under perform compared to younger children. So, I'd say the results are inconclusive, at best.

I suppose I can understand the practice if your child is determined to be an athlete and you hold him back to support that dream. It seems extreme, but to each her own.

If you want your child to be successful in school, support him. Support him when he's in preschool, kindergarten, first grade, and all the way through college. That will go much farther than holding him back a year before putting him into kindergarten.

For what it's worth, I was the very youngest in school. I entered kindergarten at age 4, turned 5 in October. (I attended a private kindergarten.) I was 17 when I went off to college. I was in the lowest reading group in the first grade, and I struggled and cried and had a really difficult time making sense of the symbols on the page for the first half of the school year. Then, one day, I could read. Everything. (And I haven't stopped since.) I did just fine in school, my age did not hold me back. I was a leader, and an athlete, and an all around happy child. I can't imagine how bored I would have been had my parents redshirted me in kindergarten.

 

[Rhea]

I don't agree with the practice, but I'm also not a parent.

My late summer birthday fell about 2 weeks before the cut-off date so I was the youngest in my class when I started school in TX. The teacher encouraged my parents to hold me back. I was meeting and exceeding the requirements - except for the playing well with others as all my report cards note - the decision was based solely on my age. My parents eventually decided against it. I'm glad they did, when we moved to GA the cut-off was much later in the year, Oct I think, so I was no longer the youngest in the classes and still on target with grades and development. Except I still don't play well with others.

I graduated High School at 17 with a ton of 18 year olds and a few 19 year olds in my class. I always just assumed that the 19 year olds were delayed at some point due to falling a class and grades. It might be a disadvantage to be young, but being older than the majority of your class would also have some serious disadvantages.

 

[janinegirly]

Haven/Addy: thanks for sharing your experience and I agree with all you say. I think the youngest in the class often ends up exceling because they are challenged - and why should we hold back a child from being challenged if they are ready to learn just because of where their birthdate falls - my DD has a Sept birthday so is already the youngest in preschool.

The problem is that with people redshirting early on, they are impacting things on a macro level and affecting everyone for the wrong reasons. Sure there are justified reasons in some cases, but not in the numbers we are seeing..numbers that are impacting and increasing average age in Kindergarten by 1+ year. Which means those who are the youngest based on birthdate, will now be 2 years younger in some cases. That concerns me. It's intimidating for a child to be among those years older - and I worry about what it might do to one's confidence, especially if you are a petite cautious little girl like my own. But how sad that I have to consider that when she is otherwise a smarty and ready and anxious to learn!

Another aspect is that some school districts encourage redshirting, even requiring those otherwise ready be held back or repeat (they achieve this by moving the cut off date back). In some districts it helps pump test scores and therefore funding.

My guess (but not sure) is that this does not come up so much with private schools.

 

[jazzoboe]

This is an interesting topic, and something I never even thought about when I was younger. I have a late August birthday and the cutoff in our area was mid-September, so I was one of the youngest in my class, but to be honest I don't think I was aware of that fact until maybe around 3rd grade? I never struggled to keep up, if anything I was near the top of the class, but this may have more to do with factors such as my parents gettin me started with reading before I started school and having an older sister at home than it was to do with my age. I, like several of you, graduated high school and started college at 17, while most were 18 and a few 19. I didn't give it much thought- I always assumed those who were 19 were held back at some point because they weren't ready for th academic material, certainly not because their parents were trying to give them some advantage. I can see the point about young kids being intimidated by classmates close to 2 years older than them, but as I say, I cannot remember even being aware of age differences at that young age, and I was a pretty tiny little girl myself.

That said, I do agree that there are plenty of legitimate reasons to wait a year before starting your child in school, I would just hate to think that parents would hold their children back purely because they don't want them to be the youngest in their class. I never saw it as a real disavdantage.

