This article was downloaded by: [Universitaetsbibliothek Dortmund]On: 17 October 2014, At: 07:55Publisher: RoutledgeInforma Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered office: Mortimer House,37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK

Educational ResearchPublication details, including instructions for authors and subscription information:http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/rere20

‘Does it matter when children start school?’Anne West a & Andreas Varlaam aa Centre for Educational Research, London School of EconomicsPublished online: 09 Jul 2006.

To cite this article: Anne West & Andreas Varlaam (1990) ‘Does it matter when children start school?’, Educational Research,32:3, 210-217, DOI: 10.1080/0013188900320308

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/0013188900320308

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the “Content”) containedin the publications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis, our agents, and our licensors make norepresentations or warranties whatsoever as to the accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of theContent. Any opinions and views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors, andare not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Content should not be relied upon andshould be independently verified with primary sources of information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable forany losses, actions, claims, proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilities whatsoeveror howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to or arising out of the use ofthe Content.

This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Any substantial or systematicreproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing, systematic supply, or distribution in anyform to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions

210 Educational Research Volume 32 Number 3 Winter 1990

'Does it matter when childrenstart school?'

Anne West and Andreas Varlaam, Centre for Educational Research,London School of Economics

Summary

This paper surveys research carried out into the effects of age of entry to infant school. Al-though the majority of studies in this area show differences in performance between the ol-dest and youngest children, it is not clear whether these are the result of the children's ageor the amount of schooling received. One large-scale study, however, shows that pre-schooleducation is an overriding factor. A number of local education authorities (LEAs) havestarted admitting children into the infant school in the year in which they are five. The large-ly qualitative research in this area suggests strongly that for these schemes to be effective,high-quality provision of the sort offered in nursery schools and classes needs to be made.

Introduction

A substantial body of information has accrued about the effects of the age at which childrenstart school. This review looks at the subject from several different angles. First of all, policiesabout age of entry to school, both in England and in other countries, are explored. Second-ly, research looking at the effects of age when starting school and length of schooling is sur-veyed; this review is selective, but includes a number of the most recent studies. The thirdsection focuses on the effects of pre-school education; and the fourth section looks at thequality of learning experiences in nursery classes and infant classes, drawing on researchcarried out in this country. In the final section, the main findings and their policy implicationsare discussed.

Policies on age of entry

Full-time education in the rest of Europe generally begins later than it does in England. OnlyEnglish and Dutch children are required to receive full-time education from the age of fiveyears. All other countries within central and southern Europe (e.g. France, Austria) requireattendance from six, whilst the Scandinavian countries do not make school a statutory re-quirement until children are seven years old. As a corollary, state pre-school education ismuch less readily available in the UK (and Eire) than in other member-countries of the Euro-pean Community (see Woodhead, 1986; Sharp, 1988).

Recent trends have resulted in even younger children starting school in England. Ad-mission at four is becoming the general policy for an increasing number of authorities

AcknowledgementsThe authors would like to thank all those who contributed to this paper, in particular, Desmond Nuttall,Wendy Scott, Pam Sammons and Robert West for helpful comments, and Bernie Elsome-Jones and Bar-bara Andrews for the word processing of the paper.

Address for correspondence: Centre for Educational Research, London School of Economics, HoughtonStreet, London WC2A 2AE.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

itaet

sbib

lioth

ek D

ortm

und]

at 0

7:55

17

Oct

ober

201

4

'Does it matter when children start school?' 211

(Cleave ef a/., 1985; Sharp, 1988). While nursery education in recent years has been 'slow-ly and steadily extending its coverage of the under-fives, primary education has too, espe-cially between 1983-84 when an additional 26,000 pre-school pupils were admitted intoprimary classes' (Woodhead, 1986, p. 10).

Cleave ef al. (1985), in their survey of LEA policy on admission to infant or first school,revealed that in recent years there has been a marked and increasing trend in England to-wards admitting more children under statutory age to infant school. In particular, there is agrowing tendency to admit them annually in the September of the school year in which theywill become five, instead of the more widespread practice of admitting them termly at rising-five or at five. Cleave ef al. conclude that mere is a need to give very careful considerationto ways of minimizing inequality while maintaining the quality of the child's early educa-tional experiences.

