ReadingRockets

Position Statement on Student Grade Retention and Social Promotion

By: National Association of School Psychologists (2008)

In this position statement about student grade retention and social promotion, the National Association of School Psychologists (NASP) identifies characteristics of students more likely to be retained; and the impact of retention at the secondary school level, late adolescence, and early adulthood. NASP also provides a long list of alternatives to retention and social promotion.

The increasing emphasis on educational standards and accountability has rekindled public and professional debate regarding the use of grade retention as an intervention to remedy academic deficits. While some politicians, professionals, and organizations have called for an end to "social promotion," many states and districts have established promotion standards.

Despite a century of research that fails to support the efficacy of grade retention, the use of grade retention has increased over the past 25 years. It is estimated that as many as 15% of American students are held back each year, and 30% - 50% of students in the US are retained at least once before ninth grade. Furthermore, the highest retention rates are found among poor, minority, inner-city youth. Research indicates that neither grade retention nor social promotion is an effective strategy for improving educational success. Evidence from research and practice highlights the importance of seeking alternatives that will promote social and cognitive competence of children and enhance educational outcomes.

The National Association of School Psychologists (NASP) promotes the use of interventions that are evidence-based and effective and discourages the use of practices which, though popular or widely accepted, are either not beneficial or are harmful to the welfare and educational attainment of America's children and youth. Given the frequent use of the ineffective practice of grade retention, NASP urges schools and parents to seek alternatives to retention that more effectively address the specific instructional needs of academic underachievers.

Research findings

Findings from extensive research during the last century on the efficacy of grade retention warrant serious consideration. The following summarizes the preponderance of the evidence.

Student Characteristics

Some groups of children are more likely to be retained than others. Those at highest risk for retention are male; African American or Hispanic; have a late birthday, delayed development and/or attention problems; live in poverty or in a single-parent household; have parents with low educational attainment; have parents that are less involved in their education; or have changed schools frequently. Students who have behavior problems and display aggression or immaturity are more likely to be retained. Students with reading problems, including English Language Learners, are also more likely to be retained.

Impact at the Elementary School Level

Impact at the Secondary School Level

Impact in Late Adolescence and Early Adulthood

There are multiple explanations for the negative effects associated with grade retention, including:

  1. The absence of specific remedial strategies to enhance social or cognitive competence
  2. Failure to address the risk factors associated with retention
  3. The consequences of being over-age for grade, which is associated with an assortment of deleterious outcomes, particularly as retained children approach middle school and puberty (stigmatizing by peers and other negative experiences of grade retention may exacerbate behavioral and socio-emotional adjustment problems)

Evidence of the psychosocial effects of grade retention is apparent in studies examining children's perceptions of twenty stressful life events. Initial research two decades ago indicated that, by the time students were in 6th grade, they feared retention most after the loss of a parent and going blind. In 2001, 6th grade students rated grade retention as the most stressful life event, followed by the loss of a parent and going blind.

Individual considerations

The research on retention at all age levels and across studies is based on group data. While there may be individual students who benefit from retention, no study has been able to predict accurately which children will gain from being retained. Under some circumstances, retention is less likely to yield negative effects:

Alternatives to retention and social promotion

Both grade retention and social promotion fail to improve learning or facilitate positive achievement and adjustment outcomes. Neither repeating a grade nor merely moving on to the next grade provides students with the supports they need to improve academic and social skills. Holding schools accountable for student progress requires effective intervention strategies that provide educational opportunities and assistance to promote the social and cognitive development of students. Recognizing the cumulative developmental effects on student success at school, both early interventions and follow-up strategies are emphasized.

Furthermore, in acknowledging the reciprocal influence of social and cognitive skills on academic success, effective interventions must be implemented to promote both social and cognitive competence of students. NASP encourages school districts to consider a wide array of well-researched, evidence-based, effective, and responsible strategies in lieu of retention or social promotion (see Algozzine, Ysseldyke, and Elliott, 2002 for a discussion of research-based tactics for effective instruction; see Shinn, Walker, and Stoner, 2002 for a more extensive discussion of interventions for academic and behavior problems).

Specifically, NASP recommends that educational professionals:

For children experiencing academic, emotional, or behavioral difficulties, neither grade retention nor social promotion is an effective remedy. If educational professionals are committed to helping all children achieve academic success and reach their full potential, we must discard ineffective practices, such as grade retention and social promotion, in favor of "promotion plus" specific interventions designed to address the factors that place students at risk for school failure.

NASP encourages school psychologists to actively collaborate with other professionals and parents in their school districts to address the findings of educational research, and develop and implement effective alternatives to retention and social promotion. Incorporating evidence-based interventions and instructional strategies into school policies and practices will enhance academic and social outcomes for all students.

References

References

Click the "References" link above to hide these references.

Algozzine, B., Ysseldyke, J. E., & Elliot, J. (2002). Strategies and tactics for effective instruction. Longmont, CO: Sopris West.

Anderson, G. E., Jimerson, S. R., & Whipple, A.D. (2002). Student's ratings of stressful experiences at home and school: Loss of a parent and grade retention as superlative stressors. Manuscript prepared for publication, available from authors at the University of California, Santa Barbara.

Anderson, G., Whipple, A., & Jimerson, S. (2002, November). Grade Retention: Achievement and mental health outcomes. Communiqué, 31 (3), handout pages 1-3.

Dawson, P. (1998, June). A primer on student grade retention: What the research says. Communiqué, 26 (8), 28-30.

Ferguson, P., Jimerson, S. R., & Dalton, M. (2001). Sorting out successful failures: Exploratory analyses of factors associated with academic and behavioral outcomes of retained students. Psychology in the Schools, 38 (4), 327-342.

Jimerson, S. R. (1999). On the failure of failure: Examining the association of early grade retention and late adolescent education and employment outcomes. Journal of School Psychology, 37 (3), 243-272.

Jimerson, S. R. (2001a). Meta-analysis of grade retention research: Implications for practice in the 21st century. School Psychology Review, 30 (3), 420-437.

Jimerson, S. R. (2001b). A synthesis of grade retention research: Looking backward and moving forward. The California School Psychologist, 6, 47-59.

Jimerson, S. R., Anderson, G., & Whipple, A. (2002). Winning the battle and losing the war: Examining the relation between grade retention and dropping out of high school. Psychology in the Schools, 39 (4), 441-457.

Jimerson, S. R., Carlson, E., Rotert, M., Egeland, B., & Sroufe, E. (1997). A prospective longitudinal study of the correlates and consequences of early grade retention. Journal of School Psychology, 35 (1), 3-25.

Jimerson, S. R., Egeland, B., Sroufe, L. A., & Carlson, E. (2000). A prospective longitudinal study of high school dropouts: Examining multiple predictors across development. Journal of School Psychology, 38 (6), 525-549.

Jimerson, S. R., & Kaufman, A. M. (2003). Reading, writing, and retention: A primer on grade retention research. The Reading Teacher, 56 (8).

McCoy, A. R., & Reynolds, A. J. (1999). Grade retention and school performance: An extended investigation. Journal of School Psychology, 37 (3), 273-298.

Shinn, M. R., Walker, H. M., & Stoner, G. (Eds.) (2002). Interventions for academic and behavior problems II: Preventive and remedial approaches. Bethesda, MD: National Association of School Psychologists.

National Association of School Psychologists. (2003). Position Statement on Student Grade Retention and Social Promotion. Bethesda, MD.www.nasponline.org. Permission to use this material must be directed to NASP.