I had the same choice to make with my son. A first grade teacher advised us that generally boys in this situation need the extra year just so that they sit still in class. Girls usually pay attention better.

 

My son is now in the 8th grade and has never had anything less than an A. He is not the oldest in the class, he just isn't one of the youngest. The decision was right for him.

 

Sometimes very young kids also have a harder time socializing. I know guys that went to Covington Latin who had a hard time in college because their weren't many of their peers to hang around with.

 

Don't take this as a slam on Cov Latin. Some individuals handle it, some don't.

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.

 

 

Ding Ding we have a argument that cannot be beat.

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.

Within reason, they do not. They cannot choose to just not educate their child. Parents have been put in jail for NOT sending their child to school.

 

So there is some authority given to the public schools upon the education of the children in their community.

 

Not sure where that line is but the complete and utter authority does not completely lie with the parents. The public school has a responsibility to that child unless the child has been removed and placed in a approved (not sure by whom) educational plan either private or home school.

 

And again, using the bolded and your logic, let's flip it. Can a parent request that a child skip the 4th and 5th grade even though they have failed the 1st, 2nd and 3rd grade? Using the logic put forth that it is completely the parent's choose, I can move my 5th grade son and having him graduate from HS next year. I don't think it works that way.

 

So there must be some authority/power given to the public schools, musn't there?

LBBC

 

I think most everyone knows that you are a teacher. Honestly, doesn't the levels of maturity between boys (low) and girls (nowhere near as low) give parents an honest & genuine reason to hold a boy back?

 

I understand what you are saying about that "truely" expceptional child, and agree that holding a kid back isn't for everyone. But if that kid is as mature and bright as you say, having the parents sit down and talk with him about the benefits of being a holdback would surely entice him to want to stay back himself.

 

I stand by my statement earlier...And I will add that unless the government, state, public or private school district start paying the mortage for the roof over my child's head, or the electricity that keeps them warm, or the food I feed them, or the vehicle that takes them to & from, it is MY right to decide if my child is fit to repeat a grade.

 

And I've still yet to see anyone present a case where a kid was held back or started school a year late and it have a negative impact on the child's educational or social upbringing.

 

BTW, LBBC. I know I am hard-headed or stubborn on this issue, and don't take what I say to be insulting. The bottom-line really is that I feel this is a parental decision only. School administration and their input should be heard, but I'd like to think that a good parent knows what's best for their kid more so than anyone else. If a child is a straight A student, more often than not it is because their parents demand those type of grades. And I'm sure when that kid is held back their parents will still demand the grades to be kept at a high level.

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.

 

Don't send your child to school and see what happens.

 

Your definition or my definition of privileges & rights must be misconstrued.

 

By the way...the babysitting purposes you speak of are more often than not the #1 reason parents send their kids to school early. Not everyone can afford $800-$1000 a month in child care services, and not everyone gets child care services for free.

 

A school's job is to educate our children, and in no way is it their job to decide the best way to "raise" our children. That's not to say some parents don't need a little positive influence from the school system, like those who won't send their kids to school.

 

Can jail-time be considered positive reiforcement when concerning these particular parents?

LBBC

 

I think most everyone knows that you are a teacher. Honestly, doesn't the levels of maturity between boys (low) and girls (nowhere near as low) give parents an honest & genuine reason to hold a boy back?

 

I understand what you are saying about that "truely" expceptional child, and agree that holding a kid back isn't for everyone. But if that kid is as mature and bright as you say, having the parents sit down and talk with him about the benefits of being a holdback would surely entice him to want to stay back himself.

 

I stand by my statement earlier...And I will add that unless the government, state, public or private school district start paying the mortage for the roof over my child's head, or the electricity that keeps them warm, or the food I feed them, or the vehicle that takes them to & from, it is MY right to decide if my child is fit to repeat a grade.

 

And I've still yet to see anyone present a case where a kid was held back or started school a year late and it have a negative impact on the child's educational or social upbringing.

 

BTW, LBBC. I know I am hard-headed or stubborn on this issue, and don't take what I say to be insulting. The bottom-line really is that I feel this is a parental decision only. School administration and their input should be heard, but I'd like to think that a good parent knows what's best for their kid more so than anyone else. If a child is a straight A student, more often than not it is because their parents demand those type of grades. And I'm sure when that kid is held back their parents will still demand the grades to be kept at a high level.

Good post and well said.

 

I do have a question for you though.

 

Does the parent have the right to demand a kid skip a grade or two? Do I have the right to take my 10-year-old son and enroll him in HS next year?