Effects of age of entry and length of schooling

Russell and Startup (1986) reviewed research carried out over the past 20 years which haslooked at academic achievement and the child's month or season or birth. Children born be-tween September and December tend to succeed more than those born between Januaryand April, who, in turn, perform better than the remainder born between May and August.This effect appears to persist in secondary school and into university with a disproportionatenumber of the 'older' students graduating. However, by the time they graduate the relation-ship has altered; for the first time, the youngest within each year are at an advantage andtend to leave university with better degrees.

A more recent study by Mortimore ef al. (1988) explored the effects of children's age in astudy of children attending 50 junior schools in inner London. They found differences in atti-tudes to school, a greater incidence of behavioural difficulties and lower attainment in read-ing, writing and mathematics in the younger members of the sample. These differencesindicate that younger children are at risk of experiencing greater difficulties in adjustment tojunior school. The results of their analyses suggest that it is important to promote teachers'awareness of the impact of age differences within year-based classes of pupils; in particular,amongst any year group, younger children are likely to have had less infant school experi-ence than other groups, and this helps to account for age differences in attainment at entryto junior school.

A number of explanations can be put forward to explain these month-of-birth effects: first,the effects of length of education; secondly, the fact that summer-born children generallybegin school as tne youngest in their year group ('age-group position' effects); and thirdly,the fact that the summer-born children start school at a younger age ('starting age' effects).A fourth factor, possibly independent of the other three is the effect of term-of-entry toschool. A number of studies have investigated the effects of one or more of these factorsand, in some cases, tried to ascertain which (if any) single factor (length of time in school,'age-group position' effects or 'starting age' effects) is the crucial factor.

Length of education

A number of studies have found length of time at school to be a crucial factor. Fogelmanand Gorbach (1978), for example, examined data from the National Child DevelopmentStudy (NCDS), a longitudinal study following children born in one week of March 1958.Their data allow a direct test of the association between length of schooling and attainmentat the age of 11 years. After certain exclusions (such as those children who had receivedany nursery education, which was relatively rare at that time), the NCDS provided a sampleof about 10,300 children. These divided approximately equally into two groups: those whostarted their infant schooling between the age of 4 years 6 months and 4 years 11 months('earl/ starters) and those who started between the age of 5 years and 5 years 6 months('late' starters). Fogelman and Gorbach examined the association between age of startingschool and measures of attainment and behaviour, administered when the children were in

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

itaet

sbib

lioth

ek D

ortm

und]

at 0

7:55

17

Oct

ober

201

4

212 Educational Research Volume 32 Number 3 Winter 1990

their final year of primary schooling. No differences between the 'ear l / and 'late' starterson the behaviour measure were found. On each of the other measures (a general ability testscore, reading comprehension test scores and mathematics test scores), significant differen-ces were found in favour of the 'early' starters. The nature of the sample - all being born inone week - and the large number of background variables which it was possible to takeinto account, suggests strongly that the differences found are due to length of schooling, al-though 'starting age' effects could also account for the variation found.

Booth (1980) also examined the effects of length of schooling upon early reading attain-ment in Scotland. In his study, standardization was carried out on children of different ages,but who had started school at the same time (since there is a single school entry date forchildren in the Grampian Region). He found that mean test scores were lower one year,when the amount of teaching was reduced by about 5 per cent as a result of school clo-sures. He contends that the 'quantity of educational input is a major determinant of pupilachievement, not least in the early years of schooling' (p. 58). However, educational inputwas defined in very broad terms, and, as such, the conclusions should be"treated with cau- '•tion.

Age effects

Other studies, however, suggest that the child's age per se {'age-group position' or 'startingage' effects) is a crucial factor. A study carried out in Sweden, where all children bom dur-ing any one year start school together and thus all receive the same amount of schooling,found that the youngest children in the year group were preponderant amongst those withlearning difficulties (Berglund, 1967; see also Williams, Davies and Ferguson, 1970).

A more recent study was carried out by Davis, Trimble and Vincent (1980) in Kentucky,USA. The aim of the research was to find out whether age of entry to school affected the laterschool achievement of a sample of 54,000 children. The majority of the children were sixyears old on entering school, but approximately one-third of the sample had started schoolbefore their sixth birthday. The study was not longitudinal, but three cohorts of children werestudied: first, fourth and eighth grades. Test scores of those who were five when they startedschool were compared with those who were six when they started. Significant differenceswere found in the children's reading, language, mathematics and total achievement score onthe Comprehensive Test of Basic Skills, in both the first and the fourth grade samples, withthose starting at six years doing better than the five-year-old entrants. By the time the eighthgrade was reached, however, the six-year-old entrants only performed better in the case ofreading. Although it appears that these differences are the result of the children's age, it is notclear whether they are 'age-group position' effects or 'starting age' effects.

