Holding Kids Back

[Olympic Fan]

Interesting piece on ESPN about the growing practice of holding kids back a year (usually in middle school), so that they will be older more mature than their classmates:

http://espn.go.com/video/clip?id=12908163

The focus is on Duke cornerback Bryon Fields, who was held back to repeat the eighth grade. He and his father are convinced it worked for them. There are some other examples, including a West Virginia father who had his son repeat kindergarten. They also talk to Bob Hurley Sr., who dismisses the practice.

Thought it was interesting because of the Fields stuff, but also since this came up with Derryck Thornton. He was one of those kids who repeated eighth grade, so that when he reclassified this spring, he was merely re-joining what should have been his class in the first place.

[roywhite]

Interesting piece on ESPN about the growing practice of holding kids back a year (usually in middle school), so that they will be older more mature than their classmates:

http://espn.go.com/video/clip?id=12908163

The focus is on Duke cornerback Bryon Fields, who was held back to repeat the eighth grade. He and his father are convinced it worked for them. There are some other examples, including a West Virginia father who had his son repeat kindergarten. They also talk to Bob Hurley Sr., who dismisses the practice.

Thought it was interesting because of the Fields stuff, but also since this came up with Derryck Thornton. He was one of those kids who repeated eighth grade, so that when he reclassified this spring, he was merely re-joining what should have been his class in the first place.

See a good bit of this in some areas that are crazy for high school football; Texas, for example. The practice may have had something to do with Mack Brown recruiting highly ranked classes and getting less than expected results; many of his recruits turned 19 in high school, and improved less than other, younger players when they came to college.

Have also seen it in a coal region town like Mt. Carmel, PA, where they supposedly had P.A. announcements in junior high, instructing those kids who might be held back a year for athletics to attend a meeting going over the procedures.

[roywhite]

There is an interesting age range for the incoming 2015 Duke basketball recruiting class; one player will be 19 when he enrolls, and two will be 17.

Luke Kennard 6/24/1996
Antonio Vrankovic 10/28/1996
Derryck Thornton 5/30/1997
Brandon Ingram 9/2/1997
Chase Jeter 9/19/1997

Will this factor into their relative development?

[Acymetric]

Interesting piece on ESPN about the growing practice of holding kids back a year (usually in middle school), so that they will be older more mature than their classmates:

http://espn.go.com/video/clip?id=12908163

The focus is on Duke cornerback Bryon Fields, who was held back to repeat the eighth grade. He and his father are convinced it worked for them. There are some other examples, including a West Virginia father who had his son repeat kindergarten. They also talk to Bob Hurley Sr., who dismisses the practice.

Thought it was interesting because of the Fields stuff, but also since this came up with Derryck Thornton. He was one of those kids who repeated eighth grade, so that when he reclassified this spring, he was merely re-joining what should have been his class in the first place.

Having kids repeat kindergarten is actually not terribly uncommon now. People with kids young for their grade seem to frequently consider it at this point (much easier at age 5 than at age 12), with the result being that instead of being young for their grade they end up slightly older than most kids. The idea is that they will be more mature and better developed to handle material as the progress further.

[JNort]

Having kids repeat kindergarten is actually not terribly uncommon now. People with kids young for their grade seem to frequently consider it at this point (much easier at age 5 than at age 12), with the result being that instead of being young for their grade they end up slightly older than most kids. The idea is that they will be more mature and better developed to handle material as the progress further.

This is what I would like to do with my kids (when I have any that is). Majority of those held back seem to have a larger advantage in sports, academics and relationships all the way through high school and into their college years. That is just from first hand experience as it could be different for other people but I also see no reason why not to. I mean what's to lose?

[wavedukefan70s]

My old high school got a 500 dollar fine and two coaches suspended for holding a honor student back in 8th grade and letting him play jv football.currently we held our son back due to ear surgeries. Plus he has a late birthday.He is a honor roll student member of the beta club.he also plays sports.I believe that his being 12 in the 5th grade will pay dividends as he aproaches and plays middle school sports.theoretically speaking when he starts 7th grade he should have a two year advantage on his peers.

[Devil in the Blue Dress]

The idea of students starting school late or being held back at some point to allow for maturation is not new. Back in the late 70s and early 80s this idea was one trend which developed from the work of the Gesell Institute.

[PensDevil]

Have also seen it in a coal region town like Mt. Carmel, PA, where they supposedly had P.A. announcements in junior high, instructing those kids who might be held back a year for athletics to attend a meeting going over the procedures.

I wasn't expecting to read about my little hometown during my daily does of DBR. The entire surrounding area is high school football crazy. Holding students back does occur to some extent at other schools in the area, but Mt. Carmel has the reputation for it.