Good post and well said.

 

I do have a question for you though.

 

Does the parent have the right to demand a kid skip a grade or two? Do I have the right to take my 10-year-old son and enroll him in HS next year?

Your argument is silly. My point above was that in no way was holding back a child infringing on the rights of the kids he'd be joining in another grade. I never said that I wanted to shove my kid up a grade (or 7:rolleyes: ). My point is that if a school decided a child was worthy academically to advance more than just one year, and the parents agreed, would that promoted child also infringe on these rights of the kids he'd be joining in the new class above him? And you couldn't be farther from wrong about the parents choice. If I choose to, I can not only hold him back, I can change schools, I can homeschool. Ultimately my decision!

Your argument is silly. My point above was that in no way was holding back a child infringing on the rights of the kids he'd be joining in another grade. I never said that I wanted to shove my kid up a grade (or 7:rolleyes: ). My point is that if a school decided a child was worthy academically to advance more than just one year, and the parents agreed, would that promoted child also infringe on these rights of the kids he'd be joining in the new class above him? And you couldn't be farther from wrong about the parents choice. If I choose to, I can not only hold him back, I can change schools, I can homeschool. Ultimately my decision!

I am still not sure about that.

 

I teach in an alternative school setting. The placement here is NOT the parent's choice. The school decides whether they go here or in a regular school setting. And let me point out that not every kid comes here because they have gotten into trouble this school year.

 

That is not much different than an elementary school deciding what grade level the kid is going to be in. A parent enrolls them in school but a school should have say in the placement of that child.

 

It would be interesting to see this tested in a court to see what would be the answer. I will PM some of our BGP lawyers and get their viewpoint.

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.

 

Not comparing apples to apples here. If academically he/she needs to be held back (or double promoted) so be it. But if a child should be promoted from an academic standpoint and the ONLY reason that a parent wants to hold him/her back is for athletics, then I think the school has a right to say no. Accomodations should be made based on academic need, not a parent's desire to raise a star player.

Ding Ding we have a argument that cannot be beat.

I am not arguing this point. (see above)

I am still not sure about that.

 

I teach in an alternative school setting. The placement here is NOT the parent's choice. The school decides whether they go here or in a regular school setting. And let me point out that not every kid comes here because they have gotten into trouble this school year.

 

That is not much different than an elementary school deciding what grade level the kid is going to be in. A parent enrolls them in school but a school should have say in the placement of that child.

It would be interesting to see this tested in a court to see what would be the answer. I will PM some of our BGP lawyers and get their viewpoint.

I agree that the school should have A say in the placement, not the final say. And ultimately, they don't.

Not comparing apples to apples here. If academically he/she needs to be held back (or double promoted) so be it. But if a child should be promoted from an academic standpoint and the ONLY reason that a parent wants to hold him/her back is for athletics, then I think the school has a right to say no. Accomodations should be made based on academic need, not a parent's desire to raise a star player.

Not my argument at all, you said earlier that this new kid in the class had somehow invaded the rights of the other students in that class, I say, how so?

How about this scenario:

There are 25 students in a class, 12 of them boys, none of which have repeated a grade yet. Their school basketball team is very good. Two parents decides to have their boys repeat so they can be even better in basketball. A couple of other parents decide it would be a good idea also. After some discussion 10 of the 12 parents decide to have their boys repeat just so they can play on the same team again together next season. Keep in mind that academically and socially these boys are ready to be promoted and there are a dozen boys in the grade behind them ready to move up also. Are some of you saying that the school has no choice but to somehow let all of those boys repeat? I think the school has a responsibility to say no.

Something I don't recall seeing being discussed is, if a student repeats a grade, after they are promoted, doesn't that school loose state funding for that student, for the subsequent year?

 

How about this scenario:

There are 25 students in a class, 12 of them boys, none of which have repeated a grade yet. Their school basketball team is very good. Two parents decides to have their boys repeat so they can be even better in basketball. A couple of other parents decide it would be a good idea also. After some discussion 10 of the 12 parents decide to have their boys repeat just so they can play on the same team again together next season. Keep in mind that academically and socially these boys are ready to be promoted and there are a dozen boys in the grade behind them ready to move up also. Are some of you saying that the school has no choice but to somehow let all of those boys repeat? I think the school has a responsibility to say no.

What grade, are you proposing this scenario for, because they can't repeat 7th/8th grade and then play Varsity Basketball again. They must set out that year.

Let's make the scenario 6th grade then.