If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(The New York Times)   Parents are redshirting their kindergarten age children. Coming soon: supplying birth control with milk and cookies at nap time   (nytimes.com) divider line 187
    More: Silly, naps, kindergartens, birth control  
•       •       •

21110 clicks; posted to Main » on 22 Aug 2010 at 10:09 PM (4 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



187 Comments   (+0 »)
   

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | » | Last | Show all
 
2010-08-22 07:37:57 PM  
I wish my parents started me a year later so I could have been the bullier rather than the bullyie.
 
2010-08-22 07:44:46 PM  
bully and bullied would have been a bit more elegant.
 
2010-08-22 07:51:13 PM  
I thought they were letting them get killed by aliens when I first read that headline.
 
2010-08-22 07:53:05 PM  
Roook: I thought they were letting them get killed by aliens when I first read that headline.

hell, the kids would probably be better off.
 
2010-08-22 07:53:47 PM  
Parents are redshirting their kindergarten age children. Coming soon: supplying birth control with milk and cookies at nap time (nytimes.com)

Then further down...

Why the hell won't kids grow up these days? Warning: Originally ten pages, and still doesn't say why they won't get the hell off Subby's lawn

It's almost as if control-freak parents who try to create the perfect angel who is beautiful, gets straight A's, and is the star of the football team end up creating immature brats who don't know how to wipe their own arse.
 
2010-08-22 07:54:08 PM  
Roook: I thought they were letting them get killed by aliens when I first read that headline.

I was going to say, they're letting them beam down with the captain?
 
2010-08-22 08:02:00 PM  
An excellent academic article that studies this is "The benefits of delayed primary school enrollment: Discontinuity estimates using exact birth dates" by McEwan and Shapiro. I studied it in grad school and it's really interesting stuff.

They conclude that "An exogenous one-year delay in first grade enrollment decreases the probability of first grade retention by about two percentage points, relative to a baseline of 2.8 percent, and increases fourth- and eighth grade test scores by 0.3 or more standard deviations. The persistent effects suggest that absolute or relative enrollment age, rather than age-at-test, explain these results."

So the effect is quite small, but there. In the end, though, how much is it worth it to keep your kid in daycare for another year or whatever.
 
2010-08-22 08:07:41 PM  
I was one of the smallest and youngest kids in my class so I wanted to hold off an extra year for my kids. My ex wasn't having it - she wanted them out of the house. They've grown into decent well adjusted adults but I still wonder how much bullying and bullshiat they could have avoided if I had got my way.
 
2010-08-22 08:08:36 PM  
I, too, went Star Trek reading this.
 
2010-08-22 08:08:55 PM  
FTFA: Citing a study from "The Tipping Point" about Canadian hockey players, which found that the strongest players were the oldest, she said, "If he's older, he'll have the strongest chance to do the best."

This doesn't entirely make sense. For those of you that haven't read it, she's referencing a study of the WHA, where a high percentage of players were born Jan, Feb, March. The idea is that they get bigger and faster earlier, therefore get noticed, get extra attention, get bumped to better teams and competition, etc, culminating in a higher percentage making it to major junior play.

However, that's based entirely on birthdate, as I presume a lot of high school athletics are. U18 is still U18, regardless of whether you're in grade 11 or 12 at the time you're playing. How does this argument make sense?
 
2010-08-22 08:13:42 PM  
Citing a study from "The Tipping Point" about Canadian hockey players


I thought that was in "Outliers".
 
2010-08-22 08:13:50 PM  
Wow. Finally RTFA. The helicopters are starting early.
 
2010-08-22 08:15:21 PM  
Meanwhile, children in other countries, which don't have a broken education system, go to school at age 4.
 
2010-08-22 08:21:38 PM  
When these red shirted tots go to school their classmates are going to realize they are a year older and must have been left back because they are dumb.Kids are ruthless.
 
2010-08-22 08:24:18 PM  
bmr68: When these red shirted tots go to school their classmates are going to realize they are a year older and must have been left back because they are dumb.Kids are ruthless.

And maybe they'll realize they're bigger than the other kids and beat them up. I kinda wanna see these parents have this bite them in the ass like that.
 
