DOCUMENT RESUME ED 438 916 PS 028 334 AUTHOR Fielden, Frank, Ed. TITLE Of Primary Interest, 1998-1999. INSTITUTION Colorado State Dept. of Education, Denver. PUB DATE 1999-00-00 18p.; For 1995-1998 issues, see ED 426 792. Newsletter NOTE published quarterly. Published cooperatively with the Iowa Dept. of Education, The Nebraska Dept. of Education, The Missouri Dept. of Elementary and Secondary Education, and the Montana Office of Public Instruction, with the support of the Colorado Foundation for Families and Children. AVAILABLE FROM Colorado Department of Education, 201 East Colfax Avenue, Denver, CO 80203; Tel: 303-866-6674; Fax: 303-866-6857; Web Site: http://ericps.crc.vivc.edu/naecs/opi-nl.html Collected Works - Serials (022) PUB TYPE Of Primary Interest; v6 n1-4 Win 1998-Fall 1999 JOURNAL CIT MF01/PC01 Plus Postage. EDRS PRICE Academic Achievement; *Emergent Literacy; *Grade Repetition; DESCRIPTORS Grade 1; Grade 3; Kindergarten; Literacy; *Primary Education; Reading Achievement; Reading Instruction; School Readiness; Student Evaluation; *Teaching Methods ABSTRACT This document is comprised of four consecutive issues (Winter 1998-Fall 1999) of a newsletter published quarterly to provide information on current research and practice to early childhood professionals teaching in the primary grades in Colorado, Iowa, Nebraska, Missouri, and Montana. The winter 1998 issue focuses on retention in the early grades, reviewing research, and providing alternative strategies. The spring 1999 issue also addresses grade retention, asserting that a long trail of research indicates that retention is not the appropriate route to improve student achievement. This issue also contains a brief summary of literacy accomplishments that should be evident in third-graders. The summer 1999 issue discusses myths of literacy development and contains a reprint of an ERIC Digest on kindergarten entrance age. The fall 1999 issue covers effective first-grade teaching methods, including how to build strong readers and writers, how to assess school readiness, and literacy accomplishments that should be evident in first-graders. (EV) Reproductions supplied by EDRS are the best that can be made from the original document. Of Primary Interest, 1998-1999 Published Cooperatively by: Colorado Department of Education Iowa Department of Education Nebraska Department of Education Missouri Department of Elementary And Secondary Education Montana Office of Public Instruction BEST COPY AVAILABLE 'dm Clo') CO Cs1 U.S. DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION CD Office of Educational Research and Improvement PERMISSION TO REPRODUCE AND EDUCATIONAL RESOURCES INFORMATION DISSEMINATE THIS MATERIAL HAS CENTER (ERIC) This document has been reproduced as BEEN GRANTED BY received from the person or organization 13. originating it. N- Bolt Minor changes have been made to improve reproduction quality. o Points of view or opinions stated in this TO THE EDUCATIONAL RESOURCES document do not necessarily represent INFORMATION CENTER (ERIC) official OERI position or policy. 1 2 BESTCOPYAVAILABLE Winter 1998 Vol.8 No.1 Published Cooperatively by Nebraska Department of Education lbwa Department of Education Colorado Department of. Education Missoiiri"Depdrtment.of-Elementary and Secondary Education-- Montana Office Of Public.IrVruction with -the SuPPoTt of Colorado Foundation for Families-andthildren Retention lit-the' WV:G*1*A Wit* of the/ Reseoch matine." A similar study on "transition" boned a fear of being criticiied by the:.. Bedie Anderson, as junior first grade or teachers imthe next grade forpassingstu- , in collaboration with the staff at' ergarten, led to the developmental kind dents WholVere ill prepared: AllirigtonN, - RMC Research Corporation same results (Allington 4 McGill-Franzen, and McGill-Franzen (1995)describe teach- ers in one school who reported significant Because retention and promotion practices embarrissinent when a student they pro- are expressions of beliefs about purposes of -Some researchers,such as Eads_.(1990 and -..ernOted was "sent bick down for !being- , educationiretentionis a complex andemo= Shepard and Sinith:(1988)_belieyethat--=- unable to read the assigiied trade book tionally laden issue: T'his.guide is de:Signed_ retaining students actually has deleterimis. that grade. to help you examine your district's or effects-on the schoOl. They believe kinder- SebOol'S retention policies and practices garter transition programs change the' -. ; Research studies have shown that groups and to determine the impact of yourreterv, composition of fifsfgrade classes to indude of retained childrendernOnstrate a Short- tion practices. the ./ older, more "mature" ,students term "bounee" in performance in relation ..,,, younger, lessinatiire stridentsare pulled 'to sane grade comparison-groUps of chil- \ Out of their agektikortand placedin the! ., dren who performed in the lowest quaktile . transition program. :This allows, perhaps ... Why do teachers retain young r. even encourages, the first grade teachers te- children? _,:increaSe the level Of difficulty of 1-.4Thatis Primary teachers being taught,.a shift referred to as-escalat,:.. A large majority of teachers'interviewed base beliefs about ing the curriculum,- Skills thatyvere once-. by Smith.