Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I'm going to refrain from arguing on here whether or not parents can make the best decisions for their own individual children, and I have a lot of respect for poster, but let me point out the NAEYC article linked to is 11 years old and it references studies from the early 90's and late 80's. IMO, this is important since the article starts out by saying ideas about "red-shirting" are outdated.
I really think the way to decide is to look at your child and decide is he going to be ready to read at 5 or ready to read at 6? Kindergarten and pre 1st programs at the big league privates hit the ground running with reading.
In fact, the application to Pace asks, "If you are applying to pre-first or first, is your child an independent reader?" In other words, enough of their pre-firsters are independent readers *at the time of application* for them to ask this question. I can look at this question, then look at my not-ready-to-read 5 year old and I know I'm glad he is in a 5-6 program right now.
Many children are not truly turned-on to read until they are 6. Hence, there is much wisdom among the teachers and administrators who advise parents of these children not to start them in pre-first until they are six. If we lived in a time and place where reading was not taught until first grade, then maybe we would have more children starting kindergarten/prefirst at 5.
To me the issue is not why are we redshirting? the issue is Why are we teaching reading in kindergarten?
I really think the way to decide is to look at your child and decide is he going to be ready to read at 5 or ready to read at 6? Kindergarten and pre 1st programs at the big league privates hit the ground running with reading.
In fact, the application to Pace asks, "If you are applying to pre-first or first, is your child an independent reader?" In other words, enough of their pre-firsters are independent readers *at the time of application* for them to ask this question. I can look at this question, then look at my not-ready-to-read 5 year old and I know I'm glad he is in a 5-6 program right now.
Many children are not truly turned-on to read until they are 6. Hence, there is much wisdom among the teachers and administrators who advise parents of these children not to start them in pre-first until they are six. If we lived in a time and place where reading was not taught until first grade, then maybe we would have more children starting kindergarten/prefirst at 5.
To me the issue is not why are we redshirting? the issue is Why are we teaching reading in kindergarten?
Exactly.
And re: the article linked, there are plenty of other more recent articles that address the opportunity cost of red-shriting for many kids. Parents know their own child best of course. I just strongly feel that it should not be the default for boys with summer birthdays and that it depends on the individual child.
Well, obviously, you also think you know more than the school that would assess your child and tell you your child is ready. You have said even if that happens, you have already made up your mind that your child is NOT ready. You have a right to think whatever you want to think about your child. Who am I to push back on you and say that it could somehow be seen as questioning your child's abilities. There is absolutely no basis for me saying that. Nothing that you have written would lead one to that conclusion. Makes total sense.
Quote:
Originally Posted by schoolqs
Thank you, AnsleyPark! I think we do know what's best for our child. We know more than our child, and certainly way more than LovelySummer.
First of all, if you post a question in a public thread, the PUBLIC can answer so YOU can now go somewhere with your seeming free time since you are too sensitive to receive a response. Don't ask the question if you don't want an answer. That is one way of handling it. Another way of handling it is to just suck it up. You can learn something from anyone.
Here is what you wrote:
Has anyone been given admission to a private school in Atlanta and deferred admission a year? For example, if we wanted to hold our child back a year, could we apply him this year, knowing he will stay at his current school one more year and ask for a deferment for one year? Has anyone ever heard of this or had this happen?
So, now let me analyze your statement since you think I like to psychoanalyze.
1. First of all, you pose the scenario of your child being admitted and then deferring admission.
2. Second of all, you admit that even if your child is admitted (which means the school obviously thinks your child is up to snuff - or else the child will not be admitted) you have ALREADY DECIDED in advance, to hold your child back.
3. So child meets qualifications of school + parent has already decided a year in advance that child could not possibly be ready = parent doubting child (or parent trying to hold the kid back to create a super kid that will be dominant in athletics and win an athletic scholarship someday).
Ok, maybe I was wrong. Maybe you are trying to have an athlete and are trying to engineer the system like lots of other parents do so that your kid will be bigger.
If all of this sounds perfectly fine and natural to you then go for it.
ETA: And if you also think it is ok to put your child through the process of possibly preparing for testing, taking the test, doing the interviews that go along with the admission process, knowing the child is submitting itself to the school possibly, meeting possible classmates during the screenings, getting admitted and then telling the child he/she will now be held back because that is best then, well, I guess. Someday that child will be old enough to learn what you did and what you thought. He/she will not always be as young as he/she is now. I imagine for some kids that will not cause them to doubt themselves in some way but for some kids that could happen.
Quote:
Originally Posted by schoolqs
And to LovelySummer - I ask a simple question about admissions and you somehow turn this around to me having no faith or confidence in my child? I was asking this question to people who would actually give me some answers, and definitely wasn't asking for a STRANGER to psycho-analyze the perceived relationship I share with my child. You can now go find another thread to comment on with your free time.
