It would be good to me if all kids are considered more holistically, especially in helping figure when they should start K. I’m glad we gave each of our kids more time by starting them so they turned 5 a few months into K. S needed more time to figure out how to socialize and D was a pro at socializing but needed more time to figure out how to read.
Other parents and kids make different choices. It’s nice when there are options and each child’s readiness is carefully considered to make the best choice for that individual.
Development is way more than just excelling at academics. Development encompasses physical growth, if you consider sports important, emotional and social development, growth in executive functions, and as they get older, dating/sexual maturation.
@additionvector, when I said that perhaps a case could be made for setting the kindergarten cutoff differently for boys and girls, I wasn’t talking about their ability to learn. Rather, I was talking about the fact that typically (although there are certainly exceptions), girls develop the ability to sit down, shut up, and follow directions earlier than boys do.
It is interesting that the things we look for in determining school readiness are large motor skills, verbal ability, and independence. And when they get to school we tell them to sit down, shut up and do as they are told.
Not sure if this has been stated yet, but I read somewhere that the oldest in a class get more leadership opportunities and do better athletically (due to being bigger and more mature) but the youngest grow up smarter (have to work to keep up) and actually do better later in life (likely due to brains being valued in this economy).
I grew up during a time when the age for K was 5 by year end. I am a late December baby so I made the cut and was not “held back”. I can tell you it was a struggle the whole time. I feel my GPA suffered because of it and this impacted where I ultimately went to college.
Being the youngest meant I was the smallest, the last to have growth spurts, the last to enter the part time work force, the last to get his drivers license and car, the last to be able to drink in college, etc. the list goes on and on. It had impacts on my social life and my academic life. Entering college at 17 was a challenge as well.
It was not until well into my college years that I began to realize the effect of being so young had been. I was finally beginning to keep pace with others and then excel. The reality is that the competition your children face is always there. Being young has very little advantages in this arena. I feel I would have done much better had I been held back a year and allowed to enter HS at age 14 and college at 18.
I feel your experience is not normal. It may be true that your child was bright at a young age and was never challenged. I would argue the majority of kids do not fall into that boat. Sure we here on CC like to thing that our Johnny is the brightest and most wonderful but the reality is most of them may just be fairly normal. We live in a pyramid societal structure where the majority of people will just not grow up to be very successful. This majority would do well to start a year later. One could argue the world is getting more complex and the requirements for more advanced training is needed (STEM). I feel being a year older has benefits that outweigh the situation you experienced. JMHO.
@MassDaD68: Well, you saw the disadvantages, but it could also be that you wouldn’t have turned out to be as smart/hard-working if you had been held back a year.
This is so interesting…thanks for the thread, @additionvector . I have noticed among the teachers at our public school that boys have a steep climb to convince the kindergarten teachers that they are ready, even if birthday is one-two months before the cutoff! Football is important here and teachers did mention it at kindergarten signup. also shaving. Girls on the other hand are assumed to be ready because they are “easier when they are younger and so much harder than boys later.”. The sexism toward both groups is amazing to me. I agree that boys on average are maturing later, but the average is seen, by our teachers, to apply to every single kindergartner…not always true. They are very kind teachers, but not terribly good at statistical reasoning…I never identified my old kindergartner as a boy or girl, but many assumed boy. Either way, it’s so important to realize like many have said here, each kid should be considered individually. I agree that the “gift of time” can actually backfire. (edited to name the OP
OP - April birthday is average and I just can’t believe that it was the reason for whatever happened a decade later.
My son had a September birthday but HE wanted to go to kindergarten. He was bright and social, so we let him go.
He did well and there were no issues until around 6th/7th grade. Some boys (redshirted) were 13 months older and when they hit puberty my son felt like a little kid. It bothered him a lot.
But he dealt with it. Eventually hit puberty, then a nice growth spurt and by middle of freshman year he looked his age. He hit the weight room. Put on some muscle and the girls started swarming. End of social issues!
And academically… we’ve never seen a B on his report card.
The only con that remains is he’s last to get his drivers license. Some might point out the he’s at a disadvantage in sports. True. He plays baseball. He’s a pitcher throwing in the low 80s If he were a sophomore instead of a junior He’d stand out more and have a chance to have a develop into a top recruit. But its not a big deal to him.
Point of my post is that when parents try to manipulate their child’s future by redshirting its still a crap shoot.
There is no magic formula that works for everyone. We’re all just trying to do the best we can for our kids.
