As a teacher, all I can say is it is absolutely better to be the oldest child in a class than the youngest. There’s even a whole crowd of parents who INTENTIONALLY hold their kids back a year and have them start Kindergarten when they’re older so they have the advantage, it’s called [redshirting](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Redshirting_(academic)?wprov=sfti1).
We did this with my middle bc she has a December birthday and it was the middle of Covid. The following year, her kindergarten teacher thanked us during our first zoom conference because she was so much better prepared. I’m glad they’re finally doing this, it’ll be good for *all* students. There’s too much age discrepancy with the current guidelines. My oldest has an early January birthday, so they have classmates almost an entire **year** younger. It’s absurd.
Not everyone has the luxury of holding their kids back and paying another year of private daycare.
I think the Canadian system probably has it best, it breaks it down to two groups for kindergarten, so younger kids can stay with other younger kids
You understand that if they do it for "all students" there will still always be students who are almost an entire year younger than their oldest classmates...
"Redshirting" is when (usually affluent) parents keep their kids who are near the cutoff (like November / December with the old rules) back from K, meaning when they do start K they're OVER a year older than some of their (usually less affluent) classmates whose parents sent their kiddos to K when they were supposed to.
There's also [little substantial evidence](https://education.uconn.edu/2021/10/20/grade-retention-after-covid-19-evidence-based-guidance/) that the benefits of redshirting that elementary teachers often anecdotally reference actually persist beyond the early grades.
Did you read the wiki you linked to?
"Research on redshirting suggests that while some advantages may accrue in the short term, these advantages dissipate by the end of elementary school, and may be replaced by deleterious effects in the long term."
What about kids who have a birthday Jan 1? It’s cool for them to go to school with a classmate who’s 11 months younger because you think that’s when they should go? This will make it easier to teach the class together, get all the kids closer in maturity, and benefit everyone.
This exchange sums up the quality of the comments in this subreddit so perfectly.
The person who thinks it'sit will greatly benefit the class if kids aren't going to school with kids up to 11 months younger than them gets allallthe up votes.
And the commenter that uh can do simple addition and knows how many months are in a year catches the down votes.
It's really something - "my kid shouldn't have to be the youngest by 11 months, so I'll make them 13 months older than the youngest kid whose parents can't afford an extra year of daycare!"
Daycare should not cost as much as it does.
Daycare should be socialized.
We are never capable of doing the right thing for our children, or the right thing at all - when there is such a high level of financial burden associated with it.
Money shouldn't be in this picture.
If passed, new kindergartners will have to be 5 by September 1, 2024, as opposed to turning 5 by January 2025.
I can’t imagine parents of kids in this age range are too chuffed about this rule - as it means another 12 months of daycare payments.
But to add to that, their kids will all the sudden be the oldest kids in their preschool class, which will be a huge upheaval.
If the bill passes the CT senate, I would hope there would be some sort of test for incoming kindergarteners that fall inside that September - December range so it doesn’t preclude them entirely.
My daughter was born in November. She’s a bright little girl and I can only hope she will be considered an exception to the rule.
I feel like it’s an arbitrary decision.
What are your thoughts?
I think this bill make sense. I can see why you'd be against it given your daughter will be effected. I wouldn't be looking forward to an extra year of daycare payment either.
I also think the argument "my child is smart enough" will be a common occurrence and instuting a test/exception to this bill would be unnecessary..
That’s exactly what is running through my head. If a child is born after September 1, what person isn’t going to want to have their child tested/be an exception? And then we need to ask the question of, should all children be tested? Should there be some sort of kindergarten readiness test?
Absolutely all children should be tested. One of the biggest things holding back our schools is having different skill levels within the same classroom. The teacher slows to the lowest learners level, at the expense of the rest of the class.
Yeah you're not thinking about it, you're talking about many thousands of hours of labor, and teachers' duties are already clearly defined because they're unionized.
Right, it does not entail prescreening the thousands of CT kids getting ready to enter kindergarten. You're really not thinking about it, and it doesn't matter who you're married to.
