It is mainly about Connecticut's debate about whether to change their cutoff date for starting K, but it also includes discussion about whether or not it actually makes a difference and also the socio-economic impact. Since this is such a hot topic around here I thought it would be interesting for many of you.
https://www.nytimes.com/2011/05/28/education/28kindergarten.html
Re: NYT article about "redshirting"
The part about redshirting causing more drop outs is something I hadn't heard before.
I never get the arguement about changing the cut off dates. No matter what you change it to, there will still be kids whose b-day is close to the new cut off.
I may just be dense today, but I don't see how it can cause a 'loss of earning power' since they start careers later. Huh? They get the same number of years in school.
Both of my December babies will be 5 3/4 when they start K, due to the 9/30 cutoff dates in our area. That will make them almost the same age as they are talking about in the article. Are they DOOMED because they are older? I don't think so.
DS - December 2006
DD - December 2008
I agree with Dandelion. It doesn't matter when the cut off is, someone will be at the first month and someone will be at the last month. As long as they accept kids for a full 12 months there will always be an oldest and youngest in the class.
I think the idea is that if you change it to something before September, you'll have fewer kids starting K before they are 5. For example, in NY it's Dec. 1, so there are four months worth of kids who could be 4 when they start school in Sept. If you change it to Sept 1, each kid will at least be 5.
Does that sound right?
I get that but I really don't see how it matters. The youngest kids in class will always act like the youngest kids in class.
Does anyone know if this is the same train of thought in Canada? I have a 9/29 baby that will be starting kinder this fall and I truly believe he is ready. He is short and small and even waiting another year will just put him where those kids are size wise.
They spoke a lot about being 'test ready' and harder a curriculum, is this the same in Canada? We went to the orientation and it seemed like a very fun environment, complete with watching baby duckings hatch, etc. They do have smart boards in class which I though although very cool, a little unnecessary for kinder though.
I have zero intention of holding him back, he is very excited to start this fall but I will have more of a debate when it comes to my 12/29 DD. In Alberta you only have to be 4 1/2 to start, meaning even February babies can start. I was started at 4 as a January baby and held back, so for DD I believe it will be more of a wait and see scenario.
Agree. I don't understand why it is such a big deal down there.
Kids start JK the year they turn 4 in Ontario; therefore there are some 3 year 9 month old kids in JK. The more parents try to manipulate the system there more messed up it seems to get with parents trying to 'get an edge' with age.
I have a biased opinion on that. My sister and brother were both fall birthdays (late Sept and late Oct) and both struggled with maturity issues without a question. My sister thrived in elementary school, but started HS at 13 and was just not emotionally prepared. Even compared to people I knew from similar home situations who were only a month earlier, she struggled from immaturity starting HS. My brother struggled from day 1, but my mom "pushed" him in because she couldn't afford an extra year of daycare and he made the cutoff (by 2 days... within a few years the school made it earlier).
I definitely see where maturity comes in and where a young 5 still has a bit of maturity on an older 4. Yes there will always be kids on the cusp no matter where the cutoff falls, but it seems like an earlier cutoff ensures a slightly higher overall maturity level.
I also don't understand the person in the article who claimed that this would put kids graduating at 19. If all kids were 5 by September 1 and nobody was 6 they would be either 17 or 18 at graduation. If the cutoff were before the end of the previous school year then you would risk kids who started on time being 19 at graduation.
I think so.
I think some points of this article make sense. It's harder for younger kids to sit still long enough and have the maturity to handle kindergarten. I don't think the arguments in the article about redshirting, however, add to the argument of the cut-off.
op - TFS the article. Interesting reading.
But the date does matter! IMHO - As kids get older the difference of a year in terms of maturity gets significantly smaller. There is a huge difference, obviously, at DS's age between an average one-and-a-half year old and a two-and-a-half year old. At DD#2's age, there's a smaller difference, but still a noticeable one between an average 3-year-old and a 4-year old. To me, there's a big difference between kids who are still only 4 and a half and kids who are well over 5. There's still less of a difference between kids who are already 5 and kids who are almost 6 (to me). Obviously, kids fall on all ends of the spectrum in terms of maturity, intelligence and everything else, but it is likely to be less of a wide spectrum if the kids are older.
Did anyone else notice, that almost all the teachers in that article commented on how they were supporters of "red shirting" and they could almost always tell the youngest kids before looking at their birthdates? My mom is a teacher and has been for over 45 years. She along with almost all of the teachers she knows agree with this completely. She also understands and gets frustrated by the fact that well-off families can afford to do this whereas poorer families can't and even if they can, their kids aren't getting the advantages of private preschools or special classes. I don't know what the answer is in terms of the population as a whole. I do know that if you're personally questioning holding your younger kindergartner out, my mom would tell you "when in doubt, keep them out" which is a saying they all have. She has never seen a child who hasn't benefited from being kept out the extra year, but she's seen plenty who were sent when they weren't ready and have struggled throughout their academic career. And yes, she has seen plenty who were very young for their classes and have done amazingly well and gone on to be doctors. Each child is different and nothing will be right for everyone. It's just a "rule of thumb" that she goes by.
I agree. And, with a later cut off, you're holding back kids who really aren't ready and letting the ones who really are go ahead. Whereas with a later cut off, you're holding back kids with spring bdays and having kids turn 7 in KG, which is a little crazy to me.
Then again, my opinion may be biased b/c being from a state with a later cut off, the expectations of KG kids seem to be a bit more realistic here (or at least in my district).