"Red Shirt" Vent

[Leajess99]

Most of the sports teams in our area allow kids to play up but not down. The cut off age is different than schools for preschool age kids but after kindergarten they go by grade on most sports. A 2nd grader could play on the 3rd grade team if they want but not the 1st.

Aside from the rec and Compet/select leagues we have Upwards at various churches and those go by grades while the rec and compet/select leagues go by ages. Our soccer association does allow for children with some special needs to play down but otherwise you can choose for the kids to play up. The grade level stuff is where we run into the biggest issue due to the redshirts. It would not be as bad but like a precious poster, we had a couple of kids that had early year birthdays like the one on my youngest's team last year that turned 8 in 1st grade and was huge in comparison. With soccer he would have to play with the kids his own age and have basically the same developmental level as the other kids.

 

[pacrosby]

If your son and my son were in the same grade, your son would have been 1 year and 10 months older than my son. I think of Jan. as being a early birthday, usually those born in Jan and sent to school on time are the oldest in the class, never mind being kept home!

My daughter is actually younger than your son by a few months and is a grade ahead.

I'm not sure the point here. Just an observation or some sort of jab. I certainly hope the former but in case it's the latter................do your children have congenital heart disease that resulted in 3 open heart surgeries in the first couple of years of life? No, didn't think so.

I made my decision based upon developmental readiness. Quite frankly I don't give a hoot about anybody else's decisions. Their kid, their decision. My kid, my decision.

 

[pacrosby]

And see these are the kids that people have issues with. My daughter's 8th birthday is on the 12th and there is no way I would have ever thought to hold her from starting school at 5 1/2. Sorry but that is just ridiculous IMHO. My poor kid is bored in 2nd grade especially in Math so I could just imagine what she would be feeling like in 1st grade. And honestly, size is again a ridiculous reason in considering holding back. My son had a child the size of a young Kindergartener on his Under 10 soccer team and the child was 9. That child got out there and played and did not care about size. he would challenge anyone.

I guess I fail to understand how sending a 5 1/2 year old to Kindergarten is "setting them up for failure". I know plenty of parents and school staff that would be peeved to have that child in their children's 1st grade class just as the ones that had the 8 year old in last year's 1st grade class were. It gets ridiculous especially for the young kids in the class.

As mentioned to another poster who thought it wise to question me......I made my decision based upon 'developmental readiness' not chronological age which is what the decision should always be based on. The story behind the story, if you want me to make you feel bad, is that my son has congenital heart disease, experienced three open heart surgeries in the first couple of years of life which is likely 'why' he wasn't really developmentally ready yet. Could I have sent him anyway and had him struggle every step of the way. Sure but the kids has had more than enough struggles in life.....why set him up for more. And it would be a struggle. If a child is not developmentally ready to manage the expectations of the curriculum, than he will struggle and possible fail. Do you honestly think that that is the way to go? Put him at a disadvantage at the get-go simply because of a birthdate? Baffles my mind that anyone would even suggest such a thing.

And.........this notion that people would/should be upset that there is an 8 year in the 1st grade classroom. Are you kidding me? He's an 8 year old doing 1st grade work with 1st grade friends who looks every bit like every other 1st grader (actually looks younger than many). Developmentally he's more like a 7 year old. Who cares how old the child is chronologically?


Sorry but my goal is for my kids, ALL my kids, to be happy and healthy and well-adjusted and successful in life. I don't care if they graduate at 16, 17, 18 or 19. In the grand scheme of things it really doesn't matter. And to be honest, I'm not sure I really need to worry about at what age this little guy is going to graduate because......well, let's just say prognosis is unknown.

Sometimes it's best to keep your opinions to yourself huh? Especially when you don't really know what you are talking about.

 

[Leajess99]

I'm not sure the point here. Just an observation or some sort of jab. I certainly hope the former but in case it's the latter................do your children have congenital heart disease that resulted in 3 open heart surgeries in the first couple of years of life? No, didn't think so.

