Gifted Issues Discussion homepage Forums Parenting and Advocacy Grade placement and peer status for boys

We did sort of the opposite for our early October birthday kid, DD14. She started at a private school that had an end of calendar year cutoff date, and after 2nd grade, she moved to the public school. She was quite short and rather immature. The school gave her some quick tests and said she was academically ready for 3rd (and based purely on testing, that is where they would place her), but if we wanted her to repeat 2nd grade for social reasons, that was fine with them too.

We opted to repeat 2nd. Sure, she was likely bored out of her mind, especially since the private school was about a year ahead in math. However, this is the kid that I declared, "not college material" when she was 4. I later realized I was wrong on that one, but not until much later (entered gifted program in 7th grade based on FSIQ).

We later realized we were wrong on the sports side of things too. She is not super athletic, and while our kids have tried a lot of rec sports, husband declared that age 12 would be the last year in sports (even the lousy level of rec play) for her. However, two years ago in 7th, a friend asked her to try out for volleyball. She did and was a starter for the 7th grade (and next year, 8th) team. She made the cut for JV volleyball this year in 9th. She also asked to play travel softball. We had asked her many times before if she would like to try travel ball, but at a younger age when there were developmental teams (would have been helpful for her). However, she tried out for a local team and made it. She is now in the 3rd year of travel ball.

Sorry if this is long, but my point is that I wouldn't count out abilities - sports, academics, arts, etc. - based on early performance. I think that most bright kids are bored in elementary, so skipping pre-K or K probably won't serve their academic needs. While my three kids went to private school in early elementary, most folks I know say the public K is a waste of time from the academic side. Still, our district has very high test scores. SAT scores are on par with a lot of private schools in other areas, and with six colleges within 2 miles of our house, there are a lot of bright folks around here. There are many kids "waiting it out" until they get to middle or high school to see an academic challenge.

Of course, you may need to consider if the public schools will have other kids like him (possibly bored kids, but bright kids he can relate to). Here there are plenty of kids as bright or brighter than my kids. Staying back to be in the correct grade per birthday cutoff also likely allowed her to grow/develop skills in volleyball and softball so that she can play on the school teams. If we hadn't held her back, I doubt she would still be playing sports. Oh, and she still can't ride a bike, but that is my fault as I didn't teach her when she was young.

I feel your pain. My ds just turned 6 and missed K cutoff for last year. Sigh. I think there is no perfect. He is very bored academically but doing fantastic socially (and he had always been a follower /sensitive kid) . So we see his self -confidence soaring. BTW: both my ds and his bf can't ride bikes without training wheels (ugh...we're trying) OR tie their own shoes. As far as a skip: my ds is well -beyond first grade curriculum also - and I KNOW he couldn't emotionally handle 2nd or 3rd grade!

I would look at:

Do you think his experience in K is harming him emotionally?
How are his fine motor skills?
How will the gifted program change if he enrolled in K vs 1st?

We chose to spend last year with s lot of hands-on home "enrichment". It was awesome....and now that he's in school five days a week - we both really miss that time we had.

My husband is a prime example of that. He was the smallest in his confirmation class and was not particularly coordinated. He was a September birthday and was pushed ahead.

As an adult he is taller than the average NBA player, with incredible hand-eye coordination, and a longstanding annoyance with his school system for pushing him ahead. He didn't have much of a chance to compete physically because, as he says, he was younger than a good chunk of the boys the grade below him, and it took his body a long time to catch up. (He gained two more inches and 20 lbs the year after high school.) The higher curriculum wasn't a help either, because he was so bored and had such bad handwriting he simply refused to do any homework -- considering it beneath him to do mundane practice of things he already knew. He graduated with a nice C average from straight A's on tests and very little finished class or homework.

Of course, that's just anecdotal. I think, on the whole, it's better to support the academic needs than the physical needs when you can. I think it's really about whether the grade above will give enough of a curriculum boost to be worth the possible other issues, and whether they're mature enough to handle the transition (mine wasn't).

I would caution anyone against labeling their child as nonathletic at an early age. My own history suggests that can be flat wrong.