I can't say I've ever heard P.A. announcements made for redshirting. Maybe back in the 80's and before that was the practice.

Students still "redshirt", but the numbers have gone down over the past 20 years. Mostly it happens around the middle school years. If a passing student wants to redshirt now, they get something written up by a doctor with a "medical" reason for repeating the grade. Sometimes students repeat a grade in elementary school (usually kindergarten) for "maturity reasons". Often these early repeaters come from families that had prominent high school athletes in the past. During my time as a student (80's into the 90's), there were even a few students that did both. They were held back in elementary school, and then repeated a middle school grade.

[Reisen]

This is what I would like to do with my kids (when I have any that is). Majority of those held back seem to have a larger advantage in sports, academics and relationships all the way through high school and into their college years. That is just from first hand experience as it could be different for other people but I also see no reason why not to. I mean what's to lose?

Yeah, it's a tough call. Our son was born last August, so he will just make the cutoff to start kindergarten in a couple of years. There are pretty good arguments on both sides.

[devildeac]

Young female devildeac #1 missed October 15 cut off by about 3 weeks so she started kindergarten on time and Mrs. dd and I are quite happy with that decision.

Young male devildeac #2 missed October 15 cut off by less than a week but was a rather precocious young cuss and we debated for a year before deciding not to "move him up" and are again quite pleased with that choice. One of the older children in his class from K-12, excellent scholar and athlete and well-adjusted socially.

Young female devildeac #3 is a mid-winter birthday so she was an easy decision, unless we wanted to hold her back for 6-7 months. She started school "on-time," has done well so we went 3/3 in our social/child-rearing/parenting decisions.

My (deceased) brother and his ex-wife/widow went 0/3 in their decisions. Completely different universes in their parenting choices/philosophies from each other and their results sadly and tragically reflect that.

We have a nephew who is similar in birthdate to our son and he was started a bit early I think, had some social adjusting issues in K-2 and ended up repeating 2nd grade, IIRC, and his parents are ecstatic at how he's done in his middle and high school years, academically, athletically and socially.

Each parent/family/child run their own races. Just thought I'd share our experiences as we've gone through them 1st and 2nd hand and can appreciate the advantages and disadvantages of both pathways.

[andyw715]

I can't really comment on the athletic side of things, but my wife is an elementary/middle school counselor. After 18 years of working in the schools and countless kids that she has helped, she can pretty much point out the young students in a given class after a few minutes of observation.

Our current experiment has our daughter (born July 5) as the baby in her 3rd grade class. Our other daughter (born September 21) is the oldest in her Kindergarten class.

Obviously every kid is different, but I've volunteered in both classes enough that you can definitely see the maturity differences between my daughters and their classmates. So much so with the older one, that she may take 3rd grade again.

[wavedukefan70s]

That being said. A.J. Green was 20 when he graduated. It worked out well for him.

[HaveFunExpectToWin]

Having kids repeat kindergarten is actually not terribly uncommon now. People with kids young for their grade seem to frequently consider it at this point (much easier at age 5 than at age 12), with the result being that instead of being young for their grade they end up slightly older than most kids. The idea is that they will be more mature and better developed to handle material as the progress further.

The ole Pre-K redshirt season.

[sagegrouse]

That being said. A.J. Green was 20 when he graduated. It worked out well for him.

Same with Mike Gminski.

Back in the day, the fashion was to speed kids along. I just made the cutoff into first grade (no K in my area back in the Middle Ages) and was the youngest in the school -- until second grade. Then a half-dozen boys showed up who had been in Mrs. So-and-So's kindergarten and were propelled over first grade into second grade. Indeed, the momentum to move ahead was so great that a first-grader in my class was kidnapped the very first day of school. There was a bit of a commotion, and then this kid disappeared. Shortly thereafter, the teacher announced that the school had discovered he could read and put him in second grade.

Kindly,
Sage

[Kfanarmy]

I can relate to a parent holding their children back or pushing them forward for academic, emotional or physical development reasons. Just imagining someone holding a child back so he can be a starter on the football field someday really says it all. "We're gonna have you park your brain for a year son...because that part aint nearly so important as your size and speed?"

[bluedev_92]

I copied this from my post on the D. Thornton thread from about one month ago - seems relevant here:

I live in Northern Delaware (right at the border with Southeastern Pennsylvania). Our high level sports teams often play teams from Pennsylvania. While coaching in a high level girls (7th/ 8th grade) basketball tournament recently, it was brought to my attention that its becoming more & more common in PA to "yellow shirt" children - hold them back a year so that they can compete on school teams against younger competition. Usually happens @ transition between elementary/middle school. If a school won't comply, some will just send the kids to another school for the repeat year. While I knew this was going on to some extent - didn't know they had a name for it! This doesn't work on many travel teams (soccer, for instance, is strictly age based & I think AAU basketball has new reforms moving in that direction, but with larger age bracket (24 month) windows)
Anyway, it leads to many kids being older than the "normal" high school graduation age that we may be used to...

