Years after being retained, students
have significantly lower achievement than similar students who were not
retained. Many retained students never catch up to their promoted same-age
peers with similarly low test scores. Whatever performance advantage retained
students have over their younger, same grade peers is short-lived, as they
typically fall behind these students after one or two years. Several
longitudinal studies indicate that, relative to low-achieving students who are
promoted to the next grade, retained students are significantly more likely to
drop out of school. After accounting for socioeconomic status and prior
performance, dropout rates for retained students often exceed comparable promoted
students by 49% or more.
have significantly lower achievement than similar students who were not
retained. Many retained students never catch up to their promoted same-age
peers with similarly low test scores. Whatever performance advantage retained
students have over their younger, same grade peers is short-lived, as they
typically fall behind these students after one or two years. Several
longitudinal studies indicate that, relative to low-achieving students who are
promoted to the next grade, retained students are significantly more likely to
drop out of school. After accounting for socioeconomic status and prior
performance, dropout rates for retained students often exceed comparable promoted
students by 49% or more.
This paper addresses the following
questions:
1. After children's growth rates in
achievement prior to retention (and other factors) are taken into account,
is grade retention associated with significantly lower levels of school achievement and higher rates of
school dropout?
2. Among children who are retained during the early school years, is
participation in a comprehensive
instructional intervention associated with improved school achievement and
a lower likelihood of dropping out of school? Does this participation lead to better performance than promotion with
remediation?
questions:
1. After children's growth rates in
achievement prior to retention (and other factors) are taken into account,
is grade retention associated with significantly lower levels of school achievement and higher rates of
school dropout?
2. Among children who are retained during the early school years, is
participation in a comprehensive
instructional intervention associated with improved school achievement and
a lower likelihood of dropping out of school? Does this participation lead to better performance than promotion with
remediation?
The study sample for this paper
includes students who enrolled in the public schools for at least six years
(from kindergarten to ninth grade) and whose school dropout status was known by
age 19. Children who have left the study or cannot be located are similar to
those that remain in the sample on measures of kindergarten achievement and
socioeconomic status. Information on grade retention and high school completion
as of January 2019 were obtained from school records. School records provided
descriptive information on children including gender, race, and name of the
school in which the student is enrolled at the end of each school year.
Standardized test scores in reading and math were obtained annually from the
beginning of kindergarten through ninth grade. Teacher and parent surveys were
used to obtain information on classroom adjustment, parent involvement, and
family background. Two measures of educational
attainment were used in analyzing the effects of retention. Data were
collected from school records, surveys, and interviews from youth and, if
necessary, their parents.
includes students who enrolled in the public schools for at least six years
(from kindergarten to ninth grade) and whose school dropout status was known by
age 19. Children who have left the study or cannot be located are similar to
those that remain in the sample on measures of kindergarten achievement and
socioeconomic status. Information on grade retention and high school completion
as of January 2019 were obtained from school records. School records provided
descriptive information on children including gender, race, and name of the
school in which the student is enrolled at the end of each school year.
Standardized test scores in reading and math were obtained annually from the
beginning of kindergarten through ninth grade. Teacher and parent surveys were
used to obtain information on classroom adjustment, parent involvement, and
family background. Two measures of educational
attainment were used in analyzing the effects of retention. Data were
collected from school records, surveys, and interviews from youth and, if
necessary, their parents.
Before investigating the association
between grade retention and high school
completion or dropout, a comprehensive set of predictors of retention was
examined, including child and family background, early adjustment indicators
(kindergarten and first grade academic
performance and achievement), and intervening school experiences (e.g.,
school mobility and special education placement). In order of magnitude, the
following factors increased the odds of being retained: low family income
(children eligible for a subsidized lunch had twice the risk of retention than
those not eligible); sex of child (boys had twice the risk of retention), and
number of school moves from ages 10 to 14. The following factors decreased the
odds of being retained: overage at kindergarten entry, number of years of
average or better parent involvement in school, reading and math achievement in
first grade, grade in reading in first grade, and math achievement in kindergarten.
Findings that the number of school moves increases the risk of retention and
parent involvement in school decreases the risk are relatively new, and
especially significant. Variables such as race/ethnicity, parent education,
years of CPC intervention, residence in a high-poverty school attendance area,
and special education placement were
not associated with retention. Findings indicate that grade retention-no matter
when it occurs-is associated with significantly lower levels of school achievement and higher rates of
school dropout. The students who were retained fell further behind their
similarly low-achieving former classmates as early as kindergarten and first
grade. By the end of their eighth-grade year, retained students were 1 to 2
years behind these former classmates. Retained students had a rate of school
dropout that was 24% higher than that of promoted students (controlling for
preretention achievement growth and
other factors).
between grade retention and high school
completion or dropout, a comprehensive set of predictors of retention was
examined, including child and family background, early adjustment indicators
(kindergarten and first grade academic
performance and achievement), and intervening school experiences (e.g.,
school mobility and special education placement). In order of magnitude, the
following factors increased the odds of being retained: low family income
(children eligible for a subsidized lunch had twice the risk of retention than
those not eligible); sex of child (boys had twice the risk of retention), and
number of school moves from ages 10 to 14. The following factors decreased the
odds of being retained: overage at kindergarten entry, number of years of
average or better parent involvement in school, reading and math achievement in
first grade, grade in reading in first grade, and math achievement in kindergarten.