I made my decision based upon developmental readiness. Quite frankly I don't give a hoot about anybody else's decisions.

(oh yeah, and btw...the MAW kid referenced in the below mentioned Trip Reports? That'd be my almost 8 yr old, 45 inch, 1st grader)

I'm sorry but if your child has developmental delays needing services than schools do have those services. Your child is not the only child with developmental delays IF he has them. My daughter's best friend has CP and is in a regular class with her peers and started on time. I'm sorry but thank you for showing others that you don't care how it affects the other children in the classroom. That is a big part of the problem for the younger kids in the classes is because parents don't care.

Oh and please know that your child is NOT the only child who has had heart surgeries in the first years of their lives and started school on time. One of the teachers at my daughters old school has a child with Downs and had open heart surgeries and she started school on time as well and continues in a regular classroom with an aid when needed.

 

[pacrosby]

I'm sorry but if your child has developmental delays needing services than schools do have those services. Your child is not the only child with developmental delays IF he has them. My daughter's best friend has CP and is in a regular class with her peers and started on time. I'm sorry but thank you for showing others that you don't care how it affects the other children in the classroom. That is a big part of the problem for the younger kids in the classes is because parents don't care.

Oh and please know that your child is NOT the only child who has had heart surgeries in the first years of their lives and started school on time. One of the teachers at my daughters old school has a child with Downs and had open heart surgeries and she started school on time as well and continues in a regular classroom with an aid when needed.

I can't even BELIEVE that you are going here. You should be offering up an apology not goading me further.

Nope. The child doesn't, and never has, needed 'services'. He just needed time. Fortunately I knew the difference. And for the record, if a Kindergartener needs special services and a private aide in order for them to succeed in the classroom then, quite frankly, they aren't ready and shouldn't be there (a chld with a condition such as CP or DS would of course be an exception).

And since you have no idea about the specifics of my child's particular circumstances, I suggest you just stop now.

Wow.

 

[Leajess99]

As mentioned to another poster who thought it wise to question me......I made my decision based upon 'developmental readiness' not chronological age which is what the decision should always be based on. The story behind the story, if you want me to make you feel bad, is that my son has congenital heart disease, experienced three open heart surgeries in the first couple of years of life which is likely 'why' he wasn't really developmentally ready yet. Could I have sent him anyway and had him struggle every step of the way. Sure but the kids has had more than enough struggles in life.....why set him up for more. And it would be a struggle. If a child is not developmentally ready to manage the expectations of the curriculum, than he will struggle and possible fail. Do you honestly think that that is the way to go? Baffles my mind that anyone would ever suggest such a thing.


Sorry but my goal is for my kids, ALL my kids, to be happy and healthy and well-adjusted and successful in life. I don't care if they graduate at 16, 17, 18 or 19. In the grand scheme of things it really doesn't matter. And to be honest, I'm not sure I really need to worry about at what age this little guy is going to graduate because......well, let's just say prognosis is unknown.

Sometimes it's best to keep your opinions to yourself huh? Especially when you don't really know what you are talking about.

I have no idea why you think that would make me feel bad since I know several kids who have had open heart surgeries in their early life and still start school on time. I know many kids with special needs to include Downs and CP and even transplants that have started school on time and not at almost 7. I'm sorry that your son's prognosis is unknown and good luck with his future but in all honesty he is not the only one in this condition. My little cousin (she is now 13) is a leukemia survivor and a MAW kid and she started school on time. She fought from 18 months on to be here with us today. She has diagnosed special needs because of the chemo and that. Her diagnosed LDs are the result of her attending school and them realizing there were delays. Her parents knew something was off but until you see a child in an educational setting you are not always positive there is an issue. When those more prone to see them notice them, than help can be gotten. Of course some of this also depends on the school system you are in and the teacher.