(1989)..viewed retention-as benefi-__ rialto studentsTeachers talked about chil- considered tObeappropriate to second: the benefits of reten- dren who'had been retained as a's'suming grade, such as-reading, are noWbeing-.-- taught to and expected'of first graders.;:- more-leadership,- being more comfortable tion on incomplete Shepard and Smith (1988'.35) argue that. with the routine, beirigrnore cooperative, to a lower grade ' hairing gr,eaterSelf-confidence, becoming acadernics pushed-dos and misleading_ does-not necessarily lead to betterlearning more a part of the-Social group, and achiev- because "boring proficiehdes leanied by ing More academic success. -7 information. rote are substituted for Conceptuallearning, hi 's study,(1989:130), almost half of Smith_ and enthusiasm-for int rvie ed die w th 40 kind en rt rs e a hoWevet-this on norm referenced testsi Led their retention recommendations on view of the:repeated reSearcheVidence advantage decreases over time. Holmes`' . their beliefs aboutchildren'l maturity ley- on the negative effects of reteritiOn,-Smith ,(1989);,in his meta-analysis of multiple .. -(1989:147448) argues-that 'primary-tea-diets -- els.'iTheSe teachers 'believe:that, within studies:On retentionrfOuricithat after three base beliefs abOut the benefits Of rete:ntibn -some normal range of' environments,--chil- grades there- was no difference between vdren become more "prepared for school.:- incomplete andnisleadinginfOrinatiOn. children who were retained andthose who 0)/accorciing,toan evolutionary, physiolOgical-: were 0 even-though the retained chit- What tke-teacher lacks access to,hOwever, is- unfolding dren were one year older. This temporary the infoiriation about what hat child would_ "bounce" inthe performance of retained, There areother factors influencing teach- have been like had he been promoted:Indeed, ' students provides one answer to why ers' decisions to retain students. In inter- these unseen circumstances aft-hypothetical, teachers retain children. --, vieWs with ateacheis, Byrnes (1989) -;they laClc reality; andiii fact, she inaideny reported that while teachers were con the poisibility that vith some acceptable !met However, in a carefully controlled study . cerned about retaining students, they often Of struggling the child would haw succeeded of kindergarten retention, Shepard and,- pro- felt it would be worse for a child tobe in the subsequent grefcle.and later on would Smith (1989 :105) found "no boost or aca; ,moted because of the expectations in_the be indistinguishable from his peers. demic advantage front the extra year to folloWing grade. Several teachers men- continues on page 2- BEST COPY AVAILABLE .grade retention as a rentedial strategy Retention in the Early Grades: does not appear to fix school perfor- A Review of the Research .rnance; continued from Page 1- retention is the strongest message a teacher or school can give a student that How do children and families- they are not as capable as their age. mates; and experience retention? overage students become In 1989, Byrnes-interviewed 71 nonpro- trated when they `struggle with school moted children about repeating a grade in -- c. work ;school. Half of these children were from received substantially different curricula upper-middle income'Sehools and half - and-methods of instruction during their Grissom and Shepard (1989:34) concluded were from lower-middle income schools. that "retained students experience a greater retained year. In private interviews,,27 percent of the riskfor dropping out that cannot be theinter- retainedchildren did not admit eitplairied by their poor achievenient." When VieWer that they had been They-found that for black males in Austin, asked how they felt of would-feel if they What alternatives ,td retentiOn are Texas, retention increased their risk of were retained, 84 percent of the-responses :schools exploring? dropping out of high school by 27 percent focused on "sad;' "bad," and "upset" Sritith (1989) found that teachers within White females:from a high socioeconomic Byrnes concluded (1989:130) that retained the, same school typically demonstrated district who were" retained increased their children Viewed retention as a "punish- the other - retention practices that matched chances of not completing high-School by ment and a stigma, not as a positiVe event teachers' -in their sr-1901_1n other-Words; 21 percent Based on their study and designed to help them." there seemed to he 'a school culture that review of retention research, Grissom and affected retention practices: SOme schools Shepard, (1989:60) stated: Byrnes also interviewed principals, teach,- retained-as many as a third of their kinder- ers and_parents:- She found that these contemplating tougher Fora school gartners fora second yeatarld otheiS adult§ viewed retention as a way to help promotwn policies, it is possible to estimate retained only one or two percent( children who were fudged by adults to be what the effect might be on the district's unable to deativith the "tasks of the next Likewise, Allington and Mill-Pianzen dropout rate. If annual retention rates are grade. (1995:53) found that schools with similar increased, say, fray; five percent to seven per- ' student populationsiespOneled