2010-08-22 08:36:53 PM  
Wrong_Intentions: bmr68: When these red shirted tots go to school their classmates are going to realize they are a year older and must have been left back because they are dumb.Kids are ruthless.

And maybe they'll realize they're bigger than the other kids and beat them up. I kinda wanna see these parents have this bite them in the ass like that.


I doubt it, because a parent that would leave a kid back like that is also raising a sissy.
 
2010-08-22 08:38:39 PM  
Wrong_Intentions: I, too, went Star Trek reading this.

Same here. Then, I started hoping it was an article about the Duggars.
 
2010-08-22 08:40:17 PM  
Broad generalization: Rich people red shirt & poor people put their kids in ASAP instead of having to pay for daycare/preschool.
 
2010-08-22 08:47:25 PM  
Our son missed our town's cutoff by 5 days (cut off was Oct 1, his birthday was Oct. 5). He is one of the oldest in his class and he is still not the biggest or brightest. At the time we didn't didn't make a big deal of it as we thought he needed the extra year, more for maturity, as he would have been the youngest and smallest child. However there were times the following year when he was in kindergarten, especially by spring, when he was 6 1/2, that I thought he was bored.
 
2010-08-22 08:56:21 PM  
unyon: This doesn't entirely make sense. For those of you that haven't read it, she's referencing a study of the WHA, where a high percentage of players were born Jan, Feb, March. The idea is that they get bigger and faster earlier, therefore get noticed, get extra attention, get bumped to better teams and competition, etc, culminating in a higher percentage making it to major junior play.

However, that's based entirely on birthdate, as I presume a lot of high school athletics are. U18 is still U18, regardless of whether you're in grade 11 or 12 at the time you're playing. How does this argument make sense?


I actually listened to this on audiotape just today on a long drive. The argument wasn't just that they only succeeded in the early leagues with a birthday cutoff, it was that the players who were at a young age selected for elite travel teams were only slightly better than the other kids then, a difference that could largely be attributed to being 6-9 months older and bigger than the people who didn't get selected. But once selected, they played many more games than others, practiced a lot more, and had better coaches, so that after a few years of that they actually were significantly better than the kids who weren't on the elite teams.

Similarly, it cited some study that said that with all other variables controlled for, the kids on the side of the cutoff that made them oldest did 6-12% better on standardized testing than the kids that were youngest. I know at least in my school, roughly half of the kids in the high school gifted program had been in it since kindergarten, since at the beginning of kindergarten they put all the "smart kids" in it and it was much harder to join after that. Then, being in the gifted program, they have better teachers every year and the gap in ability just grows. I would imagine being 5 years 11 months old rather than 5 years 1 month provides at least a moderate advantage in that initial determination, and I could absolutely understand wanting to wait a year if your kid is near the cutoff.
 
2010-08-22 09:02:22 PM  
Star Trek was the first thing I thought of too.

scienceblogs.com
 
2010-08-22 09:04:49 PM  
bmr68: Wrong_Intentions: bmr68: When these red shirted tots go to school their classmates are going to realize they are a year older and must have been left back because they are dumb.Kids are ruthless.

And maybe they'll realize they're bigger than the other kids and beat them up. I kinda wanna see these parents have this bite them in the ass like that.

I doubt it, because a parent that would leave a kid back like that is also raising a sissy.


So wasn't Mrs. Bates.
 
2010-08-22 09:27:45 PM  
Citing a study from "The Tipping Point" about Canadian hockey players, which found that the strongest players were the oldest, she said, "If he's older, he'll have the strongest chance to do the best."
==============================================

That's like saying a 25 year old has a better chance of doing better in kindergarten than a 5 year old. No shiat, lady.

I went to kindergarten when I was 5, my aunt was in FIRST GRADE at 5... kids these days are entering kindergarten at 6 and 7 and then being held back another year.

Crazy people.
 
2010-08-22 09:37:47 PM  
Sand tables have been replaced by worksheets to a degree that's surprising even by the standards of a decade ago. Blame it on No Child Left Behind and the race to get children test-ready by third grade: Kindergarten has steadily become, as many educators put it, "the new first grade."