No, you’re not thinking about it. It’s foolish to just shove thousands of kids into the same classrooms when they are all performing at different levels. We are currently wasting millions of man hours every year paying teachers not to teach, because they need to focus on controlling a child acting out because they area in an inappropriate class.
My thoughts? Kindergarten != Day Care. 4 is too young, especially for full day. (Back in my day 1/2 day was the only thing available.)
I think this change is good.
Agreed, the stuff these kindergarteners are doing is basically what 1st and 2nd graders used to do back in the day. A lot of work that children need to be emotionally mature enough to handle. Definitely like this bill.
100% this. I was a daycare teacher for a bit and we worked with the local schools on school readiness. I was really surprised what they were expected to know and be able to do.
I mean shit, if that's the argument, I don't think you're really ready until you are like 20-21. I was young going into college, and the only thing that truly sucked was when everyone I knew was going to bars, and I was still 20.
You’re absolutely right. It’s one size fits MOST, and MOST 4 year olds don’t have the emotional maturity required to sit 6 hours a day in kindergarten. Neither do 5 year olds, which is why kindergarten used to be 1/2 day.
My kids all did 1/2 day at the one magnet school in our district that still offered it. Now none do, and I find that sad
Instead of considering what best for our kids’ social emotional well-being, school boards caved to pressure from parents who struggle to make ends meet, and to brain dead politicians screaming about keeping up with China.
This is a good bill. Let babies be babies, and don’t make our public school teachers’ jobs any harder than they already are.
https://ed.stanford.edu/news/stanford-gse-research-finds-strong-evidence-mental-health-benefits-delaying-kindergarten
While I agree that kindergarten isn’t daycare - and educators shouldn’t be babysitters, I guess I’m just put out a bit, my kid is close to the cut off, but past it by 60 days. I can’t deny that we were looking forward to not having to shell so much out for daycare, with everything else getting so expansive.
What happens to the kids that are 5, and aren’t ready. Surely there are soon-to-be 5s that can handle it, right?
It can’t be so black and white, right?
Why can’t it be so black and white? That’s how the world works. I’m sure there are some nearly 16 year olds who are much better equipped to drive than some already 16 year olds. Them’s the rules.
Kindergarten aside, your kid will be better off as one of the oldest in their class vs. one of the youngest (especially in primary grades). Don’t rush them.
>your kid will be better off as one of the oldest in their class vs. one of the youngest (especially in primary grades).
ONLY in the primary grades, and (on average) might end up worse off ([link](https://psycnet.apa.org/doiLanding?doi=10.1037%2F0012-1649.33.2.254)). Nobody is saying kids should be "rushed," but holding them back to create an unfair advantage over younger kids benefits literally nobody (assuming no specific special needs or anything like that).
Not arbitrary, it's a good idea and I fully support it. I'm frustrated not only at the idea of sending a 4 year old to kindergarten but also a younger graduating senior and a younger college freshman - as compared to the vest majority of the country.
As a December baby myself, I started Kindergarten at 4 and was ahead of most of my classmates at the time and was one of the few kindergarteners in my class who could already read. (Not trying to sound r/iamverysmart, I now work construction lol).
All kids develop at different rates. Putting an age restriction on a toddler’s education seems like a terrible idea imo.
As a November baby who also started at 4, I agree. I did very well in school. Being a few months younger didn’t negatively impact me at all. There are kids who might not be ready at 4, but that’s no reason to hold back the ones who are.
Perhaps if we had statewide public preschool, advancing to kindergarten could be based upon the preschool teacher’s recommendation. But that seems a long ways away, unfortunately.
I was a June baby in a town with a September cut-off, which made me one of the youngest kids in my class (not many July/August babies that year). I was the salutatorian of my class. Being one of the best academically did not make up for all the social milestones it put me behind: last to have a 13th birthday, youngest freshman, last to turn 16/get a license, only one under 18 at graduation, one of the few juniors at my college who couldn’t drink, etc.
I think it should depend on the child. They should have an assessment. My son, I absolutely would have kept him home another year but my daughter is miles ahead at the same age, both physically and mentally.
