Grade Retention - Draft #3 1

Research Position Paper #4 Draft #3

Perspective of Grade Retention
Susan Melnick
California State University Dominguez Hills
LBS 355
April 6, 2015

Grade Retention - Draft #3 2

Perspective of Grade Retention
For many years, debate and controversy has surrounded the topic of grade retention.
Consequently, multiple studies disclosed significant flaws in the practice of grade retention.
Grade retention weaknesses include the high cost, unproven long-term benefits, as well as the
negative impact on the student from a psychological or social perspective.
To begin with, grade retention has negatively affected school budgets, due to the high cost.
For example, in Texas, the cost is over $10,000 for a student to repeat 1 year (National
Association of School Psychologists, 2011). With 7% of the students retained each year,
retention comes at a significantly high cost (Aldridge & Goldman, 2007). If proven to lower
dropout rates and increase long-term academic achievement of those retained, the investment
would be worthwhile. Since studies show grade retention fails to meet these objectives, a better
use of schools funds includes alternatives programs with proven results in these areas.
Anothernegativeconsiderationofgraderetentionisthatittypicallydoesnotaddressthe
provenlackoflongtermresults.Retained students often show a sharp improvement, relative to
promoted peers, in meeting grade level standards during the repeat year, when retained students
are exposed to a familiar curriculum; however, this improvement often disappears 2 to 3 years
subsequent to retention(NationalAssociationofSchoolPsychologists,2011).Studies
concluded,theyearfollowingretention,promotedstudentstypicallyoutperformedtheirretained
counterparts(Aldridge&Goldman,2007).Consequently,withoutidentificationand
remediationofarootcausebehindtheretention,longtermresultsarenotpossible.
Onemoreconsiderationofgraderetentionisthenegativeimpactfromapsychologicalor
socialperspective.Thisisduetothenegativestigmaattachedtothoseheldback,whiletheir
classmatesmoveon(Russo,2005).Additionally,retainedstudentstendtofeelangryorsaddue

Grade Retention - Draft #3 3

toretentionandfearreactionoffamilyandfriends(Aldridge&Goldman,2007).Inaddition,the
feelingoffailingatschoolalsotiestoincreasehealthriskbehaviorssuchassmoking,alcohol
use,andweaponsrelatedviolence(Aldridge&Goldman,2007).Therefore,studiesfindshort
termissuesforretainedstudentsincludeloweracademicselfefficacy,behavioralissues,
classroomengagement,andpeeracceptance(NationalAssociationofSchoolPsychologists,
2011).While,studiescontinuetoconfirmamuchhigherdropoutrateforretainedstudentsthan
thosepromoted.Furthermore,childrenretainedmultipletimeshaveanevengreaterprobability
ofneverfinishinghighschool(Aldridge&Goldman,2007).Fromtheperspectiveofpreventing
studentsfromdroppingoutofschoolbeforehighschoolgraduation,studiesdeterminedgrade
retentionprovestobeineffective.
In conclusion, I view the real issue to be much larger than a dichotomous choice of either
grade retention or social promotion for students unable to achieve expected minimum academic
test scores. Based on my experience, the real issue also includes the students on the other side of
the spectrum, the students who perform above grade level. My son was a student that
consistently scored high on tests, but often had disciplinary issues due to boredom in school. He
attributed his boredom to what he termed as unneeded repetition and spending time helping
those who progressed at a slower pace. Similarly, to retained students, skipping a grade for an
advanced student temporarily addresses their issue. However, typically the next year the problem
returns. In my opinion, the real issues are how to best educate those significantly above or below
average for their age or grade level. I think the answer lies in investing customized programs to
allow the faster students to progress through the educational system more quickly and allow
those (Aldridge & Goldman, 2007) who need more time and focus to also progress at a pace
appropriate for their capabilities.

Grade Retention - Draft #3 4

References
Adridge,J.,Goldman,R.(2007).Currentissuesandtrendsineducation.Boston, MA:
Pearson.
NationalAssociationofSchoolPsychologists.(2011).Graderetentionandsocialpromotion
(WhitePaper).Bethesda,MD:Author.
Russo,A.(2005).Retainingretention.EducationNext,5(1),4348.