It is easy to blame some decision on an outcome, even if there is actually no connection. Send the young for age kid on time and he falters - should have held him back. Redshirt him? Should have sent him on time. Yes, it may be a mistake either way but generally not the only thing that creates the situation. A different grade, a different teacher, a different group of classmates, a different coach - all of these can impact how a kid develops. But the key factor is their own personality and how they react to challenges.
As Jerseyparents says, there is no magic formula. Many of us with more than one kid found out quite early that what worked with kid 1 did not with kid 2 or kid 3. I can think of many kids with late birthdays who did not excel (redshirted or just birthdays right after the cutoff) and many who did. Same as for kids that are young for grade.
Not trying to minimize your story Massdad, but it is impossible to know whether you would have fared all that differently if you had waited a year to start school.
@mom2and Point well taken. I just wanted to share my personal experiences in the hope it might add some perspective. It was something I learned during college. It is too much to ask that my parents should have known back then when I was 5 years old.
I, too, think redshirting is a bad idea, but for more direct reasons. I think a lot of parents who do redshirt don’t consider the long-term consequences. It may not seem like a big deal for a 14-year-old to be in middle school instead of high school, but what about when they’re 22 and still in college instead of starting their career and earning money? Do parents actually want their children to get a late start on their work lives? Do they want to be supporting kid for an extra year? I think this is a consequence that simply doesn’t occur to redshirting parents.
All of us who have made this choice to or not to have a child start according to school cutoffs and whether to hold a child back or skip a grade or more have made the best choices we could with the info we had at the time.
In hindsight, it may have turned out fabulous or not so great. As a parent, I’m certainly fine with supporting my kids financially an extra year or more for them to have the time they need to be their best selves–socially, emotionally, and mentally.
Considering the significant investment we make in choosing to have and raise kids, I’d say that one year is really not the issue–it’s making the most appropriate choice for each child we can, given the curcumstances and our resources. Any pat or one-size fits most answer just doesn’t work because there are so many variables.
Totally disagree. Totally. Some kids won’t be ready to start their working careers at age 22 as a bachelors graduate IF they don’t have a good foundation of learning, and maturity at an early age.
Have you noticed the increase in things like gap years, PG HS years, things like Americorps, Teach for America, Peace Corps and the like? No income there either. But certainly a “delay” in entering the work force.
I’m sorry, but education is a journey, not a race.
We did have our son wait a year before starting Kindegarten. It was a tough decision and made after discussing all issues with his preschool and Public school. He had a great extra year at pre-k and developed all the skills we were looking at for school. That was the right decision for him at the time.
By grade 2, he had caught up socially and academically and we then advocated to have him move ahead - back to join his age mates. And that was also the right decision at the time.
You need to look at your child and decide what they need - and keep in mind that you may need to re-evaluate what’s best at a later time.
@leasoap Most parents aren’t rushing their kids thru school so they can be done at 22. People don’t “consider this long term consequence” because that is not the goal. Having a confident, child that is a good learner is the goal. Having a teenager that is self-assured enough not to give into peer pressure is another goal (ie many don’t want a 13yo going to HS, or a 17yo going to college).
As @HImom says, education is a journey, not a race. (I’ve also seen this posted in the offices of a couple schools).
Once the son/daughter is out of college or grad school, the adult has their whole lifetime to work.
@leasoap: “Do parents actually want their children to get a late start on their work lives? Do they want to be supporting kid for an extra year?”
Considering that someone healthy can expect to live to 80 or more (give or take) these days and be working 40 years or more while many will face detours and changes in direction throughout life, starting work a year later seems like an insignificant item. And the effects and ramifications of having kids is far more than an extra year of support.
I agree with all those who say that education (and life as well) is a journey, not a race.
I mean, if you are hellbent on making your kids earn money as soon as possible, you’d pull them out of school at 16 and make them earn a living somehow (like manual labor). Yet why wouldn’t you do that?
I agree that education is not a race. However, there’s a difference between rushing your kid and not slowing them down. It really irks me how some people think that parents who neglect to redshirt their summer or fall child are rushing them, when in reality, they’re just doing what they’re supposed to do. My DS was born on September 7th and his pre-school teachers strongly advised us to hold them back, and one of the things they said was, “There’s no need to rush.” I agreed with that, but I also didn’t think there was any need to slow him down, so I sent him right when he was supposed to go, just before his 5th birthday. He’s just fine. He’s 14 and finishing up his freshman year in high school. I think he would have been really angry with me and my DH had we held him back. I don’t think we rushed him at all; we simply refused to slow him down. We also didn’t want him to carry a stigma of having been held back and his classmates thinking there was something wrong with him.