It is difficult to draw firm conclusions regarding long-term outcomes for students who experience delayed entry or kindergarten retention. Many researchers have investigated only short-term outcomes, neglecting the long-term consequences that could result from these practices. Others have examined only delayed entry or early retention but have not compared these two groups to typically progressing students in a single cohort of students. Additionally, although researchers are beginning to take into consideration other variables known to be related to achievement in examining outcomes, it remains unclear if the more negative outcomes that have been associated with retention are related to the overrepresentation of less privileged students in this group.Lincove and Painter (2006) reported some outcomes that were more positive for students that were not redshirted (E.X.: Not as likely to be arrested in high school, more likely to attend a 4 year college or university), in Lincove’s and Painter’s study (2006), delayed entry students showed a pattern of superior outcomes to retained students after the adjustment of prior differences in covariates. For example, among children with paid lunch, those in the retained group, in this specific group, were over six times more likely to be placed in special education in Grades 1–5 than children in the delayed entry group. Among those receiving free or reduced-price lunch, children in the retained group were over three times more likely to be placed in special education than children in the delayed entry group. Teacher ratings of attention in Grades 3 and 5 showed the same pattern of more positive outcomes for delayed entry than students that entered into kindergarten when they were eligible. In fifth grade, delayed entry children also were rated by teachers as having significantly better attitudes toward school. With regard to standardized test scores, the data show a clear pattern of higher scores among the delayed entry group than the retained group.