Also, in situations where medical may be an issue than there are IEPs and 504 plans. Keeping a child home until they are "developmentally ready" is ridiculous because who is to guarantee that the child is ever going to be developmentally ready?? I'm sorry but you chose and excuse and your choice DOES affect other children. Your child may continue to struggle in the future as there may be an underlying learning issue that you may not be aware of (I hope not but it could happen especially in a child with medical issues) and all you may have done is delay getting help for him or that diagnosis.

Do you know that there are children with Mitochondiral disease (an incurable disease) that are in school and miss a ton of school because of the effects of this disease?? Do you know the ones that can go to school often start on time especially if they have early birthdays in which your child is considered to have in school terms?? One little boy is in second grade at the appropriate age. There are options out there so that kids are not being left behind.

 

[Leajess99]

I can't even BELIEVE that you are going here. You should be offering up an apology not goading me further.

Nope. The child doesn't, and never has, needed 'services'. He just needed time. Fortunately I knew the difference. And since you have no idea about the specifics of my child's particular circumstances I suggest you just stop now.

Wow.

An apology for what?? For standing my ground because you CHOSE to use your child's past medical for a reason to place him with kids a year or more younger than him?? Sorry, I do NOT owe you an apology and while I am sorry for your child's situation, he is NOT the only one who has medical issues. I know many children who may not wake up tomorrow and some who have already lost their battles to cancer, mitochondrial disease, or a myriad of other medical issues. Many of these children go to school and start on time as their parents want them to be normal kids. I also know kids who continue to fight the battles from their past. They get the help they need from home as well as the school systems.

I know all too many little fighters and have volunteered my time with several in schools so, no I will NOT apologize for the choice YOU made. I will continue with my opinion that almost 7 year olds should NOT be starting kindergarten for the first time with almost or newly turned 5 year olds.

 

[pacrosby]

An apology for what?? For standing my ground because you CHOSE to use your child's past medical for a reason to place him with kids a year or more younger than him?? Sorry, I do NOT owe you an apology and while I am sorry for your child's situation, he is NOT the only one who has medical issues. I know many children who may not wake up tomorrow and some who have already lost their battles to cancer, mitochondrial disease, or a myriad of other medical issues. Many of these children go to school and start on time as their parents want them to be normal kids. I also know kids who continue to fight the battles from their past. They get the help they need from home as well as the school systems.

I know all too many little fighters and have volunteered my time with several in schools so, no I will NOT apologize for the choice YOU made. I will continue with my opinion that almost 7 year olds should NOT be starting kindergarten for the first time with almost or newly turned 5 year olds.

What exactly are you talking about?

Like I said, wow.

No, I wasn't looking for you to apologize for the choice I made. Maybe for your presumptive attitude and lack of sensitivity. Of course that would require some degree of self-awareness. Perhaps it's hard to truly see oneself when sitting so high up there on that horse.

You know, I really don't care what other people do. Not because I don't care about other people but rather because it's none of my business. My decisions are based upon what I believe to be right; based on what I know not only as this particular child's parent, but also as a former professional in a related field. If a child is not likely to thrive in Kindergarten because he/she is not developmentally ready and needs the benefit of time (as opposed to services - there's a big difference there), than he/she should not go. There is absolutely nothing to be gained from pushing such a child along and having to rely on adjunct support services for him/her to keep up. Not only is it not good for the child in question but it also puts a strain on the system. That's it. End of story. You don't have to agree with me. Rant all you want.

The children you reference are 'sick' children (mitochondrial disease). That's different. Or cognitively impaired (DS). Or neuromuscularly impaired (CP). That's different. Keeping those children out an extra year wouldn't have mattered. It wouldn't have changed anything for them really. Not in the long run. They still would have required services. They still would have had struggles along the way because of their medical diagnosis. Keeping my son out that extra year in fact resulted in him being able to thrive" independently". He's working at a 1st grade level alongside the other 1st graders. Without services of any kind. You're comparing apples to oranges.