Oh no kidding. I worked in a kindergarten class, and the kids had no play time at all except at recess. The teacher's aide was telling me that I had to make the kids read a book during any free time, just like the regular teacher did. It was one worksheet after another, all of them educational.

I remember when kindergarten was fun. : (
 
2010-08-22 09:39:39 PM  
Sorry. I have to deviate from the Star Trek response. When I saw "redshirt", I thought they were the cleaning people at work...
 
2010-08-22 09:54:56 PM  
So does this mean that the kid'll consistently be one year behind in school? So when he's eighteen and still a high school junior, the student can legally choose to either A) put up with another year of the fun that is high school (and we're anticipating a socially anomalous outsider here anyways) or B) get the fark out? Keep in mind, we're talking about an eighteen-year-old's capacity to think long term and appreciate consequences with his still underdeveloped pre-frontal cortex.
 
2010-08-22 10:13:19 PM  
Jesus christ... will the Jew York Times please start clarifying who it's talking about? It isn't "parents" in general, it's "retarded parents in New York and California". That's it. No one else know what the fark you're talking about, you retards.
 
2010-08-22 10:13:33 PM  
"He's dead, Jim!"
 
2010-08-22 10:13:57 PM  
Came here for Ensign Ricky. Not disappointed.
 
2010-08-22 10:15:50 PM  
As a guy who was born Dec. 28 and who is convinced he would be a millionaire gynecologist playing in the NHL had I been born a week later, I'm getting a kick out these replies.
 
2010-08-22 10:16:16 PM  
Maybe it just means education methods should be reconsidered for the youngest age groups. If kids start off unequally and later reach some kind of equalness, maybe we should find a way to allow kids who are ready to join school the chance without having to either be pushed into it early or be forced to wait several months.

Year 'round school could be an answer.
 
2010-08-22 10:17:48 PM  
Does anyone actually have a problem with this? It's their kid, and it's only a year.

/gotta wonder if the people who do have a problem with it are the same type that get upset when others tell them how to raise their children.
 
2010-08-22 10:18:15 PM  
i started kingergarten at 4 and was the always the youngest kid in my class

/dull story, bro
 
2010-08-22 10:18:15 PM  
What don't they just buy this little girl a stripper pole now? She's got not chance.

graphics8.nytimes.com
 
2010-08-22 10:18:15 PM  
JerseyTim: Citing a study from "The Tipping Point" about Canadian hockey players


I thought that was in "Outliers".


Yep it was Outliers - excellent book. When my daughter bombed her 1st grade entrance exam she was sent to Kindergarten at 6. She's still tiny compared to the other kids, but in the right place. Thanks to reading Outliers I'm not panicking like my Mother-In-Law who thinks that you have to be in school by 4 or you end up a failure.
 
2010-08-22 10:18:21 PM  
Wrong_Intentions: So does this mean that the kid'll consistently be one year behind in school? So when he's eighteen and still a high school junior, the student can legally choose to either A) put up with another year of the fun that is high school (and we're anticipating a socially anomalous outsider here anyways) or B) get the fark out? Keep in mind, we're talking about an eighteen-year-old's capacity to think long term and appreciate consequences with his still underdeveloped pre-frontal cortex.

You're describing as "socially anomalous outsiders" the entirety of the 17% of children who are apparently entering kindergarten a year late, because they'll be 18 instead of 17 as a junior and therefore completely abnormal? Really? And then you conclude they're likely to drop out as soon as they turn 18 just because they can (and because of apparently somehow being a social outsider due to being a year older than most students), even though the large majority of high school students turn 18 sometime before graduation and could do the exact same thing already, and even though the parents doing this are the ones most focused on their children's academic future.
 
2010-08-22 10:18:52 PM  
lo quilty: Maybe it just means education methods should be reconsidered for the youngest age groups. If kids start off unequally and later reach some kind of equalness, maybe we should find a way to allow kids who are ready to join school the chance without having to either be pushed into it early or be forced to wait several months.

Year 'round school could be an answer.


How exactly would this be an answer?
 