This is interesting. I do know of some programs in the city in which 3 year olds are already starting to sound out short words phonetically - that is from the school curriculum itself. Are we saying this is out of the ordinary? Surely a child in a 3 year old class that knows his/her alphabet and letter sounds and is starting to sound out words will be reading by 5. Or is that not the population of children Pace is taking in? That would be surprising to me. I always thought Pace was one of the privates on the forefront of academic challenge.
With regard to teaching kindergarten at 5, I think it is true that there is more that the children are expected to learn/do nowadays than when we were younger. It seems that this is pervasive throughout all of elementary, for better or worse. Why are kids doing fractions in second grade, geometry in 3rd grade? Seems odd to me...and I have a few degrees in a heavy math subject so I respect math but it just seems early. I distinctly remember we were only going for a half day in kindergarten, learning to write letters and the corresponding sounds/mapping to pictures of fruit for the starting sound and learning things like how to tie our shoes. I don't know if it's the advancement in technology but many kids 2-3 years old are already doing those things nowadays. They seem to be way more advanced than at least I know I was in kindergarten.
But hey, we were going half day (and taking a nap during the half day), kindergarten was more like daycare and I don't think there was any sort of headstart. Nowadays, kids are in headstart at 4 where they are learning sounds and letters if they have never learned it and some are reading at 5. It seems to be a much different world, in some ways worse, in some ways better.
Quote:
Originally Posted by AtlJan
I really think the way to decide is to look at your child and decide is he going to be ready to read at 5 or ready to read at 6? Kindergarten and pre 1st programs at the big league privates hit the ground running with reading.
In fact, the application to Pace asks, "If you are applying to pre-first or first, is your child an independent reader?" In other words, enough of their pre-firsters are independent readers *at the time of application* for them to ask this question. I can look at this question, then look at my not-ready-to-read 5 year old and I know I'm glad he is in a 5-6 program right now.
Many children are not truly turned-on to read until they are 6. Hence, there is much wisdom among the teachers and administrators who advise parents of these children not to start them in pre-first until they are six. If we lived in a time and place where reading was not taught until first grade, then maybe we would have more children starting kindergarten/prefirst at 5.
To me the issue is not why are we redshirting? the issue is Why are we teaching reading in kindergarten?
I agree about the blanket approach to boys with summer birthdays. I also think the evaluation should be child by child irrespective of gender and birthdate. However, there is also the idea that some children need to come to school in order *to* mature, learn to follow directions, etc. Some home environments, however well-intentioned, may not have the best structure for that particular child in terms of gaining maturity, being disciplined, following directions, etc. Could it be possible that the children could come in behind in maturity, etc. and the classroom environment could actually help? Maybe. I know I have seen a huge leap in some children's independence bc it is stressed at school in a way that it is not stressed at home.
Finally, I think there ought to be more respect for the diversity in maturity levels that a classroom with children having birthdays across the spectrum can bring. This can actually be an asset for all of the children, I think, similar to how the age range in a Montessori room is actually seen as an asset.
I think there has to be a re-working of viewing the different levels of maturity and behaviors of children all working together as an asset as opposed to the apparent current view of it being a drawback.
I think there is alot of pressures on schools to try to produce kids that are intellectually and later physically dominant over what seem to be peers (but are really kids that are 1-1.5 years younger in some cases) and there is alot of pressure on parents bc redshirting is so popular in wealthier areas. These forces working together seem to be a bit of a catch 22. The schools are trying to serve 6 year olds in 5 year old classes and hence the class is really a 6 year old class instead of a 5 year old class and the parents then get concerned when they have a true 5 year old going into what is really a 6 year old class that is presented as a 5 year old class (but otherwise in terms of social dynamics, intellectual expectations, etc.). Parents are also comparing their true age kid's level of maturity with a kid that is actually 1-1.5 years older in some cases. Of course, the true age kid is going to seem immaturity but it really should not be this way. The true age child should be respected as exhibiting all of the appropriate behaviors for his age and the older child should be respected as exhibiting all of the appropriate behaviors for his age. And then there are the parents who hold their kids out and expect the school to then boost the curriculum to their child's level thereby creating a self-fulfilling prophecy that the kids that are the true age may not be able to compete in some cases...and the nightmare we are causing for teachers that have now been turned into teachers that almost have to teach multi-age classrooms although they have typically no training i this highly-specialized approach to education. I think the schools ought to just stop allowing the practice, teach to the true age that the class is geared towards and just be done with it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by deacongirl
Exactly.
And re: the article linked, there are plenty of other more recent articles that address the opportunity cost of red-shriting for many kids. Parents know their own child best of course. I just strongly feel that it should not be the default for boys with summer birthdays and that it depends on the individual child.
Last edited by LovelySummer; 11-12-2014 at 10:00 AM..
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
