IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/sagope/v3y2013i2p2158244013486993.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Grade Retention

Author

Listed:
  • Gia A. Renaud

Abstract

Academic accountability is of great concern, therefore grade retention is being considered for both students with and without disabilities who are not meeting end-of-the-year achievement benchmarks. The purpose of this study was to investigate teacher attitudes toward grade retention and whether practices differ when recommending retention of students with or without disabilities. This mixed-methods study utilized a paper-and-pencil questionnaire using a Likert-type scale, as well as two open-ended questions and a checklist. Teacher interviews were also conducted. The findings of this study indicate that teachers are considering a multitude of factors when considering grade retention for their struggling students. Academic performance was the factor that teachers (77%) indicated the most frequently. Although teachers felt pressure and accountability from high stakes testing, they felt test results should be one of many factors considered in the retention decision.

Suggested Citation

  • Gia A. Renaud, 2013. "Grade Retention," SAGE Open, , vol. 3(2), pages 21582440134, April.
    • Handle: RePEc:sae:sagope:v:3:y:2013:i:2:p:2158