Term-of-entry effects

A further study by Hughes, Pinkerton and Plewis (1979) investigated children's difficulties onstarting infant scnooi. Their primary aim was to provide descriptive information on the na-ture arid extent of children's difficulties on starting school. This was gathered by asking tea-chers to rate how well children were coping in 12 specific areas. They also looked at howfar these difficulties were affected by factors concerned with organization of school intake,including trie age at which children start and the time of year they start. They found that dif-ficulties were much more frequent amongst children starting in January compared with thosestarting in September. The difference was particularly pronounced for items concerned withcooperation {'co-operation with other children'), persistence with activities ('concentration','use of play materials' and 'self-reliance') and language ('verbalising in school work' and'following instructions'). Their analyses suggest that the factor underlying these differences isthe proportion of new entrants in the class - i.e. the January entrants may have more diffi-culties because they are generally part of a small group joining an already establishedclass, while the September entrants are usually part of a larger group and, in some cases,make up the entire class themselves.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

itaet

sbib

lioth

ek D

ortm

und]

at 0

7:55

17

Oct

ober

201

4

'Does it matter when children start school?' 213

Effects of pre-school education

Although the studies outlined above indicate that time of entry to school affects performanceand adjustment {either because of the effects of age or length of education), a recent studyby Osborn and Milbank (1987) indicates that pre-school education can have an overridingeffect. Their study was based on data obtained in the Child Health and Education Study, anational longitudinal survey of all children born in one week of 1970. Their overall findingsprovide conclusive evidence that pre-school education provided by ordinary nursery schoolsand playgroups can have a positive effect on the cognitive development of the children whoattend them.

They also explored the effects of age of entry to infant school; after taking into accountsocio-economic and family factors, and the child's pre-school experience, they found noconsistent evidence to suggest that there was any educational or behavioural advantage ordisadvantage for children who entered infant reception classes before the statutory age. Thisfinding contrasts markedly with the consistently positive effects associated with attendance atpre-school nursery schools and playgroups; children who attended these performed better incognitive and educational tests up to the age of ten years and performance was sustained ir-respective of the age at which they started Infant school. This study strongly suggests thatwhilst the pre-school curriculum, with its emphasis on learning through play and social con-tact with staff and other children, can have definite cognitive and behavioural benefits, theregime in the normal infant reception classes may be less appropriate for all under-fives.

A number of studies in the USA lend support to Osborn and Milbank's (1987} conclusionthat pre-school education can have long-lasting effects on performance. Findings from theConsortium for Longitudinal Studies (see Lazar and Darlington, 1982) suggest that atten-dance at a 'well-run' pre-school programme reduced the risk of school failure. In addition,children who attended early childhood programmes surpassed their 'controls' on the Stan-ford-Binet intelligence test for several years after the programmes had ended.

Woodhead (1985), in reviewing me long-term effects of pre-school education notes thatthe publication of data from the Consortium for Longitudinal Studies 'provides, for the firsttime substantial scientific evidence that pre-school education can be an effective form of in-tervention in disadvantage, effective not just in the short-term enhancement of abilities, butin the long-term determination of life course' (p. 150). For a pre-school programme to be ef-fective, however, certain features appear to be important: careful planning and implementa-tion; low child-to-staff ratios; high levels of professional support for project personnel; atleast moderate levels of parental involvement in the programme; and a cognitively focusedprogramme, designed within a clear framework of educational methods and goals.

More recently in their report of the High/Scope Pre-school Curriculum Study, Schwein-hart, Weikart and Lamer (1986) note that in three 'well-implemented pre-school curriculummodels' the mean IQ of the children who had attended these high-quality pre-school pro-grammes rose markedly, but self reports at age 15 years indicate greater social alienationin the 'programmed learning' approach in which the teacher initiates activities and the childresponds to them: The latest interpretation from the study, tenuous though the data are, nowmust be that a high quality pre-school curriculum is based on child initiated learning acti-vities (p. 43). They conclude that, 'while good early childhood programs are an effectiveway to improve the life chances of disadvantaged children, formal academic programs asrepresented by direct instruction learning models may be inadequate to the task, becausethey fail to have the desired social-behavioural consequences' (p. 43).

