What to do about september birthday (if anything)

On Thu, 10 Mar 2005 15:30:45 -0600, toto wrote:
On Thu, 10 Mar 2005 13:02:06 -0800, "Circe" wrote:

This whole idea that a child's *size* is something to be worried about when
it comes to socialization in a peer group has recently been pretty well
debunked by a study that showed peer acceptance was unrelated to size in
high school students. Turns out the big kids and the small kids were just as
likely to be accepted by their peers as the more average ones.

Might be true statistically, but it sure was not my son's experience.


Likewise. Though in my case, I suspect that being in a high school
which placed enormous value on sports ability, there was an
institutional tendency to look down on anyone who wasn't a
linebacker or basketball star, and had the physique to go with it.

Of course there was also the issue that introverted, nerdy, anti-social
kids are automatic outcasts, no matter what their size. ;-)

- Rich

On Thu, 10 Mar 2005 20:59:59 GMT, "Cathy Kearns"
wrote:

I used to be big on starting kids early. My daughter with an October
birthday started Kinder at age 4.

I started at 4. My sister and dd started at 5. My ds started at 6.
All of us ended up in the same place. I see no particular reason
to *hurry* kids.

I do remember having cousins who started early who had trouble
with the social stuff in high school and another cousin who started
late who had problems with being bored and hating school (he
dropped out). The stuff is so variable, that you really have to
decide on an individual basis.


--
Dorothy

There is no sound, no cry in all the world
that can be heard unless someone listens ..

The Outer Limits

"toto" wrote in message
...
On Thu, 10 Mar 2005 13:02:06 -0800, "Circe" wrote:
This whole idea that a child's *size* is something to be worried about
when
it comes to socialization in a peer group has recently been pretty well
debunked by a study that showed peer acceptance was unrelated to size in
high school students. Turns out the big kids and the small kids were just
as
likely to be accepted by their peers as the more average ones.

Might be true statistically, but it sure was not my son's experience.

You have stated, however, that your son had poor social skills to begin
with. That being the case, it seems to me that his lack of good social
skills likely had much more to do with his acceptance by his peers than his
size. Plenty of perfectly average-sized kids are not accepted by their peers
because they have awkward social skills or are simply difficult to get along
with

IOW, do you really think that if he'd been bigger or smaller but had the
same personality, he would have have been better accepted by his peers?
--
Be well, Barbara
Mom to Mr. Congeniality (7), the Diva (5) and the Race Car Fanatic (3)

I have PMS and ESP...I'm the bitch who knows everything! (T-shirt slogan)

In article , toto says...

On 10 Mar 2005 09:32:07 -0800, Banty wrote:

People who red-shirt their kids think about the little 1st grader a little
larger and more mature than their classmates, so they think they've done a Good
Thing by holding their little boys back.
What they *don't* think about is the bearded bored-out-of-his-mind and restless
EIGHTEEN YEAR OLD that's supposed to bide his time as a senior in high school
until he graduates. Starting school late is forever. The little first grader
becomes the bored fourth grader becomes the eighth grader going through puberty
a year before a lot of his friends, becomes....

As someone who did redshirt my son, I didn't find this to be the case
at all. Of course, our school system was fantastic at keeping up with
him academically though and that may not be true in all cases.

For my son, the early grades were hell despite the redshirting because
his social skills were not great and because he was very small for his
age. He was a sensitive child. He loved sports and was good at them,
but because he was small, others didn't often pick him unless they
knew him and had seen him play.

Academically, he was very advanced, but his writing skills were poor
and his talents were primarily in math, so for him, the fact that they
allowed him to forge ahead in math and science while keeping him
with kids who were closer to his size helped. He didn't hit his
growth spurt until he was 15 and he is still only a low average man
in height (5' 8", I think).

I think that you have to judge the case individually, but I have not
seen a lot of boys hurt by being a little older than their classmates.

