I don't think I would ever do it. I was only 17 when I graduated.

A. How did you find such a stat?

 

B. How many of them were held back?

 

 

I heard it from a reliable source, trust me. I wouldnt just throw that out there for the heckuv it. It makes sense though.

 

Hey, if I had a son with a birthday in June or later and know what I know now, I would hold him back. Its an extra year of physical maturity and socially they are more mature as well. Nothing wrong with that.

 

I have an issue with kids beign held back once they reach 6th,7th grade, I mean come on. And then coincidentally even though Mom and pop say they are immature and need to be held back, they are the stud Football or Basketball player in that grade. Gee....lets see here.

Not true. If a school is being asked to hold back a student that academically there is zero reason to hold him back, I think it becomes a school issue, too.

 

The school system has ZERO right to tell a parent that keeping their child home an extra year is good or bad.

 

Giving birth to the child and providing a home, financial support, safety, nurturing, and an upbringing exclude the school system from that right altogether. Point blank, end of discussion.

My son was the youngest in his 8th grade class of about 80 kids, but he tested in the top 5% for high school - he's in every accelerated class. Now athletically he suffers, but so what? He knows he's younger and he still works hard. Yes he will graduate at 17 and won't turn 18 until college has started, but I am confident that he will be plenty mature. I know this is not a politically correct thing to say, but I think we (society) don't encourage kids to mature by age 18 anymore. A good friend of mine is currently paying for his son's 6th year of college (with still no degree). I would bet that most people reading this had parents who would have said, "OK - that's it. Now you're on your own." I love my son and will hate the day that he leaves, but in the big picture I think I am doing him a favor by not holding him back just so he could be better for a few years in sports.

The school system has ZERO right to tell a parent that keeping their child home an extra year is good or bad.

 

Giving birth to the child and providing a home, financial support, safety, nurturing, and an upbringing exclude the school system from that right altogether. Point blank, end of discussion.

 

I disagree. Education is a privilege and not a right. In the Constitution and all of the Amendments you will not find anywhere wording that guarantees every American a free education. That said, I am a huge proponent of public education. But if a parent wants to hold a kid back that academically is more than ready to move on, the school should have every right to tell that parent that his/her options are to A) let the child move on to the next grade, or B) keep the child home for a year and then they will be accepted into that grade. Some parents (and I am in no way accusing the poster that I am responding to) will start children early and then ask that they repeat a grade solely for athletic - or worse yet - babysitting purposes. Privileges that are abused are subject to being lost.

There are pros and cons to everything .

The school system has ZERO right to tell a parent that keeping their child home an extra year is good or bad.

 

Giving birth to the child and providing a home, financial support, safety, nurturing, and an upbringing exclude the school system from that right altogether. Point blank, end of discussion.

So a kid gets straight A's, the highest grades in the class, and the school has no right to say whether the kid can or cannot repeat the grade?

 

Remember, kid repeats and academically does not need to that kid is either a)increasing the class size for the teacher the next year; b)taking the spot of another child in next year's classes.

 

What I mean is the kid academically is top level student. The school keeps the top class at 25. Either the school is going to have to decide to make that class size 26 (meaning more resources, books, etc is needed for that class) or keep it at 25 and a kid who should have been in the top class is now not in the top class because parents wanted to give their child a boost athletically. Which could mean at the expense of another kid academically.

 

It is not a bubble but has at least some effects on other students. And it should be the right of the school to have a say in the decision when it affects other students.

And it should be the right of the school to have a say in the decision when it affects other students.

Amen. And consider this: A parent will rarely question a pediatrician when he/she tells them what is wrong with their child. If a parent thinks that their child has appendicitis (sp.?) and the doctor says, no, it's just a bowel obstruction, the parent would not insist that they are correct and have the appendix removed! But they are often quick to second guess teachers and counselors, many of whom have seven or eight years of higher education in their field.

I disagree. Education is a privilege and not a right. In the Constitution and all of the Amendments you will not find anywhere wording that guarantees every American a free education. That said, I am a huge proponent of public education. But if a parent wants to hold a kid back that academically is more than ready to move on, the school should have every right to tell that parent that his/her options are to A) let the child move on to the next grade, or B) keep the child home for a year and then they will be accepted into that grade. Some parents (and I am in no way accusing the poster that I am responding to) will start children early and then ask that they repeat a grade solely for athletic - or worse yet - babysitting purposes. Privileges that are abused are subject to being lost.