Quality of learning experiences in nursery and infant classes

One of the ways a number of LEAs in England have responded to the reduced amount ofschooling summer-born children receive, especially where there is a paucity of pre-schooleducation, has been to admit these children to school in the September prior to their fifthbirthday, when they are still four years old. The research in this area has been small-scaleand largely qualitative.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

itaet

sbib

lioth

ek D

ortm

und]

at 0

7:55

17

Oct

ober

201

4

214 Educational Research Volume 32 Number 3 Winter 1990

Perry (1982) looked at the differences between primary and nursery education for four-year-old pupils by observing five pupils: one from a nursery school, one from a nurseryclass and one from each of three primary schools in one town. The study indicated that inprimary schools four-year-olds can spend a quarter of their time accommodating to primaryroutines. They can also have much less opportunity to develop and use their language thannursery pupils. However, if the pupil-to-teacher ratio is improved to near nursery standardsby the addition of a nursery assistant or by limiting the number and age range of the pupils,and the education is child-initiated, then the education may be otherwise akin to nurseryeducation. If, however, the four-year-olds are grouped with older pupils and the educationis teacher-initiated, they may not only fail to communicate with either staff or peers, but willfail to achieve success in tasks allotted to them.

In Bedfordshire a 'four-plus' pilot scheme has been set up to study the effects of a once-a-year entry into school at the beginning of the academic year in which the child reaches five;it was found that the children involved in the 10 pilot-study schools

showed their resilience and coped extremely well with situations that could not be de- :scribed as appropriate for their particular stage of development. The need for in-ser-vice training was obvious, partly because some of the teachers had not been trainedfor the age group and also because new ground was being covered (Thomas, 1987,p. 11).

In both nursery classes and schools, and in classes of four-plus children, the NurseryNurse Examining Board (NNEB) training was seen as being particularly relevant, especiallyif the teachers concerned had not had early-years training. More specifically, on admis-sions, the study demonstrated that full-time places should be introduced gradually, startingfrom one day a week and progressing slowly; part-time admission should, it was felt, be thenorm at the start of a four-plus year.

As a result of the change in policy, younger children were being admitted to the nurseryand the curriculum on offer in the nursery was therefore no longer appropriate. Anotherproblem which emerged from having four-plus units in schools was that it was seen as anextension of a reception class, with the curriculum not differing from that provided in the re-ception class. As a result of the pilot scheme,

a curriculum is being developed that suits the individual schools but has a core ele-ment running through it. The main aim is to have less prescription from the adult andmore involvement or the children in helping to determine their own curriculum (Tho-mas, 1987 p. 14).

Sestini (1987) explored the quality of the learning experiences of four-year-olds in nur-sery and infant classes by systematic observation of the curriculum activities of a randomsample of four-year-olds in 10 nursery classes and 20 infant classes. In infant classes acti-vities were suggested by the teacher and involvement was teacher-directed. Most of the pre-reading number and writing activities were 'high yield', in that children were generallyworking deliberately, concentrating and the tasks were structured and goal-directed. Al-though the activities were frequently cognitively complex, there was evidence that somechildren were not being challenged by the tasks, and examples of novel, creative and im-aginative activities were rare. Play activities in school were constrained by lack of space,time allowed and facilities and by expectations of the use of the materials provided. Therewas very little outside play. 'Children did not elicit the teachers' involvement in their play',and in most play activities there was 'little evidence of cognitive challenge' (p. 27).

Generally, in nursery settings, children initiated activities and moved around at will,though there were implicit expectations of participating in 'story' and other group activities.Pre-structured activities met the 'high challenge' criteria, but they were also activities inwhich the adults tended to become involved. It emerged that children were most likely to beinvolved in play of a 'high cognitive challenge' when with an adult who was interacting withthem and trying to extend that activity.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

itaet

sbib

lioth

ek D

ortm

und]

at 0

7:55

17

Oct

ober

201

4

'Does it matter when children start school?' 215

This study indicated that the four-year-olds in school adjusted readily to the expectationsmade of them and enjoyed school routines, 'but it does not follow that all the expectationsmade were therefore appropriate' (p. 28). The assumption that, if children are introduced tostructured learning activities earlier, they will develop more competence, is not borne out byevidence of wide variation between children in rates of motivation. Tests of basic skills car-ried out on the target children showed no difference between nursery and infant groups, buta wide spread in performance across all the tasks.