[CrazyNotCrazie]

The complete lack of consistency with cutoff dates also complicates these decisions. In New York City, public schools are on the calendar year system, with very little flexibility to redshirt (so fall birthdays are 4 when they start K). Private schools are officially on a September 1 cutoff, though many schools are unlikely to consider summer birthday kids, particularly boys, so some kids graduate HS at 19. If a student moves around between districts with differing cutoffs like this, they can very quickly go from being the youngest to the oldest or vice versa. Some sport groupings are based more on age than grade, but once you get to HS, you could have kids 1.5 years apart in age competing against each other as peers.

[bob blue devil]

I can't really comment on the athletic side of things, but my wife is an elementary/middle school counselor. After 18 years of working in the schools and countless kids that she has helped, she can pretty much point out the young students in a given class after a few minutes of observation.


What makes the young ones stand out to her? Is it exclusively in a bad way?

[Lid]

I think a sometimes under-appreciated side effect of this practice (adjusting a student's grade level for non-developmental/academic reasons) can be the effect on teachers and other students in an elementary school class. It's already challenging to differentiate appropriately for the natural age range of a given class, but this artificially increases the ability range, for lack of a better word, which can complicate things for teachers. (Again, note I'm talking about holding a student back for athletic reasons, and it's not an issue in high school, when there are honors vs. regular classes.)

We have a kid on each extreme and never really considered holding the younger one back (because OMG the daycare bills!). They've both done fine so far; they're different kids, but I only have two, so I can't really speak to which of their problems are related to relative age and which are because they're genetically related to me, bless their hearts.

I'm definitely a fan of the soccer approach, though, where age groupings are defined by, you know, age. Obviously doesn't work for school-based sports, but once we've gone to a professional system at all levels, it should be implemented.

[cspan37421]

I'm surprised how little disparagement there is here of this practice, which seems in many cases motivated to give kids an athletic advantage at the expense of other kids who "play by the rules - without bending them." The silver lining to me is that when everyone is doing it, the advantage disappears. But not everyone does it.

It's ironic, too, that intellectually-gifted kids are often accelerated, but athletically-gifted kids are often held back ... yet if you use the same logic applied to the intellectually gifted, they should be accelerated too. And in some sneaky ways they are - our local high school has, at times, had an 8th grader playing point guard. But he's still in 8th grade ... and might even be old for 8th grade. But he'll be around to play 5 years of HS basketball.

If they're held back due to academics, do they really belong at Duke?

To me it's distasteful at best.

[Reilly]

... the teacher announced that the school had discovered he could read and put him in second grade ...

At Carolina, they confer a Ph.D. upon such a remarkable discovery.

[PSurprise]

Well, it just goes to show that people are difficult things to gauge. Whether in academics or athletics, everyone is different, and progresses differently depending on a lot of factors. I tend to think it's human nature to try to 'organize' kids into groups because it makes it easier for teachers, coaches, etc. to teach, train, coach, whatever; hence, (in some ways at least) why there's standards for grade levels. But of course it's impossible to put all kids in groups b/c we're talking about fairly complex creatures here. I like to imagine if Lebron had to go to college for 3 years how he would do with all of his talent. That would have been fun to watch. But it was obvious he was ready after high school, as others have been. Just like school and academics, some children are more ready than others. As hard as it is, we should try to look on these on an individual basis as much as possible to get the best consequences for that student/athlete.

[Reilly]

... we should try to look on these on an individual basis as much as possible to get the best consequences for that student/athlete.

For the Lebron's of the world, accelerating seems like a no-brainer. Same with the golfer who leaves college to win the Master's, or the tennis star going pro (guess Jennifer Carpiati is a cautionary tale), or the musician who leaves h.s. early to begin conservatory.

And for the kids who need help, being held back seems like a no-brainer.

There is something a little off about doing so just to get a competitive advantage. In other words, a kid who is at the 10th percentile in terms of academic or athletic performance and is held back to be at the 50th percentile for that same grade next year seems OK to me ... but a kid who is at the 50th percerntile of his grade and is held back so he can be at the 80th or 90th percentile in the same grade next year -- seems wrong somehow.

[Lid]

I'm surprised how little disparagement there is here of this practice, which seems in many cases motivated to give kids an athletic advantage at the expense of other kids who "play by the rules - without bending them."
I think you make an important point that this is not a practice without some negative consequences for other kids. I know it's not a pretty thought, but these kids being held back for athletic reasons are not in a vacuum. (Or if they are, there are other, larger issues. Like, is there a hepa filter?)