Since when did it become a race to get out of school anyway?
Kids are 17 to 18 when they graduate depending on their birthdays.
I do think that kids need to gradually take on responsibility for
things besides school, but that's another issue from simply marking
time waiting to graduate at 18.


I didn't mean to imply that all kids shouldn't be redshirted. What I object to
is a short-sighted formula that being older in the first grade or so is enough
reason to redshirt.
But not just
As with many things, it depends. Depends on the individual case. Not all boys,
even redshirted for short-sighted reasons, who could have started 'on time',
will have much problem with it later. Puberty hits at different times anyway.
By 18, instead of restless, he may be focussed. *On the average*, though, it
isn't a good thing to do just for temporary advantage. That's from some sources
I looked at back when my son was recommended to stay back in 2nd grade, and from
some information from the principal of his elementary school - they really are
having some problems with some of these young men (of course not all of them)
who were held back from starting, supposedly for academic and social advantage.

Banty

But it's not a reason to redshirt boys just 'cause.

On Thu, 10 Mar 2005 13:56:01 -0800, "Circe" wrote:

OW, do you really think that if he'd been bigger or smaller but had the
same personality, he would have have been better accepted by his peers?

Yes, I do.

As he got older, kids accepted him more, not less, btw.


--
Dorothy

There is no sound, no cry in all the world
that can be heard unless someone listens ..

The Outer Limits

"toto" wrote in message
...
On Thu, 10 Mar 2005 13:56:01 -0800, "Circe" wrote:
OW, do you really think that if he'd been bigger or smaller but had the
same personality, he would have have been better accepted by his peers?

Yes, I do.

As he got older, kids accepted him more, not less, btw.

Which may have been less the result of his getting bigger as his social
skills getting better. I'm not saying it's impossible that his size was a
factor. However, there are few kids who are smaller than our nephew's son
(the 3rd percentiler I mentioned upthread) and I can assure you that that
kid has *no* social acceptance problems whatsoever as a result of his size.
And I have known a number of other, smaller-than-average kids and have not
noticed that *any* of them had particular problems in getting along with or
being accepted by their peers. I know my son doesn't choose his friends
based on how tall they are--he has friends all over the spectrum, thank you
very much--and I don't think *his* friends make their choices based on
height, either.

YMMV.
--
Be well, Barbara
Mom to Mr. Congeniality (7), the Diva (5) and the Race Car Fanatic (3)

I have PMS and ESP...I'm the bitch who knows everything! (T-shirt slogan)

In ,
jojo wrote:

*In order to start school here, my son has to be 5 by September 1st.
*His birthday is September 9th. Which will basically put him behind others
*his age one year.

I can expound on this at great length, but you don't want to hear most of
what I would say, trust me. No, seriously. I mean it

My son's birthday is 9/9. Our local district's cut-off date is 9/15. So,
right now, he's in preschool, pre-K because he's 4. He's the youngest kid
in the class, and according to the teachers, pretty much the most
advanced. He is also known to be quite gifted, based on simple observation
as well as IQ testing and professional evaluation. So no problem, right?
We can send him to kindergarten next year, he'll turn 5 right at the
beginning of the year and be youngest in his class. Well, the thing is -
while our local public school district is alleged to be one of the best in
the state, it's still not right for him I don't think. Class size in
particular worries me, and looking at their Kindergarten curriculum I
noticed he already does almost everything they list as an end-of-year
goal. So we started looking at private schools - and found out the latest
cutoff date at any of them is 9/1 - so, he misses the cutoff, and would
have to do pre-K next year if he went to private school.

LOOOONG story short, we opted to have him re-do pre-K at a private school,
given that their pre-K curriculum is quite similar to the public K, they
have smaller classes, and they have lots more enrichment opportunities.
But we AGONIZED over this. I wish they didn't have such firm cutoff dates.
I wish they could just decide case-by-case!

