RESEARCH THAT BENEFITS CHILDREN AND FAMILIES

As a first grade teacher, I was disheartened at the beginning of each year when I received records for students from kindergarten that included children who were extremely below level, but they were sent to first grade anyway. It was beyond me how the administration expected me to “work a miracle” and get these children ready for 2nd grade when they had not even mastered kindergarten material. That is why the article “Holding Back: Retention Won’t Cure What Ails Students…” caught my attention.

Since the 1970s studies have demonstrated that retention does not have positive effects for most low-achieving students. Recent students have indicated that grade retention does not improve students’ chances for educational success down the road. In fact, research shows that retention is often harmful to academic development. Sometimes retention is suggested for nonacademic reasons…the student may not be mature enough or lacks social skills. Also children who are retained may not do better academically later in life. A study of 1, 539 Chicago school children who graduated from public kindergartens in 1986 indicate that children who are retained do not improve their academic performance as compared to other students their age or the other students in their grade. It was found that over time the students fall further and further behind. Grade retention also has the unintended consequence of contributing to the dropout rate.
Present research shows that retaining students greatly increased the likelihood of their dropping out of school. When comparing students with similar academic profiles in the early grades, it was found that 30 percent of those in the sample who were retained had dropped out of school by age 17. Only 21 percent of students who were not retained had dropped out by the same age. However, promoting low achieving students is not the answer either. School districts and administrators have to come up with creative ways of providing a long lasting quality education for its students. An example of a successful alternative strategy is the Chicago public schools’ Child Parent Center and Expansion Program. This program is over 30 years old and is a comprehensive intervention program for students in preschool to third grade. It emphasizes basic skills, parent involvement, and small class sizes. The good thing is that students who participate in this program are less likely to be candidates for retention.

In the experiences that I have witnessed, most of the parents have never truly agreed with retention and viewed it as a negative alternative. A few have just gone along with it because of not knowing what else to do. This article provides a positive outcome to an otherwise sad situation. No parent wants to hear that their child is behind and is not making adequate progress. However, if they have positive alternatives like summer tutoring or enrichment programs instead of retention for the next year, they may be more apt to listen to what the school has to say.

Reference:

Reynolds, A., Temple, J. & McCoy A. (October, 1997). Holding back: Retention won’t cure what ails students : North sports final edition. Chicago Tribune. Retrieved from http://ezp.waldenulibrary.org/login?url=http://search.proquest.com.ezp.waldenulibrary.org/docview/418337227?accountid=14872.