And tell me please. Is it really possible that you believe it would've been better to have him in the bottom of the barrel of the second graders, feeling frustrated and overwhelmed by work that was really beyond his capabilities? Being pulled out throughout the day to work with various specialists? Feeling like he's stupid because he can't keep up with his classmates? Looking like a preschooler? Why? For what reason? Just "cuz"? Believe me he's not taking anyone's place on any sports team. He's not skewing the academic expectations of the class. He will never "look" out of place with his grade level peers. Given how well-liked he is, he is not likely to "feel" out of place socially with his grade level peers. So what exactly is the big tragedy here? Besides 'just cuz'?

What's really nutty here though? You know nothing about me or my family. And up 'til now, you've only 'heard' but a few sentences from me about my decision and the general rationale behind it. And yet, oddly, you have sooooo very much to say. So many accusations. So many assumptions. Honestly, proof in is the pudding. My son is not the one who needs the services here.

 

[bwilcox]

I totally agree. I was called in for a conference just before Christmas to discuss my daughter's performance in 1st grade. The teacher wanted her to go back to kindergarten after the break. She has a March birthday and is one of the youngest students in the class, anyone with a summer birthday waited a year. There are a couple of April/May birthdays after hers, but there are also several in the class are a year or more older than her.

When we looked at her skills, it turned out that she was reading on a first grade level as of Dec 1. Her math is also on the first grade level. My husband asked "well, what's the problem?" and we heard that, while she's at grade level, she's not where the rest of her class is. They are moving on to 2nd grade level work in January.

So, what we have is a group of 7/8 year olds doing second grade work. In a class called first grade. The 6 year old doing first grade work doesn't belong. My heart is broken for the options--moving back labels her a failure. We can't sell it to her as a good thing. Staying in a mismatched class is not good either. We've decided we're not moving her to K in January, but we're considering changing schools for 2nd grade.

You say there are "several" in the class who are a year older than her. The rest of the class was not redshirted. Therefore, you can't attribute your daughter being behind to a couple of redshirted kids. Also, being one year older doesn't mean those few are one year smarter. They have had the same lessons as your daughter. Age doesn't translate to smartness the way it MAY translate to better athletic ability (by making you bigger). I don't think you can attribute your daughter's experience to redshirted kids. FWIW, I would move her to another school if I was you. Putting a child who is on grade-level back a grade is ridiculous, and speaks to the teacher's lack of ability to teach lessons to children of varying levels and learning styles.

 

[rumrunnergirl]

.

 

[GinnyEmma]

Wow, it is hard to believe the rudeness here. Trying to one up a sick kid? That is screwed up.

People need to make he best choices for their kids. No one else is going to. The system functions the best for the average, by necessity. Those on the ends of the curve need to advocate for their children. Alm the more power to them.

 

[GinnyEmma]

I didn't realize K existed where kids didn't walk down the halls, carry thier own trays at lunch ect. My DD was doing that in K-3. They had "school" form 9-12, then lunch and a nap. K-4 was the same setup, and K was 8-3, no nap. K was full day here 25 years ago when I was in K, and 45 years ago when mom was in K.

K is still half day here. I am proud to say. just like it was 40 years ago. Amzingly enough kids still score the same within a year. As compared to 4 neighboring districts when we looked at changing.

 

[indimom]

K is still a half-day here also. There has been talk of changing for years, but it never does. The explantation is monetary more than anything else. No money to build extra classrooms and no money for additional teachers. The only reason parents don't like it is there is no midday bus service so it can be a bit of a pain! Our kids still seem to turn out alright.

Also, around here, people are MORE concerned about how the class might be slowed down by the kids who need more assistance and services (those who are enrolled "on time" whether they are ready or not) than by the entire class being pushed harder because of one or two who might be older than the rest.

It's different all over, I guess.
If I had to spend all my spare time worrying about who is trying to get an advantage over me or mine, I'd lose it.
Y'all can move to Indiana if you like?? Around here, kids go to school to learn, not to be declared "the best of the best of the best."