 

Really?

 

SO why do parents have to go to jail if their child doesn't go to school?

 

I was held back so I speak from experience.

 

Let me give you of an example of how holding 2 students back actually hurt them as far as a college scholarship. Two very good football players in my family were not held back. One was an offensive linemen who had official visits to Clemson, Miami, OH and interest from a few other Mid-majors. I personally went on 2 visits with each and at the end of each visit the ALL 4 COACHES had almost the same story. We are impressed with your game film BUT we cannot take a chance on a kid who will not turn 18 for almost a full year because we don't know how you will MENTALLY react to campus life and being away from your parents and we can't tab you into a position on the line because your PHYSICALLY not mature enough to give a solid evaluation.

 

Bottom line is you do whats best for your child.

If a parent thinks it is best for their child to start Kindergarten late, so be it. However, if that child is in, say, the fourth grade and there is no reason that he/she should not move on (academically & socially they are above average), I think the school has a right to NOT let the child be held back. What if four or five parents wanted to do that and all the third graders are moving up? That becomes unfair to those students who are advancing as they should.

And, really, education is a privilege and not a right. Sort of like how you and I don't have a right to drive a car. It is a privilege and it can be taken away. Rights are guaranteed by the Constitution and its Amendments.

And, really, education is a privilege and not a right. Sort of like how you and I don't have a right to drive a car. It is a privilege and it can be taken away. Rights are guaranteed by the Constitution and its Amendments.

 

Education was recognized as a basic human right 50 years ago in the UN Declaration of Human Rights....look it up.........

I am not saying that children should not be given a free public education. I support it 100%. I am saying that the school has a right (not in the Constitutional sense) to administer said school and it does not need to cater to the demands of a parent. Holding a student back for athletic purposes undermines the purpose of education. I doubt the UN would attach a rider saying, "and if a parent wishes to hold a student back for athletic purposes then they shall be allowed to do so." I am pretty sure the UN wants to develop the minds of children and is not too concerned with whether or not the kid will be big enough to play offensive guard when he graduates.

If a parent thinks it is best for their child to start Kindergarten late, so be it. However, if that child is in, say, the fourth grade and there is no reason that he/she should not move on (academically & socially they are above average), I think the school has a right to NOT let the child be held back. What if four or five parents wanted to do that and all the third graders are moving up? That becomes unfair to those students who are advancing as they should.

I couldn't disagree more. First, who determines "as they should"? You? The school board, the teachers/staff? Secondly, what about it is unfair to the other students? Their rights (privilege as you put it) aren't remotely infringed upon. Bottom line, the parents have the right to dictate how, and moreover, at what age/level their kids are educated. So with your logic, if a kid is uniquely gifted academically, he'd be infringing on the other students rights if he/she were double promoted.

Well, I'd guess that the opinions of some are from those not old enough to be parents of kids of that age yet. I held my son back and he and I agree it was the best decision that his mother and I have made. It has helped him athletically, and he already was a straight A student, so there has been no benefit academically. But I will say this, he will now graduate a year later, and hopefully a year more mature. If I can keep him in my house for an extra year, hopefully guiding him as he matures to make better decisions for his future, well,,,,that's my prerogative. It seems that it wasn't that long ago when I left the "nest" off to college. But when I step back and look at all that has changed, the challenges that he'll face are even greater than the ones I faced. That year of maturity may be just what he needs to make better decisions and possibly avoid some of the pitfalls he'd have made a year sooner.

 

 

I support each parents choice to look at the situation with their child and make a decision. Where the child's birthday falls - (are they the oldest or youngest in their class) -also plays a big factor in the decision.

 

Otherwise...It seems like we have a tendency to push our youth into and through school and into a career by age 22. Most of the activities, such as sports, are structured then to conform to this timetable. So, then the pressure is very high to become a phenom by age 13 or 14. Maybe in sports it is driven by the fact that the NBA was drafting 18 year-olds, colleges eliminated Freshman teams and seventh, eight and ninth graders now play varsity in a lot of schools.