Are there any studies about children who are the youngest/oldest in their class and how 'well' they did in school/life?

[Shitemum]

My DD1 could start primary at just-turned 5 or could wait a year and start at nearly-6.

Is it better to wait a year or is being one of the youngest in the class an advantage in any way? I'm not worried about her adapting as she has been at nursery 6 hours a day since 2 yo and is very happy at school.
(Background: we currenty live in Spain where primary starts at 6yo but are considering moving back to the UK in 18-24 months).

I looked up a number of references on this on another thread a while back - I've got some bookmarked (links below). Generally you seem to be able to find research that says it doesn't matter too much as well as research that says the opposite. You have to remember that the effect can be statistically significant and still not affect a lot of children. My view is that being young in the year ON ITS OWN will usually work out OK, but if your child has other issues as well then it's more important. Anyway, the links.. (hope they are helpful to you).

nfer bibliography of relevent research

relevent article

mostly about school starting age, but some relevent info

this article suggests delayed entry doesn't improve outcomes

wow thanks snorkle!

sorry no, not got link and can't remember details. Was scottish research. But if your dd is a summer birthday she won't be youngest in Scotl;and

starsky - it might be one of the ones snorkle has linked to.

Most of the studies that I am aware of are to do with summer born babies who are often cited to be at a disadvantage. When i collect the data for my markbook for my classes I always highlight the summer born children as they may be the weaker members of a class.

My dd is one of the eldest in her class (she is 6) and she is at the top of her class and goes into higher classes for some of her lessons. They are sat on ability tables and I have noted that she is surrounded by children born before december. Certainly in the first few years the very young children do seem to struggle both socially and academically.

Both of my sisters are summer babies, one sister born at the end of July and the other at the end of August, they both struggled at school and well into secondary in particular in terms of literacy. Although in the end they both went to uni and one sister is now a nurse and the other in her last year at uni. Socially they both struggled as well.

But it all depends on so much, my dd has always been clever for her age, even when compared to children/ infants born in the same month. She also comes from a very supportive home where education is valued, we have always read to her and she has a natural interest in much of what she studies at school.

Many thanks for the links, will read them with interest. My ds is birthday is right at the end of February, and we live in Scotland. So, he will be pretty much the youngest in his year. Although only 2.10 I think he is brighy and will do OK, he has no other 'issues' aparty from normal toddler behaviour! I know I will have the choice whether to keep him back a year so he will be 5.6 when he starts school, or let him go when he would be 4.6. I am quite tempted to keep him back to be honest, as I can't see it doing any harm???

Hmm, I'm wondering now whether the effect in young children (of an autumn birthday being an advantage in the English system, presumably a spring one in Scotland) is carried right through - eg whether more of our successful candidates (I am a university lecturer) are autumn birthdays too. Anyone know? (I'm an April birthday, so towards the end of the year though not right at the end, but I skipped a year at 8 so from then on I was 9-19 months younger than everyone else - even bigger gap at university because some people had had gaps years. It worked out OK for me, but it's certainly true even quite late that it does make a difference.)

OP - I think it depends also on how nursery is going, being the oldest/most confident/largest child is great for some children's confidence, whereas others might get bored and 'switch off' or behave less well for that reason. But even if she's bright and might fall into the latter category, you've got the shift of school/country/language to factor in too, so perhaps best to play it safe.

That's what I am wondering really, if being young in his year will carry through my ds's whole school life. I know there are no certainties and you can't say for sure. BUT, if there was a strong liklihood it would affect him, even into secondary school I would keep him back.
What I would hate though is to keep him back a year and find then that he is unchallenged and finds things 'too easy' which would cause him to be bored or unmotivated in his later years.
Myself, my brother and sister were all successful at school and didn't struggle, academically anyway. It's hard to know really...

Some of the research says it does carry through and summer borns are less likely to do A levels & go to university, but interestingly do better at university once there. Other research thinks things have evened out by around age 12 or soon after. It's very difficult to know Starky - what's right for one child might not be best for another whatever the statistics say.

I know, it is an individual thing isn't it? Depends on the child etc etc. Why is nothing just straightforward