Findings that the number of school moves increases the risk of retention and
parent involvement in school decreases the risk are relatively new, and
especially significant. Variables such as race/ethnicity, parent education,
years of CPC intervention, residence in a high-poverty school attendance area,
and special education placement were
not associated with retention. Findings indicate that grade retention-no matter
when it occurs-is associated with significantly lower levels of school achievement and higher rates of
school dropout. The students who were retained fell further behind their
similarly low-achieving former classmates as early as kindergarten and first
grade. By the end of their eighth-grade year, retained students were 1 to 2
years behind these former classmates. Retained students had a rate of school
dropout that was 24% higher than that of promoted students (controlling for
preretention achievement growth and
other factors).
Does grade retention harm students,
or are the large estimated adverse effects of grade retention due at least in
part to the difficulty in controlling for observed and unobserved differences
between retained and promoted students that may be correlated with later educational attainment? The main
strength of this study was the inclusion of a variety of preretention control
variables such as achievement at different times that take account of such
differences. Results indicated that, although there were substantial
differences between the unadjusted and adjusted models, both indicated a
significant link between grade retention
and school dropout rates as well as lower rates of school completion. The finding that students who were retained in
the first three grades did not benefit academically from 1 to 3 years of participation
in the Child-Parent Center program suggests that retention plus remediation
strategies may not prevent the typical achievement declines that have been
shown for simple grade retention without remediation. Indeed, the CPC follow-on
intervention is more comprehensive and longer-lasting than most remedial
services that retained students receive under many current retention practices
in schools. Moreover, comparable students who were promoted (instead of
retained) and then participated in intervention for 1 to 3 years had
substantial performance advantages over retained students who participated in
the intervention. Grade retention is a response to academic problems. Little
attempt is made to address the underlying conditions such as low motivation, poverty,
poor nutrition, or inadequate instruction that cause underachievement. It would
be surprising if retention or limited retention-plus policies substantially
altered children's achievement. Underachieving children require educational experiences that affect
their rates of early learning.
or are the large estimated adverse effects of grade retention due at least in
part to the difficulty in controlling for observed and unobserved differences
between retained and promoted students that may be correlated with later educational attainment? The main
strength of this study was the inclusion of a variety of preretention control
variables such as achievement at different times that take account of such
differences. Results indicated that, although there were substantial
differences between the unadjusted and adjusted models, both indicated a
significant link between grade retention
and school dropout rates as well as lower rates of school completion. The finding that students who were retained in
the first three grades did not benefit academically from 1 to 3 years of participation
in the Child-Parent Center program suggests that retention plus remediation
strategies may not prevent the typical achievement declines that have been
shown for simple grade retention without remediation. Indeed, the CPC follow-on
intervention is more comprehensive and longer-lasting than most remedial
services that retained students receive under many current retention practices
in schools. Moreover, comparable students who were promoted (instead of
retained) and then participated in intervention for 1 to 3 years had
substantial performance advantages over retained students who participated in
the intervention. Grade retention is a response to academic problems. Little
attempt is made to address the underlying conditions such as low motivation, poverty,
poor nutrition, or inadequate instruction that cause underachievement. It would
be surprising if retention or limited retention-plus policies substantially
altered children's achievement. Underachieving children require educational experiences that affect
their rates of early learning.
Contrast this reactive approach to
intervention with prevention. Instead of waiting until the early signs of
academic failure are evident, proactive
education support would seek to promote the skills and attitudes needed
for mastery of the grade-level curriculum before learning difficulties are
observed. Prevention programs do this by addressing the underlying causes that
give rise to underachievement such as building language and literacy skills before formal reading instruction,
instilling pride in achievement, enhancing
motivation to learn, and promoting family-school partnerships to help
reinforce learning at home. Not surprisingly, programs that succeed in these
areas are associated with higher levels
of school achievement and lower rates of grade retention. The importance of
prevention is easily lost in an era of school accountability and high-stakes
testing, which highlight children's learning difficulties. Given the consistent
evidence that retention is not an effective strategy for improving children's school success and growing evidence that
retention plus remediation strategies do little to enhance children's
achievement, the alternatives to retention appear to deserve much higher
funding priority than they currently receive. Among these alternatives are
universal access to high quality preschool education, full day kindergarten programs,
reduced class sizes in the early
grades, family-school partnerships that provide family resource centers in
schools, and school restructuring programs. Investments in preschool education
have shown among the most positive long-term effects on the school
success of children at risk. One of the most consistent findings in the
34 years of research is that participation in preschool programs for
low-income, at-risk children reduces the need for grade retention in the
elementary grades. Only increased funding for such programs can help break the
cycle of school failure that many children face.
intervention with prevention. Instead of waiting until the early signs of
academic failure are evident, proactive
education support would seek to promote the skills and attitudes needed
for mastery of the grade-level curriculum before learning difficulties are
observed. Prevention programs do this by addressing the underlying causes that
give rise to underachievement such as building language and literacy skills before formal reading instruction,
instilling pride in achievement, enhancing
motivation to learn, and promoting family-school partnerships to help
reinforce learning at home. Not surprisingly, programs that succeed in these
areas are associated with higher levels
of school achievement and lower rates of grade retention. The importance of
prevention is easily lost in an era of school accountability and high-stakes
testing, which highlight children's learning difficulties. Given the consistent
evidence that retention is not an effective strategy for improving children's school success and growing evidence that
retention plus remediation strategies do little to enhance children's
achievement, the alternatives to retention appear to deserve much higher
funding priority than they currently receive. Among these alternatives are
universal access to high quality preschool education, full day kindergarten programs,
reduced class sizes in the early
grades, family-school partnerships that provide family resource centers in
schools, and school restructuring programs. Investments in preschool education
have shown among the most positive long-term effects on the school
success of children at risk. One of the most consistent findings in the
34 years of research is that participation in preschool programs for
low-income, at-risk children reduces the need for grade retention in the
elementary grades. Only increased funding for such programs can help break the
cycle of school failure that many children face.