This gets at the debate about red-shirting.
I was amazed last year when volunteering in my (then) first grader's class how, after awhile, I could pick out the kids with the really late birthdays who were young for their age. They were not always the smallest. They tended to be very immature, have poorer fine motor skills, and were just sillier.
One girl used to randomly wander around the room- I would gently redirect her to her desk to try and write the little paragraph the class was doing. I finally realized that her birthday was in August, and she was almost a year younger than everyone. (I don't know if she was gifted or not).
At such an early age, K or first grade, you can see a difference in how they write or pay attention, simply based on age. I think it can make a difference too in how they do in school- if you can't sit still to write you paragraph, simply because you are way younger than everyone, then you will miss out on that academic opportunity.

I just wanted to chime in that I think that athletics and it's importance in childhood is much more of a family lifestyle decision than it is a matter of whether you kid is going to be athletic or not. In other words, how does your family view athletics? Is it primarily a fun way to get exercise? Something that you'd like to encourage because it helps build friendships and a sense of team? Something your family deosn't really place much stock in? Or, do you think athletics is very important to a well-rounded childhood? Are you hoping for an athletic scholarship to college? Are you die-hard sports fans and look forward to your child's participation? It holds a different level of importance for every family.

Did want to offer another perspective, also. DD11 was involved in various sports but never was particularly driven at them. But, she fell in love with one sport and then, because all her friends at her small school were doing it, started playing two other sports. These are all school sports and my DD is more than 2 years younger than some of her teammates. What we have found is that she plays up to the level of her coaching and her teammates -- she rises to the challenge. If she was still playing with 5th graders, we really feel like she would be playing at a 5th grade skill level. But because she is with 7th graders and being taught 7th grade skills, she is competing with them. Is she the best person on the team? No. Is she the worst person on the team? Not at all. And, while she's never been the shortest person on her team or in her grade despite being two years younger, as they all hit adolescence, she is on her way to becoming one of the tallest girls on her team, although it may not happen for another year or so.

So, I guess my point is, things change and you can only do so much to anticipate how things will change. So I think it's a question of your family values in so many arenas (sports, academics, friendships, etc.) that, while we can all give you advice and offer up our experiences, you're just going to have to go with your gut after you've done your best to take everything into account.

Possible cautionary tale: don't have kids with late summer / early fall birthdays.

Or maybe don't have SMART kids with near-cutoff birthdays?

Or maybe don't have smart kids?

I digress. I am more than pleased that my dd2 has an April birthday.

Fair enough. I guess I was thinking more along the lines of the fact that if you want to be really competitive in hockey, which is big around here (esp. in my DH's family), you need to at least get out on the ice before you hit age 8. We truly are not expecting him to be on any sort of competitive traveling team in any sport. But there are individual sports he enjoys, and those are not age-or grade-based. Around here, there are not as many opportunities for rec sports that are just for fun, unfortunately.

I think this is highly dependent on the child. No one, from teachers to friends to other parents, has ever noticed that my child was younger than the others. In fact, for two of my kids, people are still convinced that we redshirted them. And, once people do find out my kids' true ages (which we don't hide but don't advertise either), they are usually very suprised. And I'm not sure it's just because my kids tend to be mature, but also because there is such a huge range in kids in any given classroom. Also, we took small motor skills, like the ability to write well, which I think is important, into account. Now, I have had people when they finally find out my children's ages after a year or two who begin saying things like, "Well, he is young for grade . . . " because their knowledge of their age begins to color their perceptions. But when they don't know their birthday, no one ever suspects a thing. Academic maturity is different than social maturity which is different from physical maturity and they don't necessarily correlate with birthday. Which is kind of why we're all here -- our kids don't fit the norms.

Yes, you are referring to Malcolm Gladwell's books. He had looked at what month elite hockey players in Canada were born. I forget the exact details but almost all of them were born within 3 months of the start date- b/c then you had older kids (who were likely bigger and had better motor skills) starting; then those kids were naturally selected for elite teams; they developed faster, etc.
Obviously, every child is different.