[sagegrouse]

I'm surprised how little disparagement there is here of this practice, which seems in many cases motivated to give kids an athletic advantage at the expense of other kids who "play by the rules - without bending them." The silver lining to me is that when everyone is doing it, the advantage disappears. But not everyone does it.

It's ironic, too, that intellectually-gifted kids are often accelerated, but athletically-gifted kids are often held back ... yet if you use the same logic applied to the intellectually gifted, they should be accelerated too. And in some sneaky ways they are - our local high school has, at times, had an 8th grader playing point guard. But he's still in 8th grade ... and might even be old for 8th grade. But he'll be around to play 5 years of HS basketball.

If they're held back due to academics, do they really belong at Duke?

To me it's distasteful at best.

I don't think Christian Laettner was held back (I believe he repeated eighth grade when he went to private school) to beat up on HS kids. It was to enable him to mature physically enough to earn a college scholarship.

The Plumlee paterfamilias basically said that the Plumlee brothers went to Christ School in Asheville because Miles needed another year to mature. Mason did not. In response to criticism from the HS coach in Warsaw, Ind., Perky Plumlee said that he heard more from college coaches about Miles than he did from the HS coach, who had Miles rooted to the bench.

[Turk]

I have seen a few cases of this over the years, and I think it's a clear example of parents who have their priorities screwed up. Most of the time in most sports, if the kid needs to be held back for an extra year, then he (never a she that I can recall) just isn't that special. Very good, sure. District all-star, maybe. State all-star, doubtful. National-level elite, rarely.

The truly elite athletes play up, not down, and sooner or later any minor advantage gained by the extra year is artificial and goes away anyway. As noted upthread, many travel / non-school sports are moving to strict calendar based age brackets anyway, and for the purposes of college scholarships these teams and leagues often carry more weight than the school teams. In my local area, I know of examples in girl's basketball and boy's soccer where the kids were either directed or chose not to play interscholastic sports so that they could focus on their travel team / showcase events.

The one exception is football, where muscle and bulk is such a critical factor for success, and where there is no real alternative to high school competition to evaluate talent. Since school sports will always be grade based, those kids are probably better off doing the post-high school prep year and then going to an NCAA school. Most basketball kids who go that route are usually doing it to meet academics requirements.

As for Laettner and the Plumlees, I respectfully suggest that they are the outliers and in the end the extra year didn't really give them much of an advantage athletically (I wouldn't even try to guess about their academic or social needs at the time).

[sagegrouse]

I have seen a few cases of this over the years, and I think it's a clear example of parents who have their priorities screwed up. Most of the time in most sports, if the kid needs to be held back for an extra year, then he (never a she that I can recall) just isn't that special. Very good, sure. District all-star, maybe. State all-star, doubtful. National-level elite, rarely.

The truly elite athletes play up, not down, and sooner or later any minor advantage gained by the extra year is artificial and goes away anyway. As noted upthread, many travel / non-school sports are moving to strict calendar based age brackets anyway, and for the purposes of college scholarships these teams and leagues often carry more weight than the school teams. In my local area, I know of examples in girl's basketball and boy's soccer where the kids were either directed or chose not to play interscholastic sports so that they could focus on their travel team / showcase events.

The one exception is football, where muscle and bulk is such a critical factor for success, and where there is no real alternative to high school competition to evaluate talent. Since school sports will always be grade based, those kids are probably better off doing the post-high school prep year and then going to an NCAA school. Most basketball kids who go that route are usually doing it to meet academics requirements.

As for Laettner and the Plumlees, I respectfully suggest that they are the outliers and in the end the extra year didn't really give them much of an advantage athletically (I wouldn't even try to guess about their academic or social needs at the time).

A related topic is the use of junior colleges in California to give young football players a chance to bulk up. It doesn't seem to be as prevalent elsewhere, where Jucos have an academic, or "couldn't qualify," stigma.

And then there are Curry sons, who were mere lads as seniors in HS and did need more time to reach varsity athlete strength and bulk

[EKU1969]

After reading most of this thread, I must say we had a slightly different experience. Our first child was so much bigger than her peers that we ended up putting her in Kindergarten earlier than we would have based on age. Nth is was a very agonizing decision and did have its ups and downs as far as her development was concerned. This had nothing to do with athletics and everything to do with size...she could already read (at 2) so that wasn't a problem, but her social development suffered. So, I am more aligned with those who disagree with the intentional holding back of students to gain an athletic advantage.

[wilko]

Having kids repeat kindergarten is actually not terribly uncommon now. People with kids young for their grade seem to frequently consider it at this point (much easier at age 5 than at age 12), with the result being that instead of being young for their grade they end up slightly older than most kids. The idea is that they will be more mature and better developed to handle material as the progress further.