very differ- cent, thecumuleitive retention rate will go up lit inOther set of interviews, parents- ently to children's difficulties with learning. on the order of 20 perdent. That is, an reported that the characteristicS of the chil- ad_di- 'Fig° Schools theOesearched each had 20 tional 20 percent of students Wilrexperie rice drerahat were used to make,the retention percent of their children eligible for free or decision, such as lack of attention and poor retention sometime in their school career. _.. ;reduced lunch. One school had retained; ,Folliiwing from the extra retentions, the dis- social skills, were not corrected by an extra ,placed in transitional classes, or placed in trict's dropout rate, Will go up by three to six year to mature (Shepard and Smith, 1989). special education almost two out of every percentage points. -A district that had a 20_ Parents in this study alsodescribed their three primary grade students. In-the other -percent dropout rate COuldanticipate a new children as having slightly poorer attitudes' school abOut one out of ten students, were rate of 25 percent as groups of previously toward school compared to a Matched cOn- retained or placed in special edrication. retained students "reached high school age:: trOl &Pup of children who were not , - describing the two schools the-researchers retained. Yet, through interviews With However, in a grade retention report by -noted: teachers-and parents, Smith (1989:145) the Massachusetts Department of'Educa- :found that 'teachers consistently under- The two communities were not venjdiffer- tiort (1990), the authors concluded that-in play the extent of conflict y,vith parents, over ..Viit, although pdperty was-higher in thisec- individual cases students can benefit from the decision- to retain and Underestimate and school. What,was4ifferent was the , retention. Schools are Unable to predict -- the degree of parents' active resistance or institatWiail ethos in'each. The teachers in who these students will be. A study by 1 , passivebut unhappy compliance" the first Schbol talked about parents and stu- Sandoval and Hughes (1981) was designed ':-- dents-in adversarial tones ("us versus to discover what type.§ Of children benefit them "). In the siedrid school, teachers talked from retention.' much more respectfully about.the-ehildren Does retention-hdp children close the Children who demonstrated greater suc- , and their patents. Teachers in both schools _ academic achieVement gap? cess after repeating first grade: were generally cordial in their - interactions Numerous research studies on the long with children, and the hallways of kith were - displayed mastery of some academic 41' term effects of reteritionhav,e,Conchided ' bright and decorated with-Student work (the skills (usually leading); that retaining children does not help them. first school even displaced banners had-good Self-concepts and adequate -- -move up academically. In fact, for the vast -,Plaques that had been awarded to denote its social skills; majority of students, retention has a nega- excellence). had parents who were involved in the tive effect On their academic achievement. School districts also influence or prescribe schools and who had favorable attitudes Researchers have found that ehildren who retentionprktices within schoirls: Ailing- toward retention; are overage for their grade are more likely:. ton and McGill - Franzen (1991), found that demonstrated difficulty with to drop out of school. Roderick (1995) sug- pri- schoOls with formal retention polities and geststhree possible reasons why retention ,marily due to lack of exposure to the plans had higher retention rates than. places students at risk of dropping out: material (school transfer or high absen- schools with no policies. teeisin); and - BEST COPY AVAILABLE EadS;G.M. (1990). kindergarten retention' Grissom; J.B. & Sheparct'L.A;(1989:3476,3). Ellwein and Glass (1989) conducted _a -Aepeating and drop, ping out of school. Ili and alternative kindergarten progratith: A ' multi -site Case study in which one district L.A. Shepard & M.L. Smith (eds.), Eliinking7 the Virginia Bord of Education. had implemented a new retention/promo- -report -grades: Research and policies or_ iretention. tion policy. They found that althc(ugh the Richmond, Virginia: Virginia State Depart- London: Faliner.Press. district very carefully designed and imPle-- men( of Education (ERIC Docuirient Repro- Merited a promotional program to bring '- 7 ductinn Service No. ED 320 670). Holmes, C.T. (1989:16-33) : Grade level order to seemingly illogic.arand haphazard retention effects:A keta-analysiS:of Ellwein,111.C. & Glass;G.V. (1989151-173). retention practices, no one was 'keeping research stadiee._In-LA, Shepard & Ending social promotion in Waterford: track of what happened.:No-one kneW if Appearanies and reality. In L.A. Shepard Sinith (e-dsl, Flunking grades: Research and the shidents'.who failed-the reqUired testy .poliVies on retention: LondomFaliner Smith (eds.),flunking & . -Were actually being retained. Researchers Research:and policies on retention. I.:on- Press. inferred that the PolicyTWaS being used don: Falmer Press. 