When should my child start kindergarten?

Some parents in our area don't enroll their children in kindergarten as soon as the children are eligible, instead delaying their entry into kindergarten for one year in a practice known as academic redshirting. Isaac's birthday is September 6, 2005, three months before California's enrollment cut-off date of December 2, and I had always assumed we would send Isaac to kindergarten on time, just a few days before he turned five.

He's smart, he's polite, he's tall, he has a good attention span, he loves to learn. Why wouldn't he go to kindergarten like everyone else?

Well, it turns out that "everyone else" is not going to kindergarten! Most people we know are holding back their boys with summer and fall birthdays. Isaac has two good playmates in our neighborhood, one born in August and one in October 2005, and they will all attend the same school -- except that neither one is starting kindergarten in the fall.

So now that school registration is actually upon us, we are carefully considering all our options, including the possibility of delaying Isaac's entry into kindergarten for a year. In that case we would send him to the private "developmental kindergarten" offered to five-year-olds at his current preschool, then enroll him in the public kindergarten the following year.

But why "developmental kindergarten" instead of real kindergarten? It's a long story, having to do with kindergarten being "the new first grade," with avoiding premature homework packets and worksheets, with preserving free play as part of the school day, with taking time to mature socially and emotionally in a nurturing environment, with remaining with a peer group of one's own age, blah blah blah.

Despite popular journalism pieces to the contrary, there are arguments against academic redshirting. Kindergarten is free, but preschool for another year will cost us $6,000. And after all that expense, delaying kindergarten entry doesn't seem to make a lasting improvement in academic performance, according to a review of the many studies done by social scientists, and a revisiting of old research. (The studies are mostly shoddy and inconclusive, but factors like family income and maternal education make a much bigger difference in academic performance; redshirting does, however, seem to make some improvement in a child's social and athletic status.)

Also having so many older classmates is bad for those who do start kindergarten at age five, who end up dominated academically and socially, and perhaps society in general; the National Association for the Education of Young Children has a position paper against redshirting, arguing that kindergarten should be, by definition, appropriate for every five-year-old child. And there are plenty of personal opinions opposed to the practice, especially from people like us, a bit contrary by nature, who resent being told that we should do what "everyone else" is doing because it will make our kid a dominant super-achiever.

However the NAEYC's position paper also says this, in a sidebar entitled "What We DO Know about Holding Children Out":

In developmentally appropriate kindergartens, children’s age or maturity should make no difference. In kindergartens that are pressure-cookers influenced by the demands of achievement-oriented teachers, families may have greater cause for concern.

And the summary of the research on redshirting says this, in a section entitled "What Advice Can Teachers Give Parents About Delaying Kindergarten for Their Children?":

In making the decision, it is important for parents to consider the type of kindergarten program and academic expectations the child will face. If the program is developmental with individualized curriculum, the child will be more likely to succeed than if he is placed in a program emphasizing whole group instruction, sitting still for long periods of time and doing worksheets.

So these two identical pieces of advice, especially coming from early childhood educators otherwise philosophically opposed to delaying kindergarten, make me wonder about the developmental inappropriateness of our local "achievement-oriented" and award-winning (i.e., high-test-score-receiving) schools.

Yes, Isaac is very smart, and he would probably be able to rise to the occasion, academically, if thrown into a developmentally inappropriate classroom. On the other hand, like his parents he is also a bit contrary by nature, and he might balk at being forced to sit down and do work he isn't developmentally ready to enjoy -- especially in a classroom full of kids a year older than him!

- - - - -

So, to make a long story short, here are my three main concerns:

Question #1: Is our local kindergarten "developmentally appropriate" for five-year-olds in its academic curriculum and methods of instruction?

Question #2: Will the kindergarten teacher be able to provide "developmentally appropriate" support and guidance to Isaac as he develops socially and emotionally?

Question #3: What are the ages of the other children, especially the boys, enrolled in kindergarten?