We did this. We held my now 12yo back. He had an extra yr of pre-K.
He was born in late Aug making him young for his class. He has adhd and never met a bodily function joke that wasn't HI-larry-us.
The thinking at the time was it would give him more time to season out and mature.

Looking back I don't regret it. I cant see that it has been particularly advantageous to any degree or another.... but he been a normal kid on par with his peers. Perhaps that he hasnt HAD any issues to call him to the principle or be sent home is advantage enuff...

[Indoor66]

I've been held back many times. In fact, most of my life.

But then, those who know me fully understand.... :D:cool:

[cspan37421]

I've been held back many times. In fact, most of my life.


Lucky you. My parents wanted to get rid of me ;) ... they sent me off to kindergarten at age 4. No skipping grades, just "off you go, junior!"

Academically I did more than fine. Athletically? Well, I was tall and skinny ... by the time I went to college, my BMI was as low as my age. It wasn't until the end of my soph yr of college that I had filled out to normal size, thanks to a steady diet of chili dogs, bagels, and PE classes. Starting me out the normal time, I wouldn't likely have been appreciably bigger in my secondary school years, so although I loved playing soccer, I still would have been gangly.

At the moment I'm reading John Cleese's So, Anyway ..., and as a kid he was also tall, skinny, and not exactly expected to be his country's next great Olympian. One teacher even referred to him as "six foot of chewed string." :D

[flyingdutchdevil]

Lucky you. My parents wanted to get rid of me ;) ... they sent me off to kindergarten at age 4. No skipping grades, just "off you go, junior!"

Academically I did more than fine. Athletically? Well, I was tall and skinny ... by the time I went to college, my BMI was as low as my age. It wasn't until the end of my soph yr of college that I had filled out to normal size, thanks to a steady diet of chili dogs, bagels, and PE classes. Starting me out the normal time, I wouldn't likely have been appreciably bigger in my secondary school years, so although I loved playing soccer, I still would have been gangly.

At the moment I'm reading John Cleese's So, Anyway ..., and as a kid he was also tall, skinny, and not exactly expected to be his country's next great Olympian. One teacher even referred to him as "six foot of chewed string." :D

You mean cheap beer, Cosmic Cantina, and pick-up basketball, right?

[cspan37421]

You mean cheap beer, Cosmic Cantina, and pick-up basketball, right?

No, for better or worse, I meant just what I said. Very few regrets. But were I to go back today, well, I would take PE courses to get my BMI down!

(I think there was no Cosmic Cantina then. My chili dogs came from the East Campus shop - near the then-post office location between Epworth & the Ark; bagel & cream cheese (cheap calories & protein) from the a la carte part of the Pits (now a Chick Fil A or something), and while I took a wide variety of PE classes, I probably took weight training 4x, from the late great curmudgeonly character Bill Harvey, longtime wrestling coach. Coach Harvey tried to be a grouch to us weight-trainers, but it seemed like an act to me. I liked how he showed us how we could work the same areas with Nautilus machines, free weights, or virtually nothing at all.)

[Devil in the Blue Dress]

No, for better or worse, I meant just what I said. Very few regrets. But were I to go back today, well, I would take PE courses to get my BMI down!

(I think there was no Cosmic Cantina then. My chili dogs came from the East Campus shop - near the then-post office location between Epworth & the Ark; bagel & cream cheese (cheap calories & protein) from the a la carte part of the Pits (now a Chick Fil A or something), and while I took a wide variety of PE classes, I probably took weight training 4x, from the late great curmudgeonly character Bill Harvey, longtime wrestling coach. Coach Harvey tried to be a grouch to us weight-trainers, but it seemed like an act to me. I liked how he showed us how we could work the same areas with Nautilus machines, free weights, or virtually nothing at all.)

Are you referring to the East Campus Dope Shop?

[cspan37421]

Are you referring to the East Campus Dope Shop?

Well, I thought so at first, but then a quick google search said something about the basement of a west campus Union building.

http://www.dukestores.duke.edu/about/history.php

I don't remember know what it was called. There was SOME place called the dope shop! I just don't know anymore if this was it, esp. not after reading that link. It's been nearly 30 years since I was a freshman. Anyway, it was this small little shop where you could get snacks, postcards, and who knows what. There were eating booths outside the shop and a small couch or two in another corner of the eating area. The shop had one of those terrible hot dog machines (hot rollers on to which the link was placed), a vat of chili with a small ladle, army-size bags of hot dog buns and little paper trays to fit them in. You assembled your own. Two plus a coke or something was a near daily lunch for me, just after getting my mail.

