Comments on: Old kindergarteners http://www.joannejacobs.com/2007/06/old-kindergarteners/ Thinking and Linking by Joanne Jacobs Fri, 10 Feb 2012 04:51:22 +0000 hourly 1 By: Bill Simon http://www.joannejacobs.com/2007/06/old-kindergarteners/#comment-33909 Bill Simon Wed, 27 Jun 2007 22:46:01 +0000 http://joannejacobs.com/2007/06/04/old-kindergarteners/#comment-33909 I read an interesting comment today at gop3.com regarding the disadvantage of the choice to redshirt on my kid's wallet in the future taht I had not thought of before I read an interesting comment today at gop3.com regarding the disadvantage of the choice to redshirt on my kid’s wallet in the future taht I had not thought of before

]]> By: lori http://www.joannejacobs.com/2007/06/old-kindergarteners/#comment-33908 lori Wed, 06 Jun 2007 16:36:38 +0000 http://joannejacobs.com/2007/06/04/old-kindergarteners/#comment-33908 Jeeze, parents can't win. I wish I had a nickel for every complaint about parents who aren't involved enough in their kids' educations. And now when we have an example of involved parents, we're told their motivations aren't pure enough and they should just do what someone else tells them to do. Who are any of us to decide what the "right" and "wrong" motives are for any parents? The educational bureaucracy has long been manipulating school systems, curricula, and students in an attempt to generate a particular outcome. NCLB is only the latest big-news example of this. Why is it okay for "the system" to do it and not parents? Parents should not just sit back and accept every new wrinkle the schools hand them. If the schools make a major change, like pushing the curriculum down an entire grade and changing the nature of kindergarten, then parents are wise to think about it and respond to it. Anything less is negligent. Jeeze, parents can’t win. I wish I had a nickel for every complaint about parents who aren’t involved enough in their kids’ educations. And now when we have an example of involved parents, we’re told their motivations aren’t pure enough and they should just do what someone else tells them to do.

Who are any of us to decide what the “right” and “wrong” motives are for any parents? The educational bureaucracy has long been manipulating school systems, curricula, and students in an attempt to generate a particular outcome. NCLB is only the latest big-news example of this. Why is it okay for “the system” to do it and not parents? Parents should not just sit back and accept every new wrinkle the schools hand them. If the schools make a major change, like pushing the curriculum down an entire grade and changing the nature of kindergarten, then parents are wise to think about it and respond to it. Anything less is negligent.

]]> By: GradSchoolMom http://www.joannejacobs.com/2007/06/old-kindergarteners/#comment-33907 GradSchoolMom Tue, 05 Jun 2007 15:40:00 +0000 http://joannejacobs.com/2007/06/04/old-kindergarteners/#comment-33907 Parents that actually choose to hold their children back or push them forward because it is for the good of their child, are doing a good thing. Unfortunately, too many parents are doing it for their own good. Are they really worried that Johnny may have to work a little harder or settle for the "average" or are they competing with the boy and girl next door and deciding that Johnny needs be captain of the football team and go to an Ivy League college? Sometimes it is very difficult to recognize the true motives. When it becomes a rising trend, it usually indicates wrong motives. Parents that actually choose to hold their children back or push them forward because it is for the good of their child, are doing a good thing. Unfortunately, too many parents are doing it for their own good. Are they really worried that Johnny may have to work a little harder or settle for the “average” or are they competing with the boy and girl next door and deciding that Johnny needs be captain of the football team and go to an Ivy League college? Sometimes it is very difficult to recognize the true motives. When it becomes a rising trend, it usually indicates wrong motives.

]]> By: lori http://www.joannejacobs.com/2007/06/old-kindergarteners/#comment-33906 lori Tue, 05 Jun 2007 14:30:36 +0000 http://joannejacobs.com/2007/06/04/old-kindergarteners/#comment-33906 <i>Let me get this straight: we’ve moved the first-grade curriculum into kindergarten, and so parents are waiting until their kids are first-grade age to start. And this accomplishes what?</i> It accomplishes the wishes of the parents: that their children are developmentally ready for a first-grade curriculum. Call me crazy, but it makes sense to me that if you're going to push the first-grade curriculum down into kindergarten, the kindergarteners should be old and mature enough to handle it. What is this "holding a child back" that everyone is talking about? Why is a negative phrase being used to describe a positive parental action: choosing the best time for one's child to start formal schooling. When parents choose to let their children wait a year before starting kindergarten, they're doing the opposite of holding them back. They're letting them grow and develop at their own, natural pace. This is a good thing! They're giving their children the time they need to be ready for what everyone is admitting is a first-grade curriculum. Some children are ready for that curriculum at the ripe old age of five. Others need more time to cook. What in the world could possibly be wrong with parents choosing the path they think is best for their children? It's absurd to suggest all children should start school at the arbitrary age set by the government. "School choice" should mean more than choosing which school a child attends. Kudos to the thinking parents who do what's best for their kids, pundits and educrats be damned. Let me get this straight: we’ve moved the first-grade curriculum into kindergarten, and so parents are waiting until their kids are first-grade age to start. And this accomplishes what?

