If it negatively affects other children, then the red-shirted (RS) child should become ineligible in certain cases (i.e. field day when a RS child competes with a regular aged child since the RS child is older and presumably faster. Also in gifted programs, if the child ever wants to be classified as gifted, that child should be moved to the appropriate/legal age and forced to compete using that criteria. Top awards should also be off limits since the child has an artificial advantage). Since the trend is for some parents to RS their kids, those kids should compete head to head for RS designated prizes (ie RS winner of 4th grade field day hurdles, RS 3rd grade top science fair winner). So in essence you are putting an asterisk by the child's award because it is not an equal accomplishment for that designated grade/age. In my opinion, this is the only way to keep the playing field level and respect the rights of parents.
I am living proof that a child who enters kindergarten at the age of 4 will be able to handle being in kindergarten, especially if they were prepared for it by going to pre-school. I started at age 4 after attending pre-school and graduated high school at the age of 17 and also entered college at the same age.
I believe that with all the educational tools that are available today that a child turning 5 by the end of the same year that they enter kindergarten, will be able to keep up just as well as children who are already 5 when they enter. Children are far more advanced today than they were 20 years ago. Educational programming on TV also helps a child develop faster.
I can understand that there are at times very legitimate reasons to have a child stay behind a year when in kindergarten. However, when the intention is specifically to allow the child to have an extra year to be smarter then the rest when the child is obviously doing just fine creates an unfair situation. This is unfair in both scholarship situations and in sports abilities too.
With redshirting the student and the system are manipulated. The student may be using this to finish his college in a longer time or using it to gain more practice in his or her chosen sport. In the long run it may be an advantage to the student but only time will tell. A year of experience makes a big difference as opposed to no experience.
Redshirting is an unfair advantage because the redshirted children (who are more experienced, older, more mature and stronger) tend to outshine their classmates and win class competitions (not because they are talented, but simply because they are older). Furthermore, as they tend to ace academic work that is set for a particular grade, teachers are likely to raise the expectations for the whole class (making it harder for younger classmates).
Put your kid in the class his age requires. Don't put him/her with younger kids so that they can dominate unfairly. For every "late bloomer" there are 5 moms looking to get their kids an unfair advantage.
Our son is turning 16 in September, and is an incoming high school junior. This past year, he took Algebra 2, which is normal by sophomore standards. There was a girl in his class about 2 months older than him, except she was a freshman. For a freshman, Algebra 2 is advanced. So even though my son's classmate is older than him and they're in the same level of math, she's considered advanced in math and he's considered average in math. THAT'S NOT FAIR. The reality is that she's behind in every subject except for math, but that's sadly not how most people look it.
Do what you're supposed to do and don't redshirt. If you do it, other parents will too. But if you don't do it, then parents who would have redshirted probably won't either. If your kids are intelligent, then they should do just fine in their age-appropriate grade. There is nothing impressive about an 8-year-old 1st grader doing 2nd grade work.
It's not right to judge a kid to another kid who may be a year plus older. Also, many people I know who have redshirted their kids put them in GT--really. Then why is the kid held back then!! It's simply gaming the system . I can see short tem advantages but I'm scared to know what the long term implications are. Things are not supposed to come easy in life. The greatest lessons are learned through failure but doing things like this shields kids from potential failures and growing opportunities.
First, let's define red shirting. If the cut-off date is in November/December and you hold your October+ kid one year, that is not red shirting. It may very well be appropriate.
If the cut-off date is August and you hold back you June or less kid, that is red shirting BIG TIME, unless there is a special need children involved. But that is not the what this debate is about.
The way I see it, it's mostly for parents obsessed with having their kids living the life they never could, like being drafted into pro sports or getting better grades all the way to Harvard.
Seeing these ginormous kids along these adorable little face that used to be the norm for K just makes me sad. For the kid, but also for the wacko parents behind this travesty. And let's not forget the school's principal, who would happily sign up kids at 7 or 8 yo just to get better test scores, like the perfect little useless bureaucrats that they really are.
The big studies show red shirted children have a definite advantage over younger children in standardized testing, academics and sports but not a greater ability to learn.
I have a (normal age, straight A , top of her class in Science and Math for years) child who was just denied admission to the #2 HS in the country based on standardized testing. Last years acceptance list included 28% directly from schools which allow and encourage red shirting ( you guessed it they can afford an extra year of day care) and countless others who were red shirted than transferred over. The following is a list of some of the major studies done on red shirting and it's consequences. Yep it works but so does not getting caught cheating.
- Elizabeth Dhuey The Persistence of Early Childhood Maturity: International Evidence of Long-Run Age Effects"(with Kelly Bedard) The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 2006 121(4), 1437-1472.