Anyone try a Gluttonwich at the Downunder? Three 1/4-lb beef patties on a bun ... or a stack of them (think Big Mac with an extra floor!).
I remember Wild Bill's Pizza, with the six-shooter shaped coupons they'd hang on your door. IMO, back then, that 'za was just awful. Very doughy, but terrible everything else.

We had the Rathskellar (-er) on West too. That was good. I can't remember what sort of concoction it was known for, but I remember something there being a favorite of mine. Had a lot of cheese, not unlike French Onion Soup, but it wasn't that. Maybe chili? The mists of time ...

Who remembers sundaes at the Oak Room? mmm ....

[bluenorth]

It can be an educated guess about how the child will develop, based on siblings' growth patterns, or just a hope that there's more to come. A classmate of my son's was 6'1" and 220 pounds at the start of 7th grade. He pretty much did what he wanted on the court because no one took more than one charge from him; he literally weighed 100 pounds more than many of his teammates and opponents. At the end of high school this boy was - 6'1" and about 230 pounds. Holding him back wouldn't have gained a thing.

[Devil in the Blue Dress]

Well, I thought so at first, but then a quick google search said something about the basement of a west campus Union building.

http://www.dukestores.duke.edu/about/history.php

I don't remember know what it was called. There was SOME place called the dope shop! I just don't know anymore if this was it, esp. not after reading that link. It's been nearly 30 years since I was a freshman. Anyway, it was this small little shop where you could get snacks, postcards, and who knows what. There were eating booths outside the shop and a small couch or two in another corner of the eating area. The shop had one of those terrible hot dog machines (hot rollers on to which the link was placed), a vat of chili with a small ladle, army-size bags of hot dog buns and little paper trays to fit them in. You assembled your own. Two plus a coke or something was a near daily lunch for me, just after getting my mail.

Anyone try a Gluttonwich at the Downunder? Three 1/4-lb beef patties on a bun ... or a stack of them (think Big Mac with an extra floor!).
I remember Wild Bill's Pizza, with the six-shooter shaped coupons they'd hang on your door. IMO, back then, that 'za was just awful. Very doughy, but terrible everything else.

We had the Rathskellar (-er) on West too. That was good. I can't remember what sort of concoction it was known for, but I remember something there being a favorite of mine. Had a lot of cheese, not unlike French Onion Soup, but it wasn't that. Maybe chili? The mists of time ...

Who remembers sundaes at the Oak Room? mmm ....
When I lived on East (the Woman's College campus), we called that little shop the East Dope, short for East Campus Dope Shop. The link above doesn't really deal with any shops on East... a Duke and East Campus that existed perhpas 20 years before your arrival. The Dope Shop ladies who worked behind the counter prepared the hot dogs, hamburgers, milkshakes, and served the Cokes. (There was even a small sized Coke which cost a nickle.)

The Rathskeller available during my tenure was in Chapel Hill. It was one of several innovative (for the times) restaurants owned by the Danziger family. It was known for the unique décor in multiple rooms and various dishes such as a steak and grilled onions on a sizzling hot flat iron skillet (The Gambler) and the lava hot lasagna. It was quite dark making it difficult to read the many notes written on the walls or carved into the tables and benches.

For decades the Oak Room was a delightful choice for dining where white tablecloths graced the tables.

One other aspect of campus dining back during the 50s, 60s and into the 70s was how much was made from scratch using fresh ingredients. The Duke Dining Halls earned some awards under the leadership of Ted Minah who brought the operation up from unpopular to cutting edge for college dining. Here's a link to an article about Mr. Minah and what he accomplished.http://blogs.library.duke.edu/magazine/2008/10/29/dining-at-duke/

I know that's more than you asked for, but it is an aspect of the past that is a bit interesting.

[Reilly]

Well, I thought so at first, but then a quick google search said something about the basement of a west campus Union building.

http://www.dukestores.duke.edu/about/history.php

I don't remember know what it was called. There was SOME place called the dope shop! ....

Yes, the brick building where the post office was on East Campus in the 1980s housed a little snack shop that was called the Dope Shop (but I've learned from these boards that the 'real' Dope Shop was on West in the 1950s/60s and was much more beloved).

I think the East Campus/brick/next-to-the-P.O. Dope Shop of the 1980s was the first place I ever saw a bagel (back then bagels were not everywhere as they are today). And it was not a good looking or appetizing bagel at that. Said bagel was being held/eaten by a short, wet-haired girl who looked stressed, and she was off to some 8 a.m. class, and the weather had started to turn, and it was just a moment when college didn't seem all that great. I think she was drinking a Diet Coke, too.

[SilkyJ]

I'm surprised how little disparagement there is here of this practice, which seems in many cases motivated to give kids an athletic advantage at the expense of other kids who "play by the rules - without bending them."

...

To me it's distasteful at best.