 

[NovemberBride]

This is an interesting topic. I have never heard of holding kids back so they will be able to compete better in sports (can you really tell whether your child will be an exceptional athlete at 5?) However, it is a common discussion in my area with regards to whether kids who are right at the cutoff are developmentally and emotionally ready for school or whether they would be better served to wait a year. I see no problem with a parent deciding that a child with an August or September birthday is not ready for school.

I actually have the opposite problem - my daughter was born at the beginning of November and the cutoff here is September 30, no exceptions made. I am concerned that by not being able to start school until she is almost 6, my daughter will be bored. She is currently in daycare and we plan to keep her there until she starts kindergarten, but based on the way they move classes she would be in pre-k for 2 years. She is a bright kid and I am afraid she'll be bored repeating the same thing for two years. However, we bought our home for the excellent school district and fully intend to send her to the public school, so I am not sure there is much that I can do.

 

[Pandora II]

I went to a private school and the cutoff was much later - January 31st. My poor 5 year old brother entered first grade before he could even sit still in a chair! He had to *repeat* which had a stigma of its own. DS was born at the end of July and I definitely won't be blindly sending him to school because his b-day is before the cutoff. I'll evaluate where he is physically, emotionally and academically (if you can call it that at 5!) and make the decision I think is best for him.

I wouldn't however hold him back to give him an *advantage*. I don't see how it's beneficial to hold a child back so that they can be with children who are younger, less mature and less advanced academically. I don't see how that breeds success.

If it's done strictly for purposes of sports, then I guess it *makes sense* - in an Outliers way. I still wouldn't do it.

PS - is it just me or is so much more expected of children entering Kindergarten nowadays? I remember learning to read IN school. None of my peers knew how to read entering school either. Our parents didn't teach us how to read or write at home. When I was enrolling DD in Kindergarten, they were concerned that she made up words in the rhyming section of her reading evaluation. She was 5! All 3 of my young nephews (one is gifted and the other two are average) knew how to read before they set foot in elementary school.

Here it's not uncommon for children to start school at 5 knowing how to read.

I will be very suprised if my daughter doesn't read well before she starts school in September '13 - she's not yet 3, but knows her letters and numbers 100% verbally and most of them she can recognise in written format. She is learning to form written letters at nursery - and she goes to a nursery that doesn't 'teach' and I don't teach her anything at home, she just picks it up.

 

[Pandora II]

.

 

[missy]

I went to a private school and the cutoff was much later - January 31st. My poor 5 year old brother entered first grade before he could even sit still in a chair! He had to *repeat* which had a stigma of its own. DS was born at the end of July and I definitely won't be blindly sending him to school because his b-day is before the cutoff. I'll evaluate where he is physically, emotionally and academically (if you can call it that at 5!) and make the decision I think is best for him.

I wouldn't however hold him back to give him an *advantage*. I don't see how it's beneficial to hold a child back so that they can be with children who are younger, less mature and less advanced academically. I don't see how that breeds success.

If it's done strictly for purposes of sports, then I guess it *makes sense* - in an Outliers way. I still wouldn't do it.

PS - is it just me or is so much more expected of children entering Kindergarten nowadays? I remember learning to read IN school. None of my peers knew how to read entering school either. Our parents didn't teach us how to read or write at home. When I was enrolling DD in Kindergarten, they were concerned that she made up words in the rhyming section of her reading evaluation. She was 5! All 3 of my young nephews (one is gifted and the other two are average) knew how to read before they set foot in elementary school.

Here it's not uncommon for children to start school at 5 knowing how to read.

I will be very suprised if my daughter doesn't read well before she starts school in September '13 - she's not yet 3, but knows her letters and numbers 100% verbally and most of them she can recognise in written format. She is learning to form written letters at nursery - and she goes to a nursery that doesn't 'teach' and I don't teach her anything at home, she just picks it up.

Both my sister and I knew how to read before we were in kindergarden but I don't remember if we knew how before nursery...we were probably well on our way before nursery school is my guess.
Most kids in our area who are our age now knew how to read before kindergarden.