 

[dogluva]

I'm not sure the point here. Just an observation or some sort of jab. I certainly hope the former but in case it's the latter................do your children have congenital heart disease that resulted in 3 open heart surgeries in the first couple of years of life? No, didn't think so.

I made my decision based upon developmental readiness. Quite frankly I don't give a hoot about anybody else's decisions. Their kid, their decision. My kid, my decision.

Right, just like you don't know a hoot about my daughter. I won't go into specifics, but let's just say she has her own issues. However, she is a March birthday and couldn't imagine keeping her home at 5.5 years, regardless. It is not a jab. I am sure you have valid reasons for keeping your son back. I just don't get the ones that hold them back just because they can. It is not fair to those kids who are close to the cut off and make it, like my oldest son. He was in a classroom with kids almost two years older than him and exposed to things he was not "developmentally" ready for. So it goes both ways. There is no way I was going to hold him back when he was ready.

I know you are only doing what is best for you son, I am not "jabbing" you, really.

 

[dogluva]

As mentioned to another poster who thought it wise to question me......I made my decision based upon 'developmental readiness' not chronological age which is what the decision should always be based on. The story behind the story, if you want me to make you feel bad, is that my son has congenital heart disease, experienced three open heart surgeries in the first couple of years of life which is likely 'why' he wasn't really developmentally ready yet. Could I have sent him anyway and had him struggle every step of the way. Sure but the kids has had more than enough struggles in life.....why set him up for more. And it would be a struggle. If a child is not developmentally ready to manage the expectations of the curriculum, than he will struggle and possible fail. Do you honestly think that that is the way to go? Put him at a disadvantage at the get-go simply because of a birthdate? Baffles my mind that anyone would even suggest such a thing.

And.........this notion that people would/should be upset that there is an 8 year in the 1st grade classroom. Are you kidding me? He's an 8 year old doing 1st grade work with 1st grade friends who looks every bit like every other 1st grader (actually looks younger than many). Developmentally he's more like a 7 year old. Who cares how old the child is chronologically?


Sorry but my goal is for my kids, ALL my kids, to be happy and healthy and well-adjusted and successful in life. I don't care if they graduate at 16, 17, 18 or 19. In the grand scheme of things it really doesn't matter. And to be honest, I'm not sure I really need to worry about at what age this little guy is going to graduate because......well, let's just say prognosis is unknown.

Sometimes it's best to keep your opinions to yourself huh? Especially when you don't really know what you are talking about.

We don't know what we are talking about because you never mentioned your son's medical issues in your first post. This is a message board, you put yourself out there for other's opinions. Sorry you don't like them.

 

[dogluva]

I can't even BELIEVE that you are going here. You should be offering up an apology not goading me further.

Nope. The child doesn't, and never has, needed 'services'. He just needed time. Fortunately I knew the difference. And for the record, if a Kindergartener needs special services and a private aide in order for them to succeed in the classroom then, quite frankly, they aren't ready and shouldn't be there (a chld with a condition such as CP or DS would of course be an exception).

And since you have no idea about the specifics of my child's particular circumstances, I suggest you just stop now.

Wow.

I am a special educator. There are many, many children you could hold back until they are 10 and it would not make a difference. Keeping them in preschool is not going to "fix" anything. They will continue to struggle regardless. Actually, starting them rigtht away is what they need.

 

[ajk912]

And see these are the kids that people have issues with. My daughter's 8th birthday is on the 12th and there is no way I would have ever thought to hold her from starting school at 5 1/2. Sorry but that is just ridiculous IMHO. My poor kid is bored in 2nd grade especially in Math so I could just imagine what she would be feeling like in 1st grade. And honestly, size is again a ridiculous reason in considering holding back. My son had a child the size of a young Kindergartener on his Under 10 soccer team and the child was 9. That child got out there and played and did not care about size. he would challenge anyone.