It accomplishes the wishes of the parents: that their children are developmentally ready for a first-grade curriculum. Call me crazy, but it makes sense to me that if you’re going to push the first-grade curriculum down into kindergarten, the kindergarteners should be old and mature enough to handle it.

What is this “holding a child back” that everyone is talking about? Why is a negative phrase being used to describe a positive parental action: choosing the best time for one’s child to start formal schooling.

When parents choose to let their children wait a year before starting kindergarten, they’re doing the opposite of holding them back. They’re letting them grow and develop at their own, natural pace. This is a good thing! They’re giving their children the time they need to be ready for what everyone is admitting is a first-grade curriculum. Some children are ready for that curriculum at the ripe old age of five. Others need more time to cook. What in the world could possibly be wrong with parents choosing the path they think is best for their children?

It’s absurd to suggest all children should start school at the arbitrary age set by the government. “School choice” should mean more than choosing which school a child attends.

Kudos to the thinking parents who do what’s best for their kids, pundits and educrats be damned.

]]> By: Elizabeth http://www.joannejacobs.com/2007/06/old-kindergarteners/#comment-33905 Elizabeth Tue, 05 Jun 2007 08:59:21 +0000 http://joannejacobs.com/2007/06/04/old-kindergarteners/#comment-33905 All I know is I held both of my boys back -- actually had one repeat kindergarten (there was no pre-first or T-1 program which is desparately needed for many, many students to make sure they are prepared for first grade) and had the other one repeat second grade. Why? Because the teacher was horrible. He learned one-half of what he needed because of her and was ill prepared for third grade. Yet, he was a straight A student. My older son is in a private prep school and my younger one is in a public prep school. Most of the kids in their class are their ages. I see nothing wrong with holding children back for a year so they start kindergarten as an older 5 year old or young 6 year old. If this makes me elitist then so be it. I did what was right for my children. Both would tell you this is true. All I know is I held both of my boys back — actually had one repeat kindergarten (there was no pre-first or T-1 program which is desparately needed for many, many students to make sure they are prepared for first grade) and had the other one repeat second grade. Why? Because the teacher was horrible. He learned one-half of what he needed because of her and was ill prepared for third grade. Yet, he was a straight A student.

My older son is in a private prep school and my younger one is in a public prep school. Most of the kids in their class are their ages.

I see nothing wrong with holding children back for a year so they start kindergarten as an older 5 year old or young 6 year old. If this makes me elitist then so be it. I did what was right for my children. Both would tell you this is true.

]]> By: R. Harlan http://www.joannejacobs.com/2007/06/old-kindergarteners/#comment-33904 R. Harlan Tue, 05 Jun 2007 04:05:01 +0000 http://joannejacobs.com/2007/06/04/old-kindergarteners/#comment-33904 Give me a break! Purposefully and, in the case of most U.S. states, forcibily holding your child back so that they can have a social (bullying) and academic (remedial) advantage is white, elitist nonsense. There is absoulutely no data available that demonstrate childern born later in the school year underperform those born earilier in the school year. This is pure bullshit! What is the best indicator for success in public schools? . . . and the answer isn't even close. It is RACE!!! If I thought for one moment that holding children back (repeat without an attempt) had a smudge of validity, I would be a strong advocate for holding black children back until the ages of 8 or 9 for kindergarten. Because I would prefer to see a black 19 or 20 year old high school graduate prepared to compete instead of a sixteen or seventeen year drop-out roaming the urban jungle with a fourth grade reading level. Give me a break! Purposefully and, in the case of most U.S. states, forcibily holding your child back so that they can have a social (bullying) and academic (remedial) advantage is white, elitist nonsense. There is absoulutely no data available that demonstrate childern born later in the school year underperform those born earilier in the school year. This is pure bullshit! What is the best indicator for success in public schools? . . . and the answer isn’t even close. It is RACE!!! If I thought for one moment that holding children back (repeat without an attempt) had a smudge of validity, I would be a strong advocate for holding black children back until the ages of 8 or 9 for kindergarten. Because I would prefer to see a black 19 or 20 year old high school graduate prepared to compete instead of a sixteen or seventeen year drop-out roaming the urban jungle with a fourth grade reading level.