 

[amc80]

Both my sister and I knew how to read before we were in kindergarden but I don't remember if we knew how before nursery...we were probably well on our way before nursery school is my guess.
Most kids in our area who are our age now knew how to read before kindergarden.

I knew how to read going in, but part of the curriculum was to learn how to read. I remember there were these booklets and each one focused on a new letter. So apparently back in 1985, they did teach you to read in kindergarten.

 

[Haven]

Both my sister and I knew how to read before we were in kindergarden but I don't remember if we knew how before nursery...we were probably well on our way before nursery school is my guess.
Most kids in our area who are our age now knew how to read before kindergarden.

I knew how to read going in, but part of the curriculum was to learn how to read. I remember there were these booklets and each one focused on a new letter. So apparently back in 1985, they did teach you to read in kindergarten.

We still teach children how to read in kindergarten in the United States.

If you are going to try to teach your child how to read before she enters school, it's best to teach her to recognize sight words, and the *sounds* that the letters make. Don't teach her the names of the letters first, she can learn them after she learns the sounds. (This way you are teaching her how to *use* the letters, not what they are called. Think of it this way: We don't teach children how to ride a bicycle by giving them a labeled diagram with all the bicycle parts and their names. Same concept.)

 

[Pandora II]

I've been asking around for details on some of the UK forums that have lots of primary teachers on them as if she is going to read I would at least like her to do in a way that isn't going to go contrary to the way the schools will teach.

I'm pretty sure that back in the 1970s I learnt by whole word recognition and 'look and say' whereas nowadays it's all about synthetic phonics.

For the letter v sound thing, it is rather annoying that they all learn the ABC song which has the names not the sounds.

The way I have explained this is: A dog is called a dog but he says woof, so an A (ay) is called an A but it says 'ah'...

 

[Haven]

I've been asking around for details on some of the UK forums that have lots of primary teachers on them as if she is going to read I would at least like her to do in a way that isn't going to go contrary to the way the schools will teach.

I'm pretty sure that back in the 1970s I learnt by whole word recognition and 'look and say' whereas nowadays it's all about synthetic phonics.

For the letter v sound thing, it is rather annoying that they all learn the ABC song which has the names not the sounds.

The way I have explained this is: A dog is called a dog but he says woof, so an A (ay) is called an A but it says 'ah'...

This is great! I like it!

I bet you could make a mint if you wrote a catchy tune that went through all the letter *sounds* instead of the names. It would be long, but I'm just sayin' . . . there's probably a lot of money to be made, there.

I'm a reading specialist, so things like this interest me. I'm going to adopt your dog line, Pandora. Thank you!

ETA: It sounds like you learned to read during the whole language era. We're definitely in the middle of a mixed approach in my corner of the U.S. right now. The pendulum will swing back to both extremes once again. It always does.

 

[janinegirly]

I've been working on letter sounds with my DD as well (3yrs old). She is starting to get it...and will say thinks like "how do you spell...." and I usually spell it for her, but lately I've just said the word slowly and asked her to tell me the first letters. She almost always gets it...like if I say BAG she says it begins with B and I can switch up the words and she still gets them all right although gets confused with some C words since she thinks it might begin with K...but that takes time. She can spell her own name, mommy, daddy and some short animal words. Writing is limited to her name and Mommy. None of this is pushed on her..she asks and I tell her and she absorbs.

So even though she is small, and young for her year - and will be even more so with redshirting trends, I just can't see myself holding her back.

 

[zoebartlett]

About letter sounds...

I have a friend who teaches special ed. I teach as well, but I'm in a regular ed. classroom. My friend recently told her assistants that when they work with the kindergartners, they are not to emphasize the -uh at the end of the sound. For example, the sound for b is NOT "buh." It's clipped at the end. When I taught first grade, it annoyed me to no end to hear my kids say t as "tuh," k (and hard c) as "kuh," and so on. When they began to read words (well, those who couldn't already read), they read cat as "kuh-a [short a]-t" and then they had no idea what they were trying to read (if they weren't looking at the pictures, that is).

Gosh, that was hard to explain in typed form!