'dilly in part. -Children'Who passed the tests' continues on page 4 were being promoted; but some of the chil -' (hen whojclid not. pass thetests Were also being promoted: This raised questions about whiCh children were retained and .--1-toW the decisions were made. Retentionin the Early Gra Many studies have found bias in retention Practices: Specifitally;children who are Alternative Strategies retained are more likely to be low- income,' male, and minority (Roderick:1995). In the end it appeared as if distriCtstuidied by Ellwein-and Glass (1989) had implemented" As yoriexplOre and review your retention praCtices, it may behelpful to examine some a policy to improve.public relations. The alternative practices. used by, other school districts. These ideas can help stimulate. your -degree to whichthe policy hanged prac- thinking about appropriate and effective educational strategies to, implement in your school tice was not of interest to the district. In or district. their multi-site case Study, the researchers district Promote all-low achievers and provide additional instructional found that the circumstances in support. One-to-one - were not unusual. _ %tutoring progranis haVe had good results in helping students ,- to meet standards.(See Allington &Walmsley,- No Quick Fix: Rethinking Literacy Programs in America's. Ele- mentary Schools). 2. Provide students in a transition linigram with an enriched curriculimi'designed to lead Bibliography to double promotion so stridentS can catchup with their age cohorts n, A. Allington, R.L. &'McGlll- eFranz- (1991). Eilucationatrefon,n and at -risk . 3 Keep teacherS wilifthe same sttidents bnio or three years witti an emphasii on con- for children : Eiclusion, retention, transition, -; tinuous progress. and special education iii an era of increased 4. Implement multi - age classrooms where children have accountability", Final repOrt to the U.S. more time to learn and advance to the next leVel after mastering the concepts at their current level. Department of Education, Office of Echica, tional Research and Improvement. (Grant a Develop a summer enrichment or "bridge",program. -#R11790143). . 6. Use supplemental funds from federal categorical Programs lilce Title Ito pay teachers Allington, R.L. & McGill-Franzen, '- to tutor students individually in reading and writing after school: (1995:45-60): Thinking: Throwing good -- money after bad, In RI. Allington& 7. Expand parent involvement to include family literacy. programs that teach'parents how -Walmsley, No-Quick Fix: Rethinking Liter7' to 'support emergent literacy, - acy Programs in America's Elementary --.Review and/or redesign curriculum for deVelopmental appropriateness SchOols. New York: Teachers College, and instruc- tional using information fmin professional associations such Columbia University --- as the National Association forthe Echication of Young Children (NAEYC) andthe National Board for Allington, R.L. & Walinsley, A.,(1995):: , Professional Teaching Standards'. No Quick Fix: Rethinkingliter4y Pro - rirts Provide intensive staff development for all ,9. Elementary Schools. K-3 teachers in emergent literacy and a common program for teaching reading/languagearts. New York Teachers College, Columbia University. - - - 10. Provide time for staff to examine current teaching practices. Use staff development funds to organize study groups to identify alternatives. Byrnes, D.A. (1989:108-131). Aftitudes of students, parents and edricaeorsItoward 11. Find time to examine your collective beliefs regarding teaching and learning. Deter- repeating a-grade, .In L.A. Shepard &;M.L. mine ways in which all students can be successful. Smith (eds.), Flunking grades: Research and policieS on retention. London: Falmer Anderson/RMC Research Corporation PresS. BEST COPY AVAILABLE Shepard, & Smith; M.L. (1989:79-107). - Retention in the Earh/fGracles: Academic nnd,eittotioital-effects of kinder- A Review cif the Research This' article is excerpted -.from Retention in gartin retention in one school district._ In the Early Grades, a document written by continued from page 3 Smitii(eds.);-Plunking L.A. Shepard Beckie Anderson for the-RMC Research - grades: Research and policies;on retention. Corporation, and is used with permission. MasachusettS Department of Education. London: Palmer Press- Copies ofthe entire publication are,avail: -- - (1990). Structuring SchOols for student suc- able from-RMCIResearch CoiporatiOn, Smith, M.L. (1989:132-150). Teacheis' cess: A focus' on grade retention [BriiChure] :: In LA Shepard St. about retention Writer's Square Suite 540, 1512 Larimer Quincy Massachusetts: Bureau OiStudent * M.L. Smith (eds.), Flunking grades: Street, Denver, CO 80202, (800).922 -3636 Development arid Health. -17 [voice], (303) 825426 [fax], Research and policies ottietentEori: Ldn-' Roderick, M. (1995). Grade ietentionand, ,[nno&Mcdenver.cOm] : Thefiist fiye don: Faliner Press. school dropout: Policy debate and iesearch -copies of any order* available at no cost _questions. ReSearch Bulletin (PhiDelta Additional copies maybe purchased for Kappan, No. 15). Washington, D.C. $10.00 e.ach prepaid. For the vast majority Sandavol, J. & Hughes,-G.P." (1981).