In most of the United States, the birthday cutoff for kindergarten is October 1st, September 1st, or even earlier, but in New York City the cutoff is December 31st. Charlie was born in December, and many parents in our neighborhood would choose to redshirt a boy born so late in the year. In his popular book Outliers, Malcolm Gladwell asserts that there is a “cumulative advantage” that builds each year for oldest kids, who do better than youngest kids both academically and in sports. Despite that, we’ve always intended to send Charlie to kindergarten on time, which would mean he would only be 4 years and 8 months old. But pending legislation may completely alter Charlie’s education path.


All grown up, and a month away from turning 3!

ADVERTISEMENT

Earlier this year, Governor Andrew Cuomo signed legislation making kindergarten mandatory for all 5 year olds. Mandatory kindergarten may help level the education playing field in a world where wealthier families can afford to hold their children back one year or send them to private school with earlier kindergarten cutoff dates, while poorer families cannot afford to pay for an additional year of childcare. What’s interesting about an unresolved portion of this bill for us is that the kindergarten cutoff may be changed to December 1st instead of December 31st, which would determine whether Charlie would be the oldest kid in his class, or the youngest. Even if the cutoff isn’t moved, there is a provision that would allow families to apply for a waiver so children with late birthdays like Charlie do not have to start kindergarten before the age of 5. (source)

Boys are typically redshirted more often than girls, because it’s commonly believed that it takes longer for them to mature emotionally and intellectually. I firmly believe we could catch Charlie up intellectually if he were behind by working together at home, so that wouldn’t be a case for us to redshirt. If Charlie seemed emotionally unprepared because he was too young, I might more seriously consider redshirting him. But is being physically smaller just as important a consideration?

I’ve given thought to how Charlie will probably be one of the smallest kids in his class. Last month, Charlie’s cousin, who has a January birthday and would enter school at the same time as Charlie, came to visit. The difference when they stood side by side was stark — Charlie’s cousin was nearly a foot taller! Since Charlie is such a picky eater and his friends are already all taller than him, it gave me a glimpse as to how small Charlie would be compared to the kids in his kindergarten class with early birthdays.

I was always the shortest, or one of the shortest kids in my class growing up. I was teased about it and I always wished I were taller, but as a girl, it didn’t affect me nearly as much as it might a boy. I’ve talked to men who were late bloomers, and some of them have told me about the insecurities they had about being the smallest ones in their class; they wonder how different their lives might have been if they’d been redshirted. Then again, my brother was always one of the shortest ones in his class, and I don’t think it really affected him because he has such a big personality. Charlie has a big personality, so I’ve always assumed that he’d be fine being the smallest too.

I think there is a case to be made for being the oldest, however. When Charlie is around kids the same age or younger, he is usually the leader. When he’s around older kids, he’s happy to be the follower. Will the decision whether or not he’s the youngest or oldest determine whether or not he’ll be a follower or leader? My brother actually has a January birthday and was still one of the smallest kids, so an extra year to grow may not even affect Charlie anyway. But because my brother was the oldest in his class, perhaps he had an emotional and intellectual advantage that enabled him to be a leader — a trait that has continued into his adult life.


The opposite of redshirting — redpanting!

While most people are aware of the perceived advantages of redshirting, detractors believe redshirting actually puts your child at a disadvantage:

In the academic arena, advantages are seen not for older students, but for those who are young for their year. In a large-scale study at 26 Canadian elementary schools, first graders who were young for their year made considerably more progress in reading and math than kindergartners who were old for their year (but just two months younger). In another large study, the youngest fifth-graders scored a little lower than their classmates, but five points higher in verbal I.Q., on average, than fourth-graders of the same age. These studies are consistent with the idea that the source of increased opportunity in this case is school itself, with effects that are most favorable to students who are surrounded by children older than themselves. (source: wikipedia)

Older children may also become bored with the curriculum if it’s too easy, which may in turn cause behavioral problems.

If the birthday cutoffs don’t change, Charlie will be heading to kindergarten when he is 4 years and 8 months old. If they do change to December 1st but Charlie is still eligible to enter kindergarten at 4 at our discretion, we will send him. If they change and Charlie cannot start kindergarten until he’s 6, well there isn’t really anything we can do about that because private school cutoffs are all before December 1st.

I’m not sure where I stand on the redshirting debate because I think Charlie will be ready for kindergarten even if he isn’t 5. But my opinion might change if I felt he weren’t ready, particularly as it pertains to emotionally maturity.

If your son had a December birthday and you had the option to redshirt, would you? Why or why not? If you had a late year birthday, do you wish you had been redshirted?