Gifted Issues Discussion homepage Forums Learning Environments Skipping/Red-shirting

I wasn't thinking in terms of ACT/SAT. It would be interesting to see both age/grade norms on them. Numats sort of gives you a look at comparing other talent search kids with one another. It's a bizarre little thing that goes on for us at least in my district. In testing for a disability or IEP qualifying issue, our district only uses age based norms. This was an issue for us last year with DD. They wanted to retest achievement because previous results had been grade normed. It was silly since it only brought her scores higher. When testing for GT placement they turn around and use grade based scoring, UH? So if my child is tested for a disability the scores are compared (in our case) to children usually a grade below her/him. In turn making my young for the grade kids look even more advanced.

I think using both might even give a better picture for us and the schools. A 99 percentile on an grade level achievement test is still a 99 when you age norm for my kids, but the redshirter's score might not look that way anymore. Maybe just maybe giving the parents some perspective. My kids have not been harmed by the current policy. If there were limited seats as in many districts and they were bumped my a child 2 years older because of red shirting, I would be annoyed to say the least. It's gotten to the point in my district when I am listening to parents of these redshirted kids complain when they don't make the cut. It's gross listening to it. They wouldn't even be close if they went to school at the appropriate age. I get looked at by them like I must be hot housing and have a secret recipe I'm not sharing with them.

There are absolutely times a child should be kept home another year. I am no more pleased with places that don't allow holding back when needed than I am with those that allow holding back to the extreme for nothing more than an edge over classmates.

Exactly.

Redshirting is so popular around here and I am a vocal advocate against this practice. I hate it so much it makes my blood pressure rise to dangerous levels. My son's TAG program is full of older boys who did well enough on the OLSAT and reading comp to get into the program. But they do not learn like gifted learners and the gifted kids suffer.

I think the practice is so short sighted. These kids get in trouble more in school and over the long term, they do not do as well.

Yup!

Is it possible that some were redshirted because of asynchronous development? Maybe when they got to kindergarten age, someone looked at them and said they're not ready (socially), wait a year.

Before DS started kindergarten one of his gymnastics teachers told me she thought we should wait a year before putting him in school, that he just didn't seem ready socially. And a close relative told us he thought we should have DS repeat kindergarten because of his not-so-great social skills.

Needless to say, we didn't follow any of this advice (he would have been even more bored than he was!) But take away the academics, and DS certainly looked like a kid who wasn't ready for school and a prime candidate for redshirting.

What is really gross is listening to the parent of a red-shirted child bitching that all those immature kids (kids 16-17 months younger that hers but, you know, supposedly age-appropriate for grade) are ruining school for her child, what were their parents thinking!

You get enough of those (I also live in an area where red-shirting is very popular amongst higher socio-economic categories), and they do make the younger kids look immature, skew the perspective of teachers and parents on what age appropriate development looks like (hint: ADHD diagnosis rates amongst young for grade kids), and increase the pressure on other parents to red-shirt too (HK is totally right about this being strike one in the college admission wars).

This leaves the age appropriate kids whose parents can ill afford to keep them at home in an even worse position in their grade cohort, as they are now starting behind even more.

And then some @&#^% actually change public policy based on this... because having as early a cut-off as possible gives a state an edge in NCLB results. Another 100 years of this and kids will have to turn 18 by July 1st in order to start K .

Put me in the "seeing red" category.

The school district in the superZIP next door does that. Any child that looks like he/she might mess up their perfect NCLB scores gets a strong recommendation to delay entry in K.

That's cheating.

That's the point.

Oh, no, wait, it is to make sure that all children are mature enough to have a good experience in K...

Sorry!

Does anyone know how gifties do in Finland with school starting at 7?