Repeat students— academic “red-shirting”?

<p>The head of SPS is named “deer field”, in German?</p>

<p>So yes, repeating has been a long tradition of many boarding schools. Repeaters have taken advantage of it to get a leg up in college admission, which is not just a one school only problem. There are kids who have deficiencies in background or maturity which warrant the repeating, but many others are simply reaping the school endorsed unfair advantage or in some cases cheating. The implications however are not just on college admission. It changes the dynamics of daily life and overall experience at BS. I would not be surprised if more and more families will choose repeating a grade when they can, as college admission game is getting more and more intense and there are more and more repeaters in BS (malicious cycle).</p>

<p>What is the % of repeat students in the BS’s today?</p>

<p>Only someone who works in boarding schools can know if repeaters end up at the top of their class. I have no idea. I’m not worrying about it. I think college admissions officers know how to add and subtract. They look to independent schools for well prepared students. </p>

<p>When I look at a group of 8th grade boys, though, the range in terms of size and maturity is stunning. Some boys are good to go, and others look as if they’re in 5th grade. I do think admissions officers are looking for students who are mature “enough” to handle boarding school.</p>

<p>The advantage in college admission is probably more obvious for atheletes, especially those who are shooting to be recruited. For non-atheletes, I don’t know if it always works even if the repeaters are “smart” enough to take all the “right” courses, even though to some the intention and <em>effort</em> are there. As pointed out earlier, the non-repeaters can take the “right” courses too because you don’t have to (actually rarely is it the case) take the same course that’s on your previous transcripts. Also, there’s only so much you could repeat and by junior and senior years the field is evened out more or less. </p>

<p>I care more about the different experience a younger child would have in such an environment. Exeter123’s son’s frustration is an illustration of such impact.</p>

<p>2 interesting articles on the topic, a week apart:</p>

<p>Wall St Journal: HS in 3 years to skip unproductive “senioritis”
[High</a> School, in Three Years - WSJ.com](<a href=“High School, in Three Years - WSJ”>High School, in Three Years - WSJ)</p>

<p>Baltimore Sun: why not introduce PG year for disadvantaged public schools
[Academic</a> redshirting: Give them a little more time - baltimoresun.com](<a href=“http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/opinion/oped/bs-ed-academic-redshirting-20120402,0,7046965.story]Academic”>http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/opinion/oped/bs-ed-academic-redshirting-20120402,0,7046965.story)</p>

<p>We struggled with this for years and still have doubts. We followed district guidelines and enrolled our son as the youngest in his class because he was more than ready to leave preschool. We planned for him to repeat kindergarten because so many families were redshirting their sons, but halfway through the year his teacher urged us to reconsider. He has always been, and still is, at the top of the heap academically and athletically. The logic then was that if we held him back when he was already ahead he would dwarf other kids and possibly be bored and disruptive. So we kept him where he was. When we applied to BS we tried to redshirt him, but long story short, it didn’t work then either. Now he is one of the youngest freshman in his BS (if not the youngest). He had a huge growth spurt in 8th grade which means that you would never know he is the youngest. He is still at the top of his game athletically and academically, but I look at some of his classmates – who are up to 18 months older – and wonder if we should have done this too. The ONLY reason I wonder is because this has become such common practice. There is nothing in his ability or experience that has ever told us that he needs more time. It’s hard not to resent all the people we know who have redshirted only for competitive advantage, but it’s not worth it. My only recommendation is that kids be placed developmentally rather than competitively.</p>

<p>I do worry about this a little. My kid will be a 9th grader… not repeating. I’m sure a good number of his classmates will be repeaters. There will be kids who took Geometry, or Algebra2 in their first pass at 9th grade. When they get to 9th grade at BS, they will have already taken this, as well as high school level foreign language. Of course, they will start off at a higher level than the regular 9th graders like my son. My son will start in Geometry. Repeaters will be more impressive to colleges, as they “started 9th grade in Pre-calculus” or got much farther in language, etc. It’s not about class rank for me, but about the advantage they have. Admittedly they’ve paid for it, but they are likely to be bigger on the playing field, more mature, etc. as well as matriculating in higher level classes. I didn’t realize this game was being played… it didn’t cross my mind.</p>

<p>I think this is a great discussion, but I wish we could stay away from the generalization that repeaters are “playing a game.” There are lots of reasons why kids repeat. It’s possible to have a child who looks physically mature, does well academically, and seems ready to the outside. Still, we simply don’t know all the details, That child’s good grades may come from an excess of effort, and the parents may realize the she is in over her head. Some of those kids simply aren’t ready for the big emotional leap of boarding school or do better with peers who are slightly younger (this is especially true, I think, for boys–having raised both, I’d say my girl is consistently 1-2 years more emotionally mature than her brothers were at her age). </p>

<p>From the vantage of a parent who has had a child with a late summer birthday who has, all his life, looked two years older than his actual age, I can tell you that the outside does not always equal the inside. The assumption that athletic-looking kids are kept “back” for sports gets as old as–I imagine–those assumptions that “she got in but she’s a URM” must for parents of color.</p>

<p>Indy: My child started high school at a more basic math level than yours will, and after two years, I’m not at all worried about his college placement. Colleges are interested in the rigor of classes, but I can’t see them holding a child’s middle school against him, any more than his prep school did. I’m sure they’re aware that kids enter high school with various levels of preparation; it’s what the kids do while they are there that matters.</p>