Stevenson (1987) also looked at the young four-year-olds in nursery and infant classes.Children's reactions and responses to their environment in infant classes were examined,using observation and interviews. Stevenson argues that when children are provided withsituations and materials appropriate to their age and stage of development, they respond byaccepting the challenge, playing out and developing their themes according to their maturityand experience. The paper concludes that the greatest challenge to the teachers of four-year-olds in schools is having to cope with classes of up to 28 children, with only part-timeancillary assistance, inadequate resources and pressure from the community to maintain acurriculum more suited to the needs of the five- to six-year-old children.

More recently in the inner London boroughs of Westminster and Camden an early entryto infant school pilot exercise was set up, in which four primary schools started admittingchildren who were not five till after Easter ('other fours') into infant school in January insteadof in April when they would have been 'rising five'. An evaluation of this exercise (West,1988) round that from the point of view of the children's parents, the pilot exercise ap-peared to be a success, with practically all the parents feeling that their own child was readyto start school. Their views on early entry generally varied, with the majority feeling it was agood idea, although a number of parents highlighted the need for flexibility in the system,acknowledging that the needs of children vary and that some children are not ready to startearly. No significant differences between the younger and older groups of children emergedwhen class teachers rated how well they had settled into school. From the point of view ofthe staff at the schools, the pilot exercise was perceived as a success by some but not byothers. Concerns about having the 'other fours' in vertically grouped classes were ex-pressed, as were concerns about the effects on the nursery class of losing the oldest children,who acted as 'role models'. Training for work with under-fives was another area highlightedby classteachers. Views on early entry differed markedly; some respondents were very posi-tive, others felt different options should be considered - maybe once-a-year entry in Septem-ber, or a separate class for the youngest children with extra staffing and additionalprovision.

Discussion and policy implications

The majority of studies looking at time of entry to infant school show differences in perfor-mance between autumn- and summer-born children in England (and between oldest andyoungest children in the USA and Sweden). The evidence suggests that these differences inperformance are due both to the difference in the age of the children concerned ('age-groupposition' or 'starting age' effects) and to the amount of schooling received. Pre-school edu-cation, however, might be an overriding factor, with time of entry not having significant in-dependent effect. Pre-school education has also been shown to have long-lasting effects onthe performance of deprived children on specific programmes in the USA. Hughes, Pinker-ton and Plewis (1979) in their research highlight the fact that children entering school afterthe start of the academic year have to adjust to a group which is already established. Alsochildren who enter school in January or April join a much a larger group; those starting inSeptember have a much more favourable pupil-to-teacher ratio (approximating that foundin nursery schools), and this may be another factor contributing to their superior perfor-mance. More detailed, carefully planned longitudinal research needs to be carried out inorder to help clarify the situation.

A number of LEAs have, however, for a variety of reasons, started admitting children intoinfant school in the year in which they are five (so the youngest children to be admittedcould be 4 years 1 day). The largely qualitative research in this area suggests strongly that

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

itaet

sbib

lioth

ek D

ortm

und]

at 0

7:55

17

Oct

ober

201

4

216 Educational Research Volume 32 Number 3 Winter 1990

for these schemes to be effective, high-quality provision of the sort offered in nursery schoolsand classes needs to be made. Attendance should begin on a staggered, part-time basis; acurriculum appropriate to the needs of four-year-olds should be offered, which is child-cen-tred rather than adult-directed. As Weir (1988) points out: 'Four is a distinctive age andstage - the needs of children of this age are distinctive and, if the curriculum is to respondeffectively, it also needs to change and become distinctive' (pp. 5-6). Other requirementsare for an adequate adult-to-child ratio, with staff trained for the age group concerned; ac-cess to outside play facilities and space both in and out of doors is also needed. Provisionmatching that in nursery schools or classes seems to be vital for children's performance to bemaximized, and the children concerned should be with children of a similar age.

Clark also made some pertinent points. She notes that many teachers in primary schoolslack an appreciation of the

educational potential of activities available in pre-school units, seen merely as 'p la/in contrast to 'work'; lack of resources, particularly of adults, to enable the necessaryadult-child dialogue to take place; pressures from parents or administrators to be'seen' to be teaching the basics interpreted very narrowly; lack of appropriate train-ing, either pre-service or in-service of some of the teachers working in receptionclasses and now possibly with even younger children (Clark, 1988, p. 278).

Mortimore er al. (1988) note that if an LEA has a policy of admitting all children who willreach the age of five during the course of the academic year, at the start of the Autumn term'great care needs to be taken to ensure that they are provided with appropriate educationalexperiences rather than just being thrown in with the other children' (p. 278). Amongst theirrecommendations are a parental involvement programme and special monitoring of pro-gress sustained into junior school; to aid teachers' recollection of children's ages, a proce-dure whereby names of pupils on attendance registers are grouped in birth order could beinstituted.