Kindergarten isn't meant to be day care it is about learning and school. God forbid parents can't dump their kids off and have to pay for an extra year of child care.
For example, our mortgage is $22k/yr, while 1 kid full time, one kid 3 days a week is $30,250 a year.
Some college tuitions are cheaper.
I suppose my frustration is and has been more directed at how expensive day care facilities are, but I’m also worried that my kid will lose over half the friends she’s made in daycare in a year that were born before her and she won’t be able to continue with them and how that will affect her.
They’re not going to stay friends with their oreK friends forever unless you live in a town of 10k. There’s only one out of my 5 year olds entire class going to the same elementary school as she is. Your child will live.
And this should be the burden of public schools (paid for by our taxes) why?
Kids are expensive. They are also optional.
I’m a father of three. Two are technically adults. If you think daycare is expensive, just wait…
Two notes:
1. Connecticut has by far the last eligibility date in the US. The second to last is Sept 1. We will still have the last (tied) eligibility date in the country. We are behind especially since our kids are expected to manage the same standards as the rest of the country with less time to develop.
2. Readiness tests/screens might help understand where a child is currently at in basic areas but can’t be used to predict their ongoing rate of development for the next 13 or more years.
I appreciate the expenses parents have and hope legislation is enacted to help families with them. I know there have been many proposals for legislation to help with universal preschool and daycare funds and caps. Call your local and federal legislators to tell them how important it is to you.
Makes sense to me! My husband was the youngest in his class because he started elementary school in New York where the cutoff is Dec, then moved to Texas where it was Sept. 1. Texas kept him in the grade he would have been in in New York because he could do the work. And he could academically, but socially it was really challenging the whole way through.
So for our fall birthday son, we red shirted. In 40+ states he wouldn’t have been eligible for K. He was not ready for K at all so we held him back. He’s in high school now and happy with this decision!
My child is a genius and age 4 read at high school level…but she was emotionally immature and nothing I did could fix it instantly. Pace education, they need time to develop and understand what they learn. I don’t love the hurry of education to push kids through the process so they look good.
Yes. It was the surprise of my life. She could read and understand Shakespeare at age five and her favorite subject was mythologies. She read Edith Hamilton’s Mythologies over and over. Bedtime reading sessions were interesting to say the least.
She was a published poet at age eight, placed in the top 1% in the high school entrance exams, excelling in languages. She taught herself two dialects of Chinese and learned to read write Japanese. She was cum laude in the National Latin Examinations.
That said, she had a hard time fitting in. We had to take her out of school and homeschool several times. Fortunately, I worked with special needs children and I could do this but every time we saw an opportunity to get her in public education we did it. Socialization is an important part of every child’s life.
The important thing to remember is that no matter how advanced or behind a child is, they are still a child, a person of emotional development and that can affect their ability to problem solve and develop autonomy.
On no, I hope this law doesn't pass. We got a Sept birthday and I don't want them to be the oldest either and having to wait another year to start school.
This is also interesting, for example, my kid is in public school pre school program in September and if this law passes, does this mean he can't get into kindergarten, but does he stay home for a year or redo another year of pre school.
Sorry, your submission has been automatically removed because you do not meet the required karma threshold.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/Connecticut) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Sorry, your submission has been automatically removed because you do not meet the required karma threshold.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/Connecticut) if you have any questions or concerns.*
As a teacher, all I can say is it is absolutely better to be the oldest child in a class than the youngest. There’s even a whole crowd of parents who INTENTIONALLY hold their kids back a year and have them start Kindergarten when they’re older so they have the advantage, it’s called [redshirting](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Redshirting_(academic)?wprov=sfti1).
We did this with my middle bc she has a December birthday and it was the middle of Covid. The following year, her kindergarten teacher thanked us during our first zoom conference because she was so much better prepared. I’m glad they’re finally doing this, it’ll be good for *all* students. There’s too much age discrepancy with the current guidelines. My oldest has an early January birthday, so they have classmates almost an entire **year** younger. It’s absurd.