- Suc- of students, retention cess in nonpromoted first grade Children. Final report to the National InstitUte-of has a negative effect :Mental Health, Bethesda, Maryland (Grant #PHS-.28765-02).' on their academic Shepard, L.A: & Smith; M.L. (1988:34-38). achievement. Flunking kindergarten: Escalating curricu- , lion leaves titanybehind. American Educa- tor- (Summer /Volume 3). COLORADO' STATE BOARD OF EDUCATION Seated January 14;1997 Patricia M. Haye, Chahman, Gully Stanford, John Evans; Member-at-Large 1st Congressional District 6ffi Congressional District r . Aurora Parker Denver Patti Johnson, Thom_ as M. Howerton, Vice Chairman, 2nd Congressional Distict 5th Congressional District -Colorado-Springs i,J3roomfield Pat M. Chlouber,- Clair Orr, - 4th aingressional District' -3rd Congressional District William :I; Moloney Kersey Leadville _ Commissioner ofEducatiOn.---. 1 III 15 ' D 111 -to. :..:13ESt COPY 'AVAILABLE, S. lIl .55 11. . , I I .:1 1 11 I 411141 AVAILABLE BEST COPY Spring 1999 Vol. 6 No. 2 Published Cooperatively by Nebraska Department of Education Iowa Department of Education Colorado Department of Education Montana Office of Public Instruction Missouri Department of Elementary and Secondary Education with the support of Colorado foundation for Families and Children Grade Retention: A History of Failure A long trail of research tells us that retention is not the route to take in our efforts to improve student achievement. vehicle for school system reports on William A. Owings and Susan Magliaro retention, promotion, and dropouts. For almost 50 years, research has shown Update Within the next two decades, researchers that grade-level retention provides no started to examine the efficacy of retention academic advantages to students. Yet, the in terms of student achievement Retention in the Early Grades practice is gaining increasing attention as The goal of grade retention was to schools face political pressure to improve school performance by allowing demonstrate accountability for student In a previous issue of Of. POinary:: more time for students to develop achievement. Publications including USA Interest; an article was exCer004:from adequate academic skills (Reynolds, 1992). Today (Ritter, 1997) and Education Week ..., Retention in the Early.Gradek.4:: By the 1930s, researchers were reporting (Reynolds, Temple, & McCoy, 1997) have document. written by: the negative effects of retention on addressed the topic, and President Clinton achievement (Ayer, 1933; Kline, 1933). for the. RMC Research Corporation. in his 1997 and 1998 State of the Union Goodlad (1954) summarized the research Unfortunately, the RMC Research.staff Addresses called for increased retention of between 1924 and 1948 related to grade no longer has free copies. of this students with low scores on standardized document available. The publicition retention. This synthesis showed that tests, stating that a child should not move retention did not decrease the variation in may be purchased; however;.fOf $10.00 from grade to grade "until he or she is student achievement levels and had no prepaid from RMC Research ready" Research suggests that retention is positive effect on educational gain. Otto Corporation, Writer's Square Suite 540, on the rise. According to one study (1951) suggested that retention had no 1512 Larimer Street, Denver; CO 80202. (Roderick, 1995), from 1980 to 1992 the special educational value for children and national percentage of retained students (800) 922:3636 [voicej, (303):8254626 that the academic gain of nonpromoted [fax), e-mail: frmc@rmcdertver:comi. increased from approximately 20 percent students was smaller than the gain of their to nearly 32 percent. promoted counterparts. The overly simplistic view of retention as Excellence in Education, 1983), a time of In the mid-20th century, researchers a panacea for education woes ignores its reduced public confidence in schools, began to investigate the relationship negative impact on children. A walk many school systems instituted more between retention and dropouts. One through history reminds us of what we stringent promotion and retention study (Berlman, 1949) indicated that have learned about retention. policiesin spite of the lack of supportive students who were retained might be research evidence (Roderick, 1994). For more likely to drop out of school than the public at large, it was counterintuitive those who were not retained. This article to think that retention was not useful in appeared at a time when the literature was History of Grade Retention helping students to reach basic skill levels emphasizing the need to keep students in It was not until about 1860 that it became (Natale, 1991). school (Anderson, 1950; Holbecic, 1950; common in U.S. elementary schools to Moffit, 1945; Nancarrow, 1951; Sandin, group children in grade levels, with promotion dependent on mastery of a 1944). quota of content. The New York City In the 1960s and the 1970s, the pendulum Current Practice and Research school system was reporting the results of moved toward the social promotion of No precise national data record the exact promotion and retention as early as the students. After the publication of A numbers of retained students. However, a turn of the century. Maxwell's (1904) age- Nation at Risk (National Commission on number of studies suggest that retention 7grade progress study became the standard continues on page 2 