]]> By: Tracy W http://www.joannejacobs.com/2007/06/old-kindergarteners/#comment-33903 Tracy W Tue, 05 Jun 2007 03:54:46 +0000 http://joannejacobs.com/2007/06/04/old-kindergarteners/#comment-33903 I don't think going to uni at 18 makes it any easier to pick a topic. I was a bit on the young side for my age and wound up doing two degrees (I made up my mind I didn't want to be doing the degree I was doing in the final year of that degree, so I finished it anyway). On the other hand, plenty of people who started uni a bit on the old side did the same switch, including a generation prior my father. I don’t think going to uni at 18 makes it any easier to pick a topic. I was a bit on the young side for my age and wound up doing two degrees (I made up my mind I didn’t want to be doing the degree I was doing in the final year of that degree, so I finished it anyway). On the other hand, plenty of people who started uni a bit on the old side did the same switch, including a generation prior my father.

]]> By: Mark Roulo http://www.joannejacobs.com/2007/06/old-kindergarteners/#comment-33902 Mark Roulo Tue, 05 Jun 2007 02:23:38 +0000 http://joannejacobs.com/2007/06/04/old-kindergarteners/#comment-33902 <i>Why would any parent include their child in the team sent down to an unknown planet in the role of the fill-in character who gets killed off?</i> Maybe the child was intended to be the plucky comic relief??? (As this veers wildly off topic ...) -Mark Roulo Why would any parent include their child in the team sent down to an unknown planet in the role of the fill-in character who gets killed off?

Maybe the child was intended to be the plucky comic relief???

(As this veers wildly off topic …)

-Mark Roulo

]]> By: triticale http://www.joannejacobs.com/2007/06/old-kindergarteners/#comment-33901 triticale Tue, 05 Jun 2007 00:37:49 +0000 http://joannejacobs.com/2007/06/04/old-kindergarteners/#comment-33901 Why would any parent include their child in the team sent down to an unknown planet in the role of the fill-in character who gets killed off? Why would any parent include their child in the team sent down to an unknown planet in the role of the fill-in character who gets killed off?

]]> By: AndyJoy http://www.joannejacobs.com/2007/06/old-kindergarteners/#comment-33900 AndyJoy Mon, 04 Jun 2007 17:45:41 +0000 http://joannejacobs.com/2007/06/04/old-kindergarteners/#comment-33900 My husband got his bachelor's at age 19, took a year off, then got a master's in an unrelated field by 23. For him, starting college early had good and bad points. The good thing was he was stifled in high school and was on the verge of getting into trouble. His sharp wit, unconventional responses, and desire for debate were much more appreciated in college. However, he was so young and unsure about which of his interests he wanted to pursue. He ended up choosing one that really wasn't a good fit. Plus, he met me and naturally wanted to get married after 3 years of dating. This means he was married at 19, when he was still discovering what he wanted to do in life. Thus, after a year of working in his major field, he discovered that he wanted to get an advanced degree in a different field. He was able to take one semester of deficiency courses, impress the school administrators, and jump into a master's without a bachelor's in that field. Fortunately for him, this cut out 3 years, but some kids who start college young and then find that interests have matured or changed might spend more time in college than if they had started at 18. My husband got his bachelor’s at age 19, took a year off, then got a master’s in an unrelated field by 23. For him, starting college early had good and bad points. The good thing was he was stifled in high school and was on the verge of getting into trouble. His sharp wit, unconventional responses, and desire for debate were much more appreciated in college. However, he was so young and unsure about which of his interests he wanted to pursue. He ended up choosing one that really wasn’t a good fit. Plus, he met me and naturally wanted to get married after 3 years of dating. This means he was married at 19, when he was still discovering what he wanted to do in life. Thus, after a year of working in his major field, he discovered that he wanted to get an advanced degree in a different field. He was able to take one semester of deficiency courses, impress the school administrators, and jump into a master’s without a bachelor’s in that field. Fortunately for him, this cut out 3 years, but some kids who start college young and then find that interests have matured or changed might spend more time in college than if they had started at 18.

]]>