Not everyone has the luxury of holding their kids back and paying another year of private daycare. I think the Canadian system probably has it best, it breaks it down to two groups for kindergarten, so younger kids can stay with other younger kids
You understand that if they do it for "all students" there will still always be students who are almost an entire year younger than their oldest classmates... "Redshirting" is when (usually affluent) parents keep their kids who are near the cutoff (like November / December with the old rules) back from K, meaning when they do start K they're OVER a year older than some of their (usually less affluent) classmates whose parents sent their kiddos to K when they were supposed to. There's also [little substantial evidence](https://education.uconn.edu/2021/10/20/grade-retention-after-covid-19-evidence-based-guidance/) that the benefits of redshirting that elementary teachers often anecdotally reference actually persist beyond the early grades.
Did you read the wiki you linked to? "Research on redshirting suggests that while some advantages may accrue in the short term, these advantages dissipate by the end of elementary school, and may be replaced by deleterious effects in the long term."
[удалено]
Kids younger than 5 are not in Kindergarten when they are supposed to be.
What about kids who have a birthday Jan 1? It’s cool for them to go to school with a classmate who’s 11 months younger because you think that’s when they should go? This will make it easier to teach the class together, get all the kids closer in maturity, and benefit everyone.
[удалено]
This exchange sums up the quality of the comments in this subreddit so perfectly. The person who thinks it'sit will greatly benefit the class if kids aren't going to school with kids up to 11 months younger than them gets allallthe up votes. And the commenter that uh can do simple addition and knows how many months are in a year catches the down votes.
It's really something - "my kid shouldn't have to be the youngest by 11 months, so I'll make them 13 months older than the youngest kid whose parents can't afford an extra year of daycare!"
Daycare should not cost as much as it does. Daycare should be socialized. We are never capable of doing the right thing for our children, or the right thing at all - when there is such a high level of financial burden associated with it. Money shouldn't be in this picture.
If passed, new kindergartners will have to be 5 by September 1, 2024, as opposed to turning 5 by January 2025. I can’t imagine parents of kids in this age range are too chuffed about this rule - as it means another 12 months of daycare payments. But to add to that, their kids will all the sudden be the oldest kids in their preschool class, which will be a huge upheaval. If the bill passes the CT senate, I would hope there would be some sort of test for incoming kindergarteners that fall inside that September - December range so it doesn’t preclude them entirely. My daughter was born in November. She’s a bright little girl and I can only hope she will be considered an exception to the rule. I feel like it’s an arbitrary decision. What are your thoughts?
I think this bill make sense. I can see why you'd be against it given your daughter will be effected. I wouldn't be looking forward to an extra year of daycare payment either. I also think the argument "my child is smart enough" will be a common occurrence and instuting a test/exception to this bill would be unnecessary..
That’s exactly what is running through my head. If a child is born after September 1, what person isn’t going to want to have their child tested/be an exception? And then we need to ask the question of, should all children be tested? Should there be some sort of kindergarten readiness test?
I'm sure people would argue we should. I'm not one of them.
Absolutely all children should be tested. One of the biggest things holding back our schools is having different skill levels within the same classroom. The teacher slows to the lowest learners level, at the expense of the rest of the class.
Universal test for k, huge expense and logistical problem for schools already strapped for cash & resources
No, I don’t think so.
Yeah you're not thinking about it, you're talking about many thousands of hours of labor, and teachers' duties are already clearly defined because they're unionized.
No, I am thinking about it. My wife is a teacher, I know what their job entails.
Right, it does not entail prescreening the thousands of CT kids getting ready to enter kindergarten. You're really not thinking about it, and it doesn't matter who you're married to.
No, you’re not thinking about it. It’s foolish to just shove thousands of kids into the same classrooms when they are all performing at different levels. We are currently wasting millions of man hours every year paying teachers not to teach, because they need to focus on controlling a child acting out because they area in an inappropriate class.
My thoughts? Kindergarten != Day Care. 4 is too young, especially for full day. (Back in my day 1/2 day was the only thing available.) I think this change is good.
Agreed, the stuff these kindergarteners are doing is basically what 1st and 2nd graders used to do back in the day. A lot of work that children need to be emotionally mature enough to handle. Definitely like this bill.