<p>@wcmom - our child is in the same boat - younger than her peers, but would have been bored if we’d held her back. And she’s done pretty well. Those parents who are redshirting because of maturity may have a point - let the child have an extra year to mature. But those hoping to gain a competitive advantage during college applications may be kidding themselves. I’ve interviewed hundreds (upon hundreds) of advanced students whose transcripts look impressive because they took (or appeared to take) advanced courses early. And yet, more often then not, they aren’t often the most impressive candidates in the pool.</p>

<p>Honestly - college admissions is becoming a lot more about the student and not how many AP and Honors courses they loaded up on I wish parents would stop looking for ways to second guess college admissions. These days it’s the normal kids whose parents LET them be kids that are starting to be the most attractive candidates.</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>I think this is true…as long as the emphasis is on “starting.”</p>

<p>As for the courseload and being “ahead” of others, remember that competitive college admissions places a lot of weight on how challenging an applicant’s courses are. If your child is taking the most demanding courses available to him, that’s what the colleges want to see. And there’s a downside to repeating, too: some of these students end up in a pickle because they will be more likely to hit their wall in certain areas and will either get lower grades in those crucial junior and senior years or they will turn to an easier course to avoid math or science or humanities…etc. Of course some are unfazed by this, but then who would say that those kids are less than “worthy” of admission at a competitive college?</p>

<p>Remember, in an applicant pool of 10,000 or 20,000 seniors, the “competition” is not a handful of repeaters at your high school. First and foremost, the applicant’s biggest “threat” is himself or herself. Going to a different high school on account of some “repeaters” won’t change the fact that they’re still going to be out there, in the applicant pools of several colleges, when it comes time for your child to apply. So, if your child is not repeating, is going to a less-than-most-desired prep school really such a smart move if the most desired prep school is “repeater friendly?”</p>

<p>b u m p . .</p>

<p>Owing to a concussion, my public school 7th grade son has been out of school since January. His school will move him along into the 8th grade. With two hours of tutoring one of the teachers proclaimed he is all caught up on two quarters of missed work. Just beautiful.</p>

<p>If he is even able to attend BS as he so desires, I see no chance for him other than taking 9th grade at the public HS and then repeating 9th grade in BS.</p>

<p>So, our path would not be a means to game the system; rather, a repeat year might hopefully be the only game in town for my son.</p>

<p>Weatherby, I’m glad to learn that your son is making progress in his recovery. Will be rooting for him this fall!</p>

<p>Weatherby - so glad to hear his recovery is progressing! </p>

<p>Not so glad to hear -

</p>

<p>That has to be frustrating - and I fear it is not that uncommon. The lack of academic rigor in our local school is one reason that we have homeschooled, and is also a major reason that both our kids will be attending boarding schools this fall.</p>

<p>All the best to your family this fall as you begin the application process.</p>

<p>None of this would be an issue if they would just let kids be where they need to be academically. Why do they try to force kids into these age categories as if all ten year olds are the same. But the concept is so entrenched in our system that when someone follows their own path in an often fruitless search for some kind of intellectual stimulation, they are looked at as an oddball, even when they are normal in every other way. Kids usually say, “good for you!” But teachers don’t always take it so well.</p>

<p>So when people ask me what grade my d is in, I just tell them how old she is instead because that’s usually what they want to know. They rarely have any interest in her curriculum, just her age, because that seems to be all that really matters, right?</p>

<p>My younger child repeated second grade because I did not feel he was ready, physically, academically, or socially for third grade. So for this Mom, it’s not about trying to gain an advantage by accelerating or repeating, but trying as best as I can to find the right environment for the kids.</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>I’m not sure why you are saying this. Everything I’m reading about HYPMS admits indicates these students are loading up on 6-10 AP classes to show how strong academically they are to elite colleges. Being a year ahead allows a student to take more AP/Advanced classes and shine more to admissions officers. I don’t see admissions officers “adjusting” for the applicant’s age.</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>I agree with this entirely. It’s not a level playing field by any means when you have a 19 year old taking the same classes and being on the same teams as a 17 year old. That’s why sports have age brackets for competitions. BSs are tacitly supporting this game and as someone new to the system it takes a while to see that the cards are marked. However, this is not the only unlevel field out there.</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>Yes, and they aren’t going to share that info anytime soon. However, it does ultimately depend on the students talents and ambitions.</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>Newsflash. Life is not fair.</p>

<p>Both parents may have had a choice, the 17 year old started school young and that is clearly a choice. The 19 year old might have had leukemia and essentially missed a school year. A young boy less than a half a mile from me got those cards dealt to him.</p>

<p>Why can’t a 17 year old successfully compete against a 19 year old?</p>

<p>Did anyone read “Outliers” or “Boys Adrift” as I suggested on this thread in October 2011? It addresses and clarifies these issues.</p>

<p>“Outliers” made us more aware of the issues, but ultimately didn’t help us. As the parents of a large and bright athlete, the question of whether to redshirt has come up over and over, yet there was never a right time to actually hold him back. The only issue we continue to have with his being the youngest is that many of his class/teammates are 12-24 months older than he is and have an athletic advantage. As an educator who has worked to try to balance the desire to help my kids succeed with the desire to be conscious of the greater good (classroom environment) it has always given me pause when parents hold their kids back for competitive advantage without regard to developmental readiness or appropriateness. In a former life I had to sit through hours of testimony from primary teachers talking about how hard it was to teach to an age range spanning 24 months, and it impacted me when deciding whether to have my bright child be dominant - and possibly bored and disruptive – if held back. That said, he is now competing athletically with kids 16 -24 months older - and while he is more than holding his own, I can’t help but want him to be exceptional :).</p>