2010-08-22 10:18:59 PM  
bogey: I was one of the smallest and youngest kids in my class so I wanted to hold off an extra year for my kids. My ex wasn't having it - she wanted them out of the house. They've grown into decent well adjusted adults but I still wonder how much bullying and bullshiat they could have avoided if I had got my way.

None.

Kids who want to be bullies find ways to be bullies; kids who can get bullied will be bullied, regardless. Kids can get bullied and picked on for being too smart/dumb; too young/old; too fat/scrawny; too pretty/ugly; etc. etc. Mostly they survive. Parents who second-guess themselves only set themselves up for a lifetime of, well, second-guessing.

As far as holding kids on the age cusp back a year for kindergarten, parents have to use their judgement at the time. My niece is one of those, she'll be five in the beginning of December. My sister thinks she's just a little too immature for kindergarten this year; however, she may well be ready for 1st grade next year. Intelligence-wise, she's good, so we'll see.
 
2010-08-22 10:19:14 PM  
Like other Farkers, I think parents should raise their kids how I think they should be raised.
 
2010-08-22 10:21:23 PM  
parents are stupidest.
 
2010-08-22 10:22:25 PM  
If your kid can't handle the alphabet, counting, and figuring out which is the business end of a glue stick by the time they're five, you obviously don't care about their education. Or they're developmentally disabled.
 
2010-08-22 10:22:40 PM  
jingks: What don't they just buy this little girl a stripper pole now? She's got not chance.

And why is that?
 
2010-08-22 10:22:43 PM  
Wait wait...wait.

She decided this based on a study about hockey players and assumed it also applied to her toddler?

I stopped reading after that.
 
2010-08-22 10:22:47 PM  
Dow Jones and the Temple of Doom: Jesus christ... will the Jew York Times please start clarifying who it's talking about? It isn't "parents" in general, it's "retarded parents in New York and California". That's it. No one else know what the fark you're talking about, you retards.

Hey Ryan,

I dare you to say that to any New York Jew.

Die in a fire.
 
2010-08-22 10:23:24 PM  
My parents did that to me... but i was a few days from the cutoff, so literally would have been youngest. The date was then adjusted, so I fell towards the oldest.
 
2010-08-22 10:23:42 PM  
Happy to know wasn't the only one who thought parents were setting their kids up to be killed on a weird planet.

Never wear the red shirt when beaming down, kids.
 
2010-08-22 10:26:40 PM  
exempli gratis: If your kid can't handle the alphabet, counting, and figuring out which is the business end of a glue stick by the time they're five, you obviously don't care about their education. Or they're developmentally disabled.

Like I said, in my school system the majority of kids in the gifted program were put there at the beginning of kindergarten based on the aptitude they showed at age 5, and had better teachers throughout school based on that. If you think modern kindergarten is just about counting and eating glue and that a kid who just turned 5 and one who's about to turn 6 couldn't possibly end up with different academic outcomes due to cascading effects of kindergarten ages, perhaps you're the one who doesn't care about their education.
 
2010-08-22 10:27:33 PM  
This happened to me (20 something years ago). I was within the cut-off by a week or so, but apparently I was way too hyperactive so my parents held me back a year before starting kindergarden. Looking back, I think it helped.
 
2010-08-22 10:27:58 PM  
paulandorder: I wish my parents started me a year later so I could have been the bullier rather than the bullyie.

*THIS*
 
2010-08-22 10:28:02 PM  
RoyBatty: Dow Jones and the Temple of Doom: Jesus christ... will the Jew York Times please start clarifying who it's talking about? It isn't "parents" in general, it's "retarded parents in New York and California". That's it. No one else know what the fark you're talking about, you retards.

Hey Ryan,

I dare you to say that to any New York Jew.

Die in a fire.


RoyBatty: Dow Jones and the Temple of Doom: Jesus christ... will the Jew York Times please start clarifying who it's talking about? It isn't "parents" in general, it's "retarded parents in New York and California". That's it. No one else know what the fark you're talking about, you retards.

Hey Ryan,

I dare you to say that to any New York Jew.

Die in a fire.


Oh stop it.
 
Displayed 50 of 187 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | » | Last | Show all



This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
On Twitter





In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report