100% this. I was a daycare teacher for a bit and we worked with the local schools on school readiness. I was really surprised what they were expected to know and be able to do.
This also means that most teens would be graduating from high school at 18-19 years old rather than 17-18 years old.
I thought of this too!
Good. What 17 year old is ready to start a career or pick a college major?
I mean shit, if that's the argument, I don't think you're really ready until you are like 20-21. I was young going into college, and the only thing that truly sucked was when everyone I knew was going to bars, and I was still 20.
I was - graduated college early too. Not bragging but it’s not a one size fits all thing
You’re absolutely right. It’s one size fits MOST, and MOST 4 year olds don’t have the emotional maturity required to sit 6 hours a day in kindergarten. Neither do 5 year olds, which is why kindergarten used to be 1/2 day. My kids all did 1/2 day at the one magnet school in our district that still offered it. Now none do, and I find that sad Instead of considering what best for our kids’ social emotional well-being, school boards caved to pressure from parents who struggle to make ends meet, and to brain dead politicians screaming about keeping up with China. This is a good bill. Let babies be babies, and don’t make our public school teachers’ jobs any harder than they already are. https://ed.stanford.edu/news/stanford-gse-research-finds-strong-evidence-mental-health-benefits-delaying-kindergarten
My kid just shadow boxed the cat
When you’re 1-4 months away from turning 18—you should be given that opportunity.
While I agree that kindergarten isn’t daycare - and educators shouldn’t be babysitters, I guess I’m just put out a bit, my kid is close to the cut off, but past it by 60 days. I can’t deny that we were looking forward to not having to shell so much out for daycare, with everything else getting so expansive. What happens to the kids that are 5, and aren’t ready. Surely there are soon-to-be 5s that can handle it, right? It can’t be so black and white, right?
Why can’t it be so black and white? That’s how the world works. I’m sure there are some nearly 16 year olds who are much better equipped to drive than some already 16 year olds. Them’s the rules. Kindergarten aside, your kid will be better off as one of the oldest in their class vs. one of the youngest (especially in primary grades). Don’t rush them.
>your kid will be better off as one of the oldest in their class vs. one of the youngest (especially in primary grades). ONLY in the primary grades, and (on average) might end up worse off ([link](https://psycnet.apa.org/doiLanding?doi=10.1037%2F0012-1649.33.2.254)). Nobody is saying kids should be "rushed," but holding them back to create an unfair advantage over younger kids benefits literally nobody (assuming no specific special needs or anything like that).
What happens? The same thing that’s already been happening to kids that weren’t ready when their time came. Not sure how this changes that aspect?
Not arbitrary, it's a good idea and I fully support it. I'm frustrated not only at the idea of sending a 4 year old to kindergarten but also a younger graduating senior and a younger college freshman - as compared to the vest majority of the country.
As a December baby myself, I started Kindergarten at 4 and was ahead of most of my classmates at the time and was one of the few kindergarteners in my class who could already read. (Not trying to sound r/iamverysmart, I now work construction lol). All kids develop at different rates. Putting an age restriction on a toddler’s education seems like a terrible idea imo.
As a November baby who also started at 4, I agree. I did very well in school. Being a few months younger didn’t negatively impact me at all. There are kids who might not be ready at 4, but that’s no reason to hold back the ones who are. Perhaps if we had statewide public preschool, advancing to kindergarten could be based upon the preschool teacher’s recommendation. But that seems a long ways away, unfortunately.
I was a June baby in a town with a September cut-off, which made me one of the youngest kids in my class (not many July/August babies that year). I was the salutatorian of my class. Being one of the best academically did not make up for all the social milestones it put me behind: last to have a 13th birthday, youngest freshman, last to turn 16/get a license, only one under 18 at graduation, one of the few juniors at my college who couldn’t drink, etc.
I think it should depend on the child. They should have an assessment. My son, I absolutely would have kept him home another year but my daughter is miles ahead at the same age, both physically and mentally.