• Deming, David, & Dynarski, Susan. (2008). The lengthening of childhood (NBER Working Paper No. 14124). Retrieved February 24, 2009, from http://www.nber.org/papers/w14124.pdf
• Elder, Todd E., & Lubotsky, Darren H. (2006). Kindergarten entrance age and children’s achievement: Impacts of state policies, family background, and peers. Retrieved February 16, 2009, from http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=916533
• Graue, M. Elizabeth, & DiPerna, James. (2000). Redshirting and early retention: Who gets the "gift of time" and what are its outcomes? American Educational Research Journal, 37(2), 509-34.
• Katz, Lilian G. (2000). Academic redshirting and young children. ERIC Digest. Champaign, IL: ERIC Clearinghouse on Elementary and Early Childhood Education. Retrieved February 16, 2009, from http://ecap.crc.illinois.edu/eecearchive/digests/2000/katzred00.html
Now that schools and colleges are basing their decisions on "the score" , "the rank" or anything besides real performance the field should be level for all. Anything else is a lie , a cheat or a politician.
If you disagree with redshirting, then a solution for you is simple. Don't redshirt. But don't take that right away from other parents. Just like no one should be telling you to redshirt even though you don't want to, you shouldn't be telling other parents not to redshirt when they want to.
You want your kid to have more confidence? Well, it comes at the expense of my kid, who was sent to school on time (at age 4), was born just a week before the cutoff (and was actually born 5 weeks early). Your kid is 15 months older than mine. The tables are starting to turn. And your kid probably doesn't feel so good when the youngest kid can do things better.
Think about it. One year of of not doing anything academic isn't going to magically make you smarter. When you enter Kindergarten, you start from square 1, just like everyone else. Another reason I'm against redshirting is because of all the people voting "yes". By redshirting a child, his or her classmates will have the false impression that he has an unfair advantage over the rest of the class, and not be impressed no matter how well he performs.
But let's suppose redshirting was an advantage. I would be for it, because I fully accommodate parents who do whatever's best for their child. If you think it's an unfair advantage, then you do it too. But it would be smarter of you not to, since it really doesn't make a difference.
I would know because I was redshirted and it didn't help me one bit. I have ADHD and aspergers, and I feel insulted that people would think that I had an unfair advantage over my high-functioning classmates simply because I was older than them. I did no better than I would have had I gone on time, and had I gone on time, at least would have understood why I was struggling so much.
So don't redshirt, because it really makes no difference.
I do not consider redshirting an unfair advantage for children.Children develop at different rate and the parents and coaches just might be trying tolook out for their best interests and not necessarily to get an unfair advantage.Once the child develops it is more likely that the playing field will become more equitable.
Stop the madness they are upset because they couldn't or were not allowed to rs their kid. It's the best thing for your kid! If I'm 5ft 9in and others are 6ft 4in their kid is going to be bigger, why not let my son have a chance to grow, so he will have some chance to fit in sports, playground, halls, and so on!
Don't do this. You don't know what the future holds. My nephew was very bright, eager to learn. Sister missed deadlines to put him in private/public schools. Already year late.
Middle of 8th grade, moved across country, didn't meet standards and held back. 10th grade, moved back, held back again. Had to fake age and residency to get a school to accept him as an over-age senior. Summer schools weren't enough, he was denied graduation and now has to pay for GED at 20.
Please prioritize education enough to keep kids on their normal age and grade track.
Children lose an entire year of productivity if they are redshirted. Preschool offers limited learning benefits past a certain amount of time. To spend an extra year there, and put off actual learning by a year, is a detriment to the development process of children. They may have a maturity advantage later on in school, once they reach high school, but they are actually a year behind everyone, much like a student who has been held back a grade. They are also required to enter the workforce a year later than everyone, and that is a year wasted.
Children all develop at different rates, even if they're healthy and normal. If a child is at the young end of the age range to start kindergarten, and isn't mature enough to keep up with children almost a year older in the same class, then he or she could be miserable and do poorly, not just that year, but for years afterward.
Redshirting was created to allow children time to grow before jumping into public school. There is a cut off date that has been decided upon, at which month a child's birthday should fall on, and what age they should be to enter kindergarten. This has been going on for years, and there have not been any issues of parents thinking that it is an unfair advantage. Every child learns their social skills at a different rate, individually. It could, instead, be argued that redshirting can be a disadvantage, instead of an advantage, because it goes by birth date, and not by where the child stands socially.
Some kids are ready to come onto a team and perform at a high level. Others are not mentally or physically developed enough to perform at that level, and should deserve the opportunity to use an additional year. As long as all students have the same opportunities available, I think there's no problem with redshirting.