--
Hillary Israeli, VMD
Lafayette Hill/PA/USA/Earth
"Outside of a dog, a book is a man's best friend. Inside of a dog, it is
too dark to read." --Groucho Marx

In article ,
(Hillary Israeli) wrote:

In ,
jojo wrote:

*In order to start school here, my son has to be 5 by September 1st.
*His birthday is September 9th. Which will basically put him behind others
*his age one year.

I can expound on this at great length, but you don't want to hear most of
what I would say, trust me. No, seriously. I mean it

My son's birthday is 9/9.

My older daughter's birthday is 9/9, also. However, where we were
living when she started school, the cutoff date was 10/1. (It was later
moved.) So she graduated from high school at 17.

She had problems, but I don't believe they were related to her age. She
was academically capable of the work, both in K and as she approached
graduation.

I think firm cut-off dates are stupid anyway -- in fact, I think the
whole 'lock-step' approach to education here is Wrong. Unfortunately,
it is something we have to live with, unless we can home school or find
a private (generally expensive) school that uses a more open concept.

I thought a lot about what I'd have done if my daughter had been asked
to stay back a year -- and a LOT of families with September (and
earlier) birthdays DID hold their kids back a year, so they ended up
graduating at 19! I suspect I'd have simply gone with what the school
system date was, even though, both academically and socially, my
daughter clearly seemed ready for K, but I can't really articulate why.
I think it has to do with the challenges she'd have faced being not just
one of the youngest, but actually younger than ANYONE else in the class
-- not so much in K, but in middle school and in high school, when
everyone else could get their driver's license and stay out later and
all kinds of things.
--
Children won't care how much you know until they know how much you care

Circe wrote:


There is, however, a fine motor skill value in all that coloring--it
does
ultimately feed into the children gaining confidence and control over
a
writing implement and that *is* necessary. As the children get better
at
coloring, their handwriting tends to improve as well. And that's one
of the
reasons it gets emphasized so much, especially in the early part of
kindergarten when letter formation is very difficult/slow for the
majority
of children and therefore writing itself isn't a good activity for
improving
motor control.

My DD#1 had pretty poor handwriting (well, still does, but it is
better). In 1st they suggested I have her color - on a daily basis -
using a slanted board. The slant encouraged muscle development in her
forearm. In addition to the slanted board, they suggested we tack up a
large piece of paper on the wall, and have her draw and color on it
every night before bed.

I agree, don't knock coloring. :-)

jen

"jojo" wrote in message
m...
In order to start school here, my son has to be 5 by September 1st.
His birthday is September 9th. Which will basically put him behind others
his age one year.
(let me clarify by saying he is only 2 now, but this applies to preschool
as
well)

Many have told me that this is an advantage with boys, as they are slower
starters and
could benefit from the extra year in preschool. But in reading some of the
other posts here and
looking at other children his same age, I am wondering if it would be a
determent instead.

He just turned 30 months.
He knows his address and phone number, and can recite them clearly if
asked.
He can say his abc's and can count to 15.
He and I have involved conversations on the way home from daycare each
day.
He remembers what he had for snack, lunch and afternoon snack that day.
he remembers who he played with today (first and last names) and can tell
me
the titles
if what books he read that day.
Does he sound like your typical 2 year old?


Anyway, is there a way to judge a child's readiness for school?
Do schools go strictly by age, or are other factors at play?

Thanks for your input...
jojo



People (including her parents unfortunately) often thought DD was about two
years older than she really was starting from 2 years old. She was (and
still is, at 7) very articulate who had a phenomenal memory (we were getting
scared when we realized she memorized Dr. Seuss' Sleep Book). But (there's
always a but) we found that emotionally she was definitely her age - there
was a tremendous difference between her and even her friends 9 months
older.

That said, missing the cutoff 8 daysis a bit frustrating and points out the
arbitrary nature of cutoffs. You may be able to appeal to the school system
and have your child tested by the school system to see if he is ready for
kindergarten or you could (and this is what my sister did) send your child
to a private kindergarten and then have him join the public school at first
grade (usually there's no minimum age for all the other grades).

Good luck,
Jeanne