The school my son attends routinely "redshirts" children in between K and 1st grade. As an individual choice, we all have to do what we think is right for our child. However, when done on such a relatively large scale (say half the class or so), I think it does more harm than good to the children, like my son, who are placed in the age appropriate grade with many older children.

My son is an early spring baby, pretty smart kid, but working through some learning disabilities associated with ADHD. He would have been bored to tears in a second year of K, and we fought to have him move to 1st grade. It turned out to be the right move academically.

As he entered 3rd grade, the age/maturity differences between the 8 and 9 year olds became overwhelmingly obvious. The 9 going on 10 kids are at an obvious physical and social advantage over the 8 going on 9s. Academically, they all seemed in sync, but not so otherwise. It was a hard year for our son. (His class has great kids in it - I don't mean to imply bad anything about the kids themselves, just the overall situation.)

Had I had that crystal ball, I still would have had him go into first grade when he was 6, but I would have switched schools where this practice was not widespread.

Thanks for linking to me, Kate.

I think the previous commenter makes a great point. The particular school has a lot to do with our decision to wait a year. If a parent waits a year, does the school have the resources to provide a challenge to an older child that is advanced academically? Or the opposite, if the child is struggling with the curriculum, are there resources to make sure that child gets the help he needs? And since all of the schools that we are considering sending our child to are full day kindergarten, we feel the transition to that from very part-time preschool would be better handled at age 6.

interesting connection with malcolm gladwell's book 'outliers', which spends a chapter or two looking at how the cutoff dates in various youth sports is correlated with the rosters of professional sports teams.

...whether 'tis nobler in the mind to suffer the slings and arrows of outrageous fortune insisted upon by helicopter Moms or to take arms against a sea of redshirted first graders, and by opposing end them?"

As noted: "The reason: Lots of redshirting, so many of the kids were older." is exactly why this is a problem.

Absent gross maladjustment issues (that most such parents would be in denial about anyway)... there is no justification for this practice. End it!

I think it is interesting that you can redshirt a child with a simple letter but you have to go through a testing process and get special approval from the principal if you want to start your kid a couple of months early.

@baltgosling: Early starting would probably be as easy as "redshirting" if teachers and administrators viewed early starting as a benefit to them, as they do with redshirting. It is assumed that an older, redshirted child will be easier to teach and exhibit better classroom behavior, and so redshirting is tacitly encouraged by making it so easy. The research on redshirting otherwise normally developing children, however, has produced mixed results and whatever advantages that have been seen usually diminish to non-significance by the later elementary school years. So why the ubiquitousness of a practice that used to be reserved for cases of true social and/or cognitive development delays? The idea that it's because "kindergarten is the new first grade" is laughable. We were told that time and time again when our 5-year-old started kindergarten last year, and it unnecessarily worried us about our son's readiness. Ultimately, however, the curriculum consisted of almost nothing he hadn't already learned at home. So chalk up the prevalence of redshirting to over-protective parents at best and, at worst, over-zealous parents that want their children to have an academic or athletic advantage over their classmates.

I resent being called overprotective by a person who knows nothing of our personal situation, has never met me and has never met my child. A LOT of thought, discussion, observation and conferring with our son's preschool teacher went into this decision, and it was one that was made with what's best for MY family and MY child in mind. It has nothing to do with being smart enough and everything to do with being mature enough, and at approaching 5, he's just not there yet.

Some states have moved the cutoff for kindergarten to late May. And while in each class, someone HAS to be the youngest, with a May cutoff, the youngest kids are still 5 years and 3 months old and old enough to handle the rigors of being in a classroom all day long. Anyone with kids knows that 3 months can make all the difference. And kindergarten is simply different than it was all those years ago when I attended (and parents had the half day option).

Two coworkers have kids at the young end of their classes. One is a female, doing fine socially but struggling academically and the other is a male doing fine academically but struggling socially. If my son was born in June, we'd probably be sending him to school this fall. But he has a September birthday, so we feel that waitinga year and starting K as a young 6 year old will better equip him to handle it.

I'd also like to point out that there is a huge difference between holding back a child who turns 5 in, say, May or June, and waiting a year for a child who is technically past the cutoff. And for every child who is older because he or she has been redshirted, there is a child who is older because there was no choice. My daughter has a November birthday, so she'll be nearly 6 when she starts K, with no options to start earlier.

@Kayris: If you read my comment, you will see that at no time did I address you personally, or your situation specifically. I made a generalization, which by definition does not apply to every single case. Rather, it explains why a once infrequent practice has become so prevalent. Be that as it may, I would caution you on the simple fact that when you post something in a public forum, you invite all sorts of responses that may or may not be aimed directly at you. To resent any such comments, or take umbrage at all, seems to defy the logic in posting in the first place.

But you used my words, "kindergarten is the new first grade," and then you called it laughable. And I simply disagree.

And while I am aware that posting something on a public forum invites conflict and criticism, I also didn't ask Kate to link to my first post, she did it on her own and my first clue was when this post showed up in my reader. Almost all the comments on my post at my personal site were positive.

My parents had that option and elected to send me later not sooner.

Let that serve as a warning. Don't let your babies grow up to Owl Meat.

My daughter has a November birthday. She graduated from High School this year, but when she began kindergarten, the cut-off date was December 31, forcing me to enroll her at age 4½.
This meant beginning a "4-year-old" preschool program at age 3½ and the "3-year-old" program at 2½. I was really lucky to get her toilet trained when I did or they would never have accepted her at the preschool.
She has ALWAYS struggled at the beginning of the school year, catching up in the Spring. Being small for her age didn't help matters socially.
Furthermore, at 17 she is now finished with High School, but too young to be expected to take on adult responsibilities like a job and an apartment. The idea of sending her off to college at 17 is unthinkable, as she can't be held responsible for damage she may do to a dorm room or apartment... that will all come back to me.
I wish holding her back had been an option...

I was at the leading edge of the baby boomer babies, when so many kids were popping up, my school system in California started a new class every spring as well as in the fall. The cutoff date was May 1st, and my birthday was later in May, but my mother thought I was ready for kindergarten at age 4 1/2, and so she successfully argued to get me admitted. I remember feeling out of my depth the first few years of school. Then we moved to another area that did not have the half year option, and they could either advance me half a year or have me repeat the first semester of 4th grade. Since I was already the youngest in my class, the latter option was chosen--and I suddenly began getting straight A's.

Lisa -- you are scaring me. You honestly think your 17 year old is not capable of living in a dorm, or holding a job? It's seriously "unthinkable"? Unless there is some special circumstance, I simply can't see how that can be true. This is speaking from my own experience as a 17 yr old college freshman --- it's not any more difficult and that extra year won't make her magically prepared for the situation. I managed to hold a job, attend classes, and not cause any damage (?!?!) that my parents were responsible for. And I was 17 until March of that year. There were however, students of all ages that behaved in an immature manner, even into their twenties. I'm sure you don't plan to hold her back that long?

It amazes me that people are so frightened to have their children experience a possibly difficult situation. Why not give them the confidence that they can indeed handle it? Why not challenge her? You can't spend a lifetime never risking failure.

It is possible, not unthinkable, for a 17 year old to handle those responsibilities. I would have hated for my parents to fearfully tell me, "no, you're not ready". That would have shown an incredible lack of confidence in my character. If they had any doubts, they didn't express them to me, and I'm glad for that.