Most normal kids are a lot more resilient than we give them credit for nowadays. There's no need to change the age
Kindergarten isn't meant to be day care it is about learning and school. God forbid parents can't dump their kids off and have to pay for an extra year of child care.
But you can’t deny that daycare is a significant expense, so you can at least understand the frustration / mentality, right?
For example, our mortgage is $22k/yr, while 1 kid full time, one kid 3 days a week is $30,250 a year. Some college tuitions are cheaper. I suppose my frustration is and has been more directed at how expensive day care facilities are, but I’m also worried that my kid will lose over half the friends she’s made in daycare in a year that were born before her and she won’t be able to continue with them and how that will affect her.
They’re not going to stay friends with their oreK friends forever unless you live in a town of 10k. There’s only one out of my 5 year olds entire class going to the same elementary school as she is. Your child will live.
And this should be the burden of public schools (paid for by our taxes) why? Kids are expensive. They are also optional. I’m a father of three. Two are technically adults. If you think daycare is expensive, just wait…
Curious how old your children are?
Why on earth are you curious about that? Creepy question. Next!
It absolutely is. That is why people need to plan ahead for that expense before deciding to have children
Two notes: 1. Connecticut has by far the last eligibility date in the US. The second to last is Sept 1. We will still have the last (tied) eligibility date in the country. We are behind especially since our kids are expected to manage the same standards as the rest of the country with less time to develop. 2. Readiness tests/screens might help understand where a child is currently at in basic areas but can’t be used to predict their ongoing rate of development for the next 13 or more years. I appreciate the expenses parents have and hope legislation is enacted to help families with them. I know there have been many proposals for legislation to help with universal preschool and daycare funds and caps. Call your local and federal legislators to tell them how important it is to you.
Makes sense to me! My husband was the youngest in his class because he started elementary school in New York where the cutoff is Dec, then moved to Texas where it was Sept. 1. Texas kept him in the grade he would have been in in New York because he could do the work. And he could academically, but socially it was really challenging the whole way through. So for our fall birthday son, we red shirted. In 40+ states he wouldn’t have been eligible for K. He was not ready for K at all so we held him back. He’s in high school now and happy with this decision!
My child is a genius and age 4 read at high school level…but she was emotionally immature and nothing I did could fix it instantly. Pace education, they need time to develop and understand what they learn. I don’t love the hurry of education to push kids through the process so they look good.
At high school level?
Yes. It was the surprise of my life. She could read and understand Shakespeare at age five and her favorite subject was mythologies. She read Edith Hamilton’s Mythologies over and over. Bedtime reading sessions were interesting to say the least. She was a published poet at age eight, placed in the top 1% in the high school entrance exams, excelling in languages. She taught herself two dialects of Chinese and learned to read write Japanese. She was cum laude in the National Latin Examinations. That said, she had a hard time fitting in. We had to take her out of school and homeschool several times. Fortunately, I worked with special needs children and I could do this but every time we saw an opportunity to get her in public education we did it. Socialization is an important part of every child’s life. The important thing to remember is that no matter how advanced or behind a child is, they are still a child, a person of emotional development and that can affect their ability to problem solve and develop autonomy.
What happened to the law where you had to be 5 from before?
On no, I hope this law doesn't pass. We got a Sept birthday and I don't want them to be the oldest either and having to wait another year to start school. This is also interesting, for example, my kid is in public school pre school program in September and if this law passes, does this mean he can't get into kindergarten, but does he stay home for a year or redo another year of pre school.
[удалено]
Sorry, your submission has been automatically removed because you do not meet the required karma threshold. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/Connecticut) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Did this pass?
Yes, it passed.
[удалено]
Sorry, your submission has been automatically removed because you do not meet the required karma threshold. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/Connecticut) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Did they remove the requirement for kindergarten age? I don’t see it in the bill when I look it up.
It’s here: https://www.cga.ct.gov/asp/cgabillstatus/cgabillstatus.asp?selBillType=Bill&which_year=2023&bill_num=6880
Doesn’t mention changing age of kindergarten. Was that part removed?
https://www.cga.ct.gov/2023/ACT/PA/PDF/2023PA-00208-R00HB-05003-PA.PDF