BEST COPY AVAILABLE frequently than the general population Grade Retention: Retention Harms Learners (McLeskey, Lancaster & Grizzle, 1995). Historically, educators have viewed A History of Failure retention as a means of reducing skill The long-held belief that early retention is continued from page 1 variance in the classroom in an attempt to best for students continues to be refuted in better meet student needs. Clearly, this has persisted and possibly has increased. the literature (Johnson, 1990; practice has not achieved its goal. In the The Center for Policy Research in Mantizicopoulos & Morrison, 1992; process we have harmed our clients. Education (1990) reported that by the 9th Thomas et al., 1992). Studies of retention Physicians take an oath that guides their grade, approximately 50 percent of all U.S. in kindergarten indicate that retained professional practice-first, do no harm. school students have been retained. students have significantly lower scores Educators would do well to take a similar Roderick (1995) reported that the on standardized achievement tests than do oath. Retention harms an at-risk proportion of overage students entering nonretained students (Dennebaum & population cognitively and affectively. high school has risen almost 40 percent Kulberg, 1994). Another study shows no Alternatives to consider include requiring since 1975. One synthesis of research difference in achievement for retained summer school, offering intensive indicated that the current level of retention kindergarten students and the matched remediation before and after school, matches that of the early 20th century control group (Shepard & Smith, 1987). changing teacher and administrative (Shepard & Smith, 1990). Some research indicates that early perceptions, and increasing teacher retention may produce a short-lived Of 66 articles on retention written from expectations. increase in achievement; however, this 1990 to 1997, only 1 supported retention gain vanishes in two or three years (Butler, One indicator of a profession is that a (Lenarduzzi, 1990). These articles and 1990; Karweit & Wasik, 1992; Snyder, body of research guides its practice Holmes' (1984) and Holmes and 1992). (Darling-Hammond & Goodwin, 1993). A Matthews' (1989) meta-analyses document body of research exists on the subject of the effects of retention. Research indicates that retention retention, and it should guide our practice. produces negative social implications. Many studies show the association If we are to treat our "patients" Kindergarten students who were retained between retention and dropping out of professionally, we need to stop punishing indicated a slightly more negative attitude school (Cairns, Cairns, & Neckerman, nonlearners and instead provide toward school than did a matched control 1989; Dawson, 1991). These studies opportunities for success. group (Shepard & Smith, 1987). Retained control for the effects of other influencing students may have more behavioral factors. Grissom and Shepard (1989) References problems than those who are not retained determined that retention significantly Anderson, H.A. (1950). "Another study of (Meisels, 1993). Rumberger (1987) increases the probability of dropping out, dropouts." School Review, 58, 318-319. suggests that retention contributes to a controlling for prior achievement, sex, and Ayer, F.C. (1933). Progress of pupils in the state of permanent disengagement from school. race. Texas 1932-33. Texas State Teachers Association. Research also shows that retention may Berlman, M. (1949). "Why boys and girls leave Demographic data show that retained have negative effects on long-term student school." American Teacher, 20, 33-39. students tend to come from lower achievement. Holmes' (1989) meta- Butler, J. (1990, November). Effects of retention on socioeconomic (SES) backgrounds than achievement and self-concept of kindergarten and analysis reviewed 63 controlled studies nonretained students (Thomas et al., 1992). first grade students. Paper presented at the annual that compared the progress of retained Meisels (1993) found that approximately meeting of the Mid-South Educational Research students with that of lower-achieving Association. 40 percent of repeaters come from the promoted students; 54 studies showed lowest SES quartile, whereas Byrd, R., & Weitzman, M. (1994). "Predictors of negative achievement results for the early grade retention among children in the United approximately 8.5 percent come from the retained students. Holmes then reviewed States." Pediatrics, 93(3), 481-487. highest SES quartile. Meisels (1993) also only those studies with the greatest Cairns, R.B., Cairns, B.D., & Neckerman, H.J. determined that more than two-thirds of statistical control. The negative (1989). "Early school dropout: Configurations and all retentions take place between determinants. " Child Development, 60(6),1437- achievement effects were again kindergarten and 3rd grade. Other studies 1452. demonstrated. These findings were have shown that retained students tend to Center for Policy Research in Education (1990). substantially identical to those of be male and African American, with Repeating grades in school: Current practice and Goodlad's analysis in 1954. Subsequent parents who are less