I guess I fail to understand how sending a 5 1/2 year old to Kindergarten is "setting them up for failure". I know plenty of parents and school staff that would be peeved to have that child in their children's 1st grade class just as the ones that had the 8 year old in last year's 1st grade class were. It gets ridiculous especially for the young kids in the class.

No, you are sending your child to school at the best time. I always thought it was best that your child turn 6 in kindergarten, so sending a 5 1/2 year old is best. You don't want kids turning 5 (or just turned 5) during kindergarten, and you don't want kids turning 7. You want 6 year olds in k, 7 year olds in 1st, 8 yo in 2nd, 9 yo in 3rd, 10 yo in 4th, etc- which puts them driving in 10th grade and then graduating and going off in the world at age 18, perfect.

 

[mommyof2princesses]

We are on the opposite end of the spectrum. I decided to homeschool because my dd showed early reading readiness at 3. By 4 1/2 she was reading. She is 7 and is reading advanced chapter books and doing long division. If she were to go to school I have no idea what they would do with her. Maturity wise she would probably be a 1st grader. Learning wise she is upper 3rd grade! Same with my other dd. She is just 2 months shy of 16 and is finishing up chemistry and 11 grade reading. Although her maturity level is way beyond her age.

The school systems are not set up for all children to succeed. Whether children start early or are redshirted there will be kids who are far behind and far ahead and no one knows what to do with them. I taught in public schools for years and by 4th grade it didn't matter who started when. It mattered more on IQ and family life. (And IQ is tested against age not grade level. So kids being redshirted may be 9 in 2nd grade and when tested against their age they would be performing lower than other aged peers.)

I have no plans to start my kids in college very early. Instead they will just get more time to study things they are interested in...DD15 will be starting Physics in January!

 

[mjkacmom]

I am a special educator. There are many, many children you could hold back until they are 10 and it would not make a difference. Keeping them in preschool is not going to "fix" anything. They will continue to struggle regardless. Actually, starting them rigtht away is what they need.

I have a degree in special education, and I disagree. There is a difference between just not being ready, especially due to a medical condition which keeps you out of an educational setting, and having a diagnosed learning disability. If you have a learning disability, your best bet is to be in the public schools ASAP, to receive necessary services (I'm a big fan of EI). However, if a child is behind academically because of a medical condition, or because he or she just isn't ready, he or she will be fine waiting.

I can't believe someone as rude as you appear to be works with children.

 

[princessmom29]

And tell me please. Is it really possible that you believe it would've been better to have him in the bottom of the barrel of the second graders, feeling frustrated and overwhelmed by work that was really beyond his capabilities? Being pulled out throughout the day to work with various specialists? Feeling like he's stupid because he can't keep up with his classmates? Looking like a preschooler? Why? For what reason? Just "cuz"? Believe me he's not taking anyone's place on any sports team. He's not skewing the academic expectations of the class. He will never "look" out of place with his grade level peers. Given how well-liked he is, he is not likely to "feel" out of place socially with his grade level peers. So what exactly is the big tragedy here? Besides 'just cuz'?

Dispite claiming you know EXACTLY what would happen, you cannot know that this would have been the case had he started on time. No one knows becuase he was not given the chance to try. I think that is the point that is being made here. You made the choice based on what you THOUGHT would happen. Many of us would have given the kid a chance to succeed with his age peers, given the choice, and not just "cuz". What is going on now and what will happen when he is a 16 year old freshman are very different. I personally would have given him the chance to not have to deal with that, but as you have said your child, your choice. We are are also free to say that we would do differently. DD has a little girl who has been in her class for both k and 1st grade. She is a child who is adopted by grandparents. Her father passed away when she was 3, and mom is in no condition to care for her. She has heart defects as a resulkt of mom's actions while pregnant, and had open heart surgery in may before starting school in august, at 4. He fifth birthday was 2 weeks after school started, and although she is very small for her age, she is thrivivng. You never know until you try!