How, then, do we account for the persistence of retention? Is everyone
just stupid? There sure isn't a problem of keeping the desks occupied.
Are there perhaps other studies that, as is often the case, show the exact
opposite to be the case? If there's 100 years of demonstrated evidence
that retention has no value it's really hard to understand why it's still
around.
Paul
----------
> From: Ken Goodman <kgoodman who-is-at u.arizona.edu>
> To: xmca who-is-at weber.ucsd.edu
> Subject: Re: social promotion
> Date: Saturday, September 25, 1999 10:09 AM
>
> 100 years ago Rice did a study called laggards in our schools. In it he
> found what research always has shown:
> Students who are not retained do better than those who are.
> Retention leads to a number of unintended results-
> resentful overage bullies who take out their shame on their
> younger
> classmates
> Higher rates of dropouts when pupils reach the legal age and
> internal
> dropouts- kids eventually tuneout when they stay
> Retention does mean a second chance to do things differently.
> Almost always it means repeating what didn't work the first time.
>
> In fact, the only evidence of success of retention is when it is done
> because of the lack of immaturity of the learner and that should be a
> joint decision of parents and teachers and pupils.
>
> Studies also show the retention is much more widely used with minorities
> and poor children from poor families.
>
> An inflexible policy of retention compounds itself. Children who repeat
> one grade are very likely to repeat a second or third time during their
> careers.
>
> Ironically, the Rice study focussed on the financial costs to schools of
> keeping kids a grade more than a year.
>
> One more issue: in countries where school attendance is not compulsory
> or attendance is not well enforced, the children who do not succeed
> disappear from the schools. In Mexico for example schools routinely plan
> two second grade classes for every three first grade classes. The norm
> if that a third of the children will not pass to second grade.
> Ken Goodman