educated than the research evidence. Washington, DC: Author. studies have provided little new evidence parents of nonretained students (Byrd & Darling-Hammond, L, & Goodwin, L.A. (1993). to contradict Holmes' synthesis of "Progress towards professionalism in teaching." In Weitzman, 1994; Dauber, 1993; Foster, research. G. Cawelti (ed.), Challenges and achievements of 1993; Meisels, 1993). In California, George American education (pp. 19-52). Alexandria, VA: (1993) found that retention rates for Other studies indicate an increased, ASCD. African Americans and Hispanics are cumulative negative effect of retention on Dauber, S. (1993). "Characteristics of retainees and twice the rate for whites. Byrd and achievement for at-risk students early precursors of retention in grade: Who is held Weitzman (1994) examined social and back?" Merrill-Pahner Quarterly, 39(3), 326-343. (Reynolds, 1992). Retained children may health factors associated with retention. continue to decline in reading Dawson, D.A. (1991). "Family structure and Poverty, gender, mother's education level, children's health and well being: Data from the 1988 achievement over time compared with national health interview survey on child health." hearing and speech impairments, low nonretained students. Whether this Journal of Marriage and the Family, 53(3), 573-584. birth weight, enuresis, and exposure to cumulative decline occurs in mathematics Dennebaum, J.M., & Kulberg, J.M. (1994). household smoking are significant achievement is uncertain. "Kindergarten retention and transition classrooms: predictive factors. Learning disabled Their relationship to achievement." Psychology in students may also be retained more the Schools, 31(1), 5-12. Shepard, L., & Smith, M. (1990). "Synthesis of Otto, H. (1951). "Grading and promotion policies." Foster, J. (1993). "Reviews of research: Retaining Educational research on grade retention." 40, 128-129. NEA Journal, 70(1), 38- Childhood Education, children in grade." 47(8), 84-88. Leadership, Reynolds, A.J. (1992). "Grade retention and school 43. The effects of retention Snyder, J. (1992, November). Educational adjustment: An explanatory analysis." Beyond retention: A study of George, C. (1993). in elementary school on subsequent academic Analysis, 14(2), 101-121. Evaluation and Policy retention rates, practices, and successful alternatives Paper presented at the annual meeting performance. Sacramento, CA: California State in California. Reynolds, A.J., Temple, J., & McCoy, A. (1997, of the Mid-South Educational Research Association, Department of Education. September 17). "Grade retention doesn't work." Knoxville, TN. p. 36. Education Week, Goodlad, J. (1954). "Some effects of promotion and Thomas, A.M., Armistead, L., Kempton, T., Lynch, non-promotion upon the social and personal Ritter, J. (1997, August 18). "When kids don't make S., Forehand, R., Nousiainen, S., Neighbors, B., & adjustment of children." Journal of Experimental p. A3. the grade." USA Today, Tannenbaum, L (1992). "Early retention: Are there Education, 22, 301-328. Roderick, M. (1994). "Grade retention and school Psychology in the long-term beneficial effects?" Grissom, J.B., & Shepard, L.A. (1989). "Repeating American dropout: Investigating the association." 29(4), 342-347. Schools, and dropping out of school." In L Shepard & M. 31(4), 729-759. Educational Research Journal, Flunking grades: Research and policies Smith (eds.), Roderick, M. (1995, December). "Grade retention (pp. 34-63). London: Falmer Press. on retention and school dropout: Policy debate and research The above article appeared in the September Holbeck, E. (1950). "Seven ways to prevent drop- Research Bulletin of Phi Delta Kappa questions." 56 (1), 86- Educational Leadership, 1998 issue of 45, 35-36. outs." Nation's Schools, Center for Evaluation, Development, and Research, 88, and is reprinted with the permission of the 15, 1-5. Holmes, C.T. (1989). "Grade level retention effects: Association for Supervision and Curriculum A meta-analysis of research studies." In L. Shepard & Rumberger, RW. (1987). "High school dropouts: A Development (ASCD). William A. Owings, a Flunking grades: Research and M. Smith (eds.), Review of review of issues and evidence." past president of Virginia's ASCD, is (pp. 16-33). London: Falmer policies on retention 57(196), 101-121. Educational Research, Superintendent of Schools. He may be reached Press. Social and emotional Sandin, A. (1944). at Accomack County Public Schools, P. 0. Box Holmes, C.T., & Matthews, K.M. (1984). "The effects adjustments of regularly promoted and non- 330, Accomac, Virginia 23301. Susan Magliaro, of nonpromotion on elementary and junior high New York: Teachers College Press. promoted pupils. Associate Professor of Education, may be Review of Educational pupils: A meta-analysis." Shepard, L., & Smith, M. (1987). "What doesn't reached at Virginia Tech, Department of 54, 225-236. Research, work: Explaining policies of retention in the early Teaching and Learning, War Memorial Gym, Johnson, E., et al. (1990). "The effects of early grade 69(2), 129-134. grades." Phi Delta Kappan, Blacksburg, Virginia 24601. retention on the academic achievement of fourth- 27(4), grade students." Psychology in the Schools, 333-338. A review of the Karweit, N., & Wasik, B. (1992). effects of extra-year kindergarten programs and Baltimore: Center for transitional first grades. NAEYC ProfeNsional Development Research on Effective Schooling for Disadvantaged Students, Johns Hopkins University. Kline, E. (1933). "Significant changes in the curve of SAVE THAT DATE! Journal of Educational elimination since 1900." 26, 608-616. Research, Lenarduzzi, G. (1990). "The effects of nonpromotion NAEYC's National Intik* for 614 allayed Professional Dovelopmed in junior high school on academic achievement and 27(3), 212- scholastic effort." Reading Improvement, June 9-12, 1999 217. Cincinnati, Ohio McLeskey, J., Lancaster, M., & Grizzle, K. (1995). "Learning disabilities and grade retention: A review of issues with recommendations for practice." primary-grade symposia Activities on June 10 will feature a Learning Disabilities Research and Practice, 10(2), Transforming Early Childhood classrooms: The Impart of Standards. 120-128. Mantizicopoulos, P., & Morrison, D. (1992). Guest streakers will include: "Kindergarten retention: Academic and behavioral outcomes through the end of second grade." Judy Helm, 29(1), 182- American Educational Research Journal, Sam Meisel:, and 198. Sixth annual report of the Maxwell, W.H. (1904). Dorothy Strickland. New York: New York City superintendent of schools. For additional information, contact Board of Education. NAEYC it 800-414-2460. Meisels, S.J. (1993). "Failure in grade: Do students 50(2), up?" Journal of Educational Research, catch 69-77. Pupil progress in the elementary Moffit, F. (1945). New York: University schools of New York State. COLORADO STATE BOARD OF EDUCATION State Press. Seated January 12, 1999 Nancarrow, J. (1951). "How can the school reduce Gully Stanford John Burnett Clair Orr National the number of early school leavers?" 5th Congressional District Chairman 1st Congressional District Association of Secondary School Principals Bulletin, 35, 304-307. 4th Congressional District Randy DeHoff Natale, J. (1991). "Promotion or retention? Ideas are cde 6th Congressional District Patricia M. Chlouber changingagain." 13(1), 15-18. Executive Educator, Vice Chairman Patti Johnson National Commission on Excellence in Education. 3rd Congressional District 2nd Congressional District A nation at risk: The imperative for (1983). William J. Moloney Ben Alexander Washington, DC: U.S. educational reform. Commissioner of Education Government Printing Office. Member-at-Large 9 BESTCOPYAVAILABI F Third-Grade Literacy Accomplishments Preventing Reading Difficulties in Can point to or clearly identify specific Combines information from multiple Young Children (1998) and Starting Out words or wordings that are causing sources in writing reports. Right: A Guide to Promoting Children's comprehension difficulties. With assistance, suggests and Reading Success (1999) present highlights Summarizes major points from fiction implements editing and revision to of literacy acquisition, sets of and nonfiction texts. clarify and refine own writing. accomplishments that the successful learner should exhibit by the end of each In interpreting fiction, discusses Presents and discusses own writing of the primary grades. Although the underlying theme or message. with other students and responds timing of these accomplishments will vary helpfully to other students' Asks how, why, and what-if questions among children, they are the sorts of compositions. in interpreting nonfiction texts. things that should be in place before Independently reviews work for entering the next grade. In interpreting nonfiction, spelling, mechanics, and presentation. distinguishes cause and effect, fact and Accomplishments for third-graders opinion, main ideas and supporting Produces a variety of written work include: details. (e.g., literature response, reports, Reads aloud with fluency and "published" books, semantic maps) in Uses information and reasoning to comprehension any text that is a variety of formats including examine bases of hypotheses and appropriately designed for grade level. multimedia forms. opinions. Uses letter-sound correspondence Infers word meaning from taught knowledge and structural analysis to The above excerpt is reprinted with roots, prefixes, and suffixes. decode words. permission from Starting Out Right: A Correctly spells previously studied Reads and comprehends both fiction Guide to Promoting Children's Reading words and language patterns in own and nonfiction that is appropriately Success. Copies of the entire publication writing. designed for grade level. are available from the National Academy Press, 2101 Constitution Avenue, NW, Begins to incorporate literacy words Reads longer fictional selections and Lockbox 285, Washington, DC 20055, (800) and language patterns in own writing chapter books independently. 624-6242, at a cost of $14.95 per book. The (e.g., elaborates descriptions; uses report is also available online at Takes part in creative responses to texts figurative wording). <http:/ /www.nap.edu>. such as dramatizations, oral With some guidance, uses all aspects of presentations, fantasy play, etc. the writing process in producing own compositions and reports. i '1 1 1 I I .0 V... .1. 0 " V., 1 I. ' II .411.1. I I I i I 8 I I .111 II 10