I know you put "rules" in quotes, but no one is really bending or breaking rules here. If the "rule" says that you have the ability to move up or down a grade, then I have no problem with it. When I moved to Philadelphia and entered a prep school (at grade 7) they wanted me to repeat 6th grade as I was young for my year and was probably going to be a late-bloomer on top of that. Most of the motivation was athletic, but some was emotional/social adjustment-related I'm sure. My parents and I discussed and decided against it as I was "ahead" of my age academically, and didn't want to be repeating courses. That said, no one saw anything malicious or felt like it was bending the rules to go the other way. (I was also 5'2" entering sophomore year and so was definitely at a disadvantage athletically...so its not like they were crazy for suggesting it. I'm a September bday, FWIW)

Interestingly, I had dinner with a very close friend last night and he commented on the fact that he repeated Kindergarten or did an extra year of Pre-K. He attributes that to his ability to earn a golf scholarship to Georgetown out of high school, and says he highly doubts he would have been able to given where he was as a soph/junior (i.e. what would have been his junior/senior years had he not done that extra year). I certainly see that as a "positive" outcome and don't look at that as distasteful at all. Perhaps when we only focus on the top level of players and the impact there, then the decision to hold back can look more malicious or artificial, but this is being done everywhere and with results that help a lot of young men and women.

[brevity]

Said bagel was being held/eaten by a short, wet-haired girl who looked stressed, and she was off to some 8 a.m. class, and the weather had started to turn, and it was just a moment when college didn't seem all that great. I think she was drinking a Diet Coke, too.

"I think I know that girl." -- Everybody

[Indoor66]

Yes, the brick building where the post office was on East Campus in the 1980s housed a little snack shop that was called the Dope Shop (but I've learned from these boards that the 'real' Dope Shop was on West in the 1950s/60s and was much more beloved).

The 'real' Dope Shop dates back to the '30s and was a fixture well into the 70's. I do not know when it closed but I was in it in the mid-seventies if my old memory has not failed me.

[-jk]

The 'real' Dope Shop dates back to the '30s and was a fixture well into the 70's. I do not know when it closed but I was in it in the mid-seventies if my old memory has not failed me.

I think it closed with the opening of the Bryan Center.

-jk

[duke79]

I know you put "rules" in quotes, but no one is really bending or breaking rules here. If the "rule" says that you have the ability to move up or down a grade, then I have no problem with it. When I moved to Philadelphia and entered a prep school (at grade 7) they wanted me to repeat 6th grade as I was young for my year and was probably going to be a late-bloomer on top of that. Most of the motivation was athletic, but some was emotional/social adjustment-related I'm sure. My parents and I discussed and decided against it as I was "ahead" of my age academically, and didn't want to be repeating courses. That said, no one saw anything malicious or felt like it was bending the rules to go the other way. (I was also 5'2" entering sophomore year and so was definitely at a disadvantage athletically...so its not like they were crazy for suggesting it. I'm a September bday, FWIW)

Interestingly, I had dinner with a very close friend last night and he commented on the fact that he repeated Kindergarten or did an extra year of Pre-K. He attributes that to his ability to earn a golf scholarship to Georgetown out of high school, and says he highly doubts he would have been able to given where he was as a soph/junior (i.e. what would have been his junior/senior years had he not done that extra year). I certainly see that as a "positive" outcome and don't look at that as distasteful at all. Perhaps when we only focus on the top level of players and the impact there, then the decision to hold back can look more malicious or artificial, but this is being done everywhere and with results that help a lot of young men and women.


I have experience with this "strategy" for both myself and my daughter. I repeated the 8th grade when I went from a very mediocre public school to an elite private high school that still had a small 8th grade. I was young for my class (late November birthday) and would have been 16 as a senior in high school (for half the year, at least). I was also small for my age and, in retrospect, immature. And it was an enormous leap academically from the junior high school I attended to this new school, even repeating the 8th grade. I was also an aspiring and avid hockey player and I definitely needed that extra year to physically mature. I'm not sure if helped me in the long run but definitely did not hurt me in any way I can think of. I ended up graduating from high school when I was 18 and turned 19 in my freshman year at Duke, like most other kids.

We started our daughter at age 4 (Mid-November birthday) in kindergarten. She went to a public, one-room school house (right out of a Norman Rockwell painting) that had a combination kindergarten/First grade. At the end of her first year, her teacher (whom I adored, not only because she was a huge Duke BB fan. LOL) thought our daughter could use an extra year at the school, not for intellectual reasons but for developmental reasons. So we kept her there for three years instead of two. She went on to do fine the rest of her academic career and is graduating from high school at age 18, like most of the other kids in her class. I think it helped her to repeat that first year but who really knows.