To conclude, further carefully planned longitudinal research is needed to help clarify whythe performance of the oldest and youngest children in a given year group differs, what rolethe difference in the children's age plays, what role the amount of schooling plays and whatrole pre-school education plays. From a practical point of view, for children to benefit fromearly entry to infant school, it seems likely that provision on a par with that needed to ensureeffective pre-school education is necessary; in addition, careful consideration to the provi-sion for the youngest children in a year group should be made, so that these children arenot disadvantaged on account of their age.

References

BERGLUND, G.W. (1967). 'A note on intelligence and season of birth', British Journal of Psychology, 58, 147-51.BOOTH, G.K. (1980). 'Effects of length of schooling upon early reading attainment', Educational Research, 23, 57-8.CLARK, M.M. (1988). Children under Five: Educational Research and Evidence. London: Gordon and Breach.CLEAVE, S., BARKER LUNN, J. and SHARP, C. (1985). 'Local education authority policy on admission to infant/first

school'. Educational Research, 27, 40-43.DAVIS, B.G., TRIMBLE, C.S. and VINCENT, D.R. (1980). "Does age of entrance affect school achievement?', Elemen-

tary School Journal, 80, 133-43.FOGELMAN, K. and GORBACH, P. (1978). 'Age of starting school and attainment at 11 ' , Educational Research, 2 1 ,

65-6.HUGHES, M., PINKERTON, G. and PLEWIS, I. (1979). 'Children's difficulties on starting infant school'. Journal of Child

Psychology and Psychiatry, 20, 187-96.LAZAR, I. and DARLINGTON, R.B. (1982). 'Lasting effects of early education', Monographs of the Society for Research

in Child Development, 47, 2-3 , Serial No. 195.MORTIMORE, P., SAMMONS, P., STOLL, L., LEWIS, D. and ECOB, R. (1988). School Matters. Wells: Open Books.OSBORN, A. and MILBANK, D. (1987). The Effects of Early Childhood Education. Oxford: Oxford University Press.PERRY, B.M.L (1982). 'The four-year-old in school', Educational Research, 24, 303-4.RUSSELL, R.J.H. and STARTUP, M.J. (1986). 'Month of birth and academic achievement', Personality and Individual

Differences, 7, 839-46.SCHWEINHART, L.J., WEIKART, D.P. and LARNER, M.B. (1986). 'Consequences of three pre-school curriculum models

through age 15', Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 1, 15-45.SESTINI, E. (1987). The quality of learning experiences of four-year-olds in nursery and infant classes.' In:

NFER/SCDC Seminar Report, Four-year-olds in School: Policy and Practice, 26-33. Windsor: NFER/SCDC.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

itaet

sbib

lioth

ek D

ortm

und]

at 0

7:55

17

Oct

ober

201

4

'Does it matter when children start school?' 217

SHARP, C. (1988). 'Starting school at four', Research Papers in Education, 3, 64-90.STEVENSON, C. (1987). The young four-year old in nursery and infant classes: challenges and constraints.' In:

NFER/SCDC Seminar Report, Four-year-olds in School: Policy and Practice, 34-43. Windsor NFER/SCDC.THOMAS, I. (1987). 'The Bedfordshire 4+ pilot scheme: some issues and implications.' In: NFER/SCDC Seminar Re-

port, Four-year-olds in School: Policy and Practice, 11-16. Windsor: NFER/SCDC.WEIR, R. (1988). Some elements of current practice. Paper given at NFER Conference, 'Starting School at Four: Plan-

ning for the Future', Solihull.WEST, A. (1988). Evaluation of the Early Entry to Infant School Pilot Exercise (RS 1193/88). London: ILEA.WILLIAMS, P., DAVIES, P. and FERGUSON, N. (1970). 'Season of birth and cognitive development', Nature, 228,

1033-6.WOODHEAD, M. (1985). 'Pre-school education has long-term effects but can they be generalised?', Oxford Review of

Education, 11 , 133-55.WOODHEAD, M. (1986). 'When should children go to school?', Primary Education Review, 10-13.

This research was carried out while both authors were at the Research and Statistics Branch,Inner London Education Authority.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

itaet

sbib

lioth

ek D

ortm

und]

at 0

7:55

17

Oct

ober

201

4