How School District Policy Influences Grade Level Retention in Elementary Schools

Research evidence indicates that retention, requiring students to repeat a grade level, fails to raise achievement or enhance social and personal adjustment. Moreover, it does not produce homogeneous classes, may be discriminatory, and is linked to dropping out. Retention continues, however, support...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Educational evaluation and policy analysis 1992-12, Vol.14 (4), p.421-438
Main Authors: Schwager, Mahna T., Mitchell, Douglas E., Mitchell, Tedi K., Hecht, Jeffrey B.
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Academic achievement
Beliefs
Board of Education Policy
Criteria
Cultural values
Districts
Elementary schools
Mobility
Organizational structure
Retention
School districts
School Holding Power
Student Mobility
Students
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:Research evidence indicates that retention, requiring students to repeat a grade level, fails to raise achievement or enhance social and personal adjustment. Moreover, it does not produce homogeneous classes, may be discriminatory, and is linked to dropping out. Retention continues, however, supported by public belief and sanctioned by district policy. A sample of district retention policies were rated according to two overarching dimensions: (a) the amount of effort required to implement, and (b) the extent to which objective criteria govern retention decisions. Differences along these dimensions are hypothesized to influence district retention rates. Results support use of this framework for comparing retention policies and retention rates when district size is taken into account. Larger districts retain more students, adopt more comprehensive retention policies, and provide a different policy context for implementation than smaller districts. Identified policy dimensions influence retention rates in opposite ways in large and small districts. We suggest that district cultural beliefs and organizational structures for student mobility contribute to these differences. Policy, rather than directly controlling staff behavior, may provide “signals” that are interpreted through organizational belief systems. Thus, adoption of identical district policy may lead to different staff behavior in different school district contexts.
ISSN:0162-3737
1935-1062
DOI:10.3102/01623737014004421