I do find it a little "sick" (if that is the right word) to hold a kid back just for athletic reasons but I know it happens. And some kids do have better high school careers - athletically and academically - if that they are more physically mature.

[cspan37421]

I know you put "rules" in quotes, but no one is really bending or breaking rules here. If the "rule" says that you have the ability to move up or down a grade, then I have no problem with it. When I moved to Philadelphia and entered a prep school (at grade 7) they wanted me to repeat 6th grade as I was young for my year and was probably going to be a late-bloomer on top of that. Most of the motivation was athletic, but some was emotional/social adjustment-related I'm sure. My parents and I discussed and decided against it as I was "ahead" of my age academically, and didn't want to be repeating courses. That said, no one saw anything malicious or felt like it was bending the rules to go the other way. (I was also 5'2" entering sophomore year and so was definitely at a disadvantage athletically...so its not like they were crazy for suggesting it. I'm a September bday, FWIW)

Interestingly, I had dinner with a very close friend last night and he commented on the fact that he repeated Kindergarten or did an extra year of Pre-K. He attributes that to his ability to earn a golf scholarship to Georgetown out of high school, and says he highly doubts he would have been able to given where he was as a soph/junior (i.e. what would have been his junior/senior years had he not done that extra year). I certainly see that as a "positive" outcome and don't look at that as distasteful at all. Perhaps when we only focus on the top level of players and the impact there, then the decision to hold back can look more malicious or artificial, but this is being done everywhere and with results that help a lot of young men and women.

Yeah, by rules I mean guidelines. Perhaps in some states they are more akin to rules. There are usually exceptions, sometimes quite limited and well-delineated. IMO if you're holding a kid back in school so they can have a benefit on the athletic field of play, that's bending the rules. It's really only breaking them if you do something dishonest to get it approved. If you're merely persuasive, and that's all it takes, well, bully for you. Maybe you can sleep at night and look in the mirror. I'm not sure i could.

But IMO it is distasteful if one is held back in a school setting solely for an athletic advantage and you end up getting a scholarship that would have gone to someone else who was in the age-appropriate grade. Another way of saying, I don't feel holding back solely for athletic reason is legitimate. If EVERY prospective NCAA athlete graduated HS at 19, I would have no problem with it. Level playing field. But not every kid or parent is like that. And where does it end? Everyone is going to try to work the system for their advantage. But now it's not so much who is getting an extra advantage. It's who isn't. Those who are "stupid" enough to go through HS with their age peers are the ones at a disadvantage. And there's something awry with our society when that's the case. Just the opinion of another late November kid ... er, fogey.

[DukeandMdFan]

"Things turn out best for those that make the best of the way things turn out"

I had a late birthday (October in a school system based on calendar year). My parents held me back becuase my speech made me difficult to understand, but then I skipped most of kindergarten, moving to 1st grade around Thanksgiving. Because I had a late birthday, I was one of the last ones to get a drivers license and started college at age 17. I usually dated girls who were in younger grades than I was, but that was the norm in my area. I don't know how I would be different if I was the oldest kid in the class rather than one of the younger ones. I'm sure I would have had a more successful HS athletic career, but I don't know if I would have ended up being a better player at age 21 if I had grown up competing with younger kids. I tell myself that I ended up being a better player because I wasn't playing against younger kids.

Where I live now is based on a Sept 1 birthday. It isn't uncommon for kids to start late. My oldest daughter was born late-July and has always been one of the youngest in her class. She probably would have had a more successful athletic career if she started school a year later. Perhaps, schoolwork would have been easier if she was older. But, she did well in sports and school, is well-adjusted and has many friends. She starts college in the fall shortly after turning 18.

My youngest son had a mid-August birthday and, at my wife's suggestion, we talked to many people about him starting late and got mixed reviews. Most parents who started their kid late were glad they made that decision. We decided to give him another year of half-day preschool even though his preschool teacher thought he should start on time as he was physically, mentally, and emotionally ready. However, my wife (December birthday) thought that he would benefit when it came time for high school and college if he was a little more mature. (Plus, she enjoyed the extra time at home with him.) He is small, but athletic so he "played up" in sports in elementary school. As a result, his teammates were not his classmates and were often a couple grades ahead of him. He still had friend on teams and in school, but they were a different set of friends. Now, he is in middle school and is small for his age and late to mature. I'm glad he started late for social reasons, although I wonder if he would be a better player if he had been competing in P.E. class and at recess with kids who were older. I know he would be more knowledgeable at the moment if he started on time, but I think it will be a wash in the end.

An added benefit for me is that paying for three college educations over ten years will be easier than paying for it over nine years...

Regarding college basketball, it does seem silly for players to go to prep school for an extra year and then leave college early for the NBA. However, that might be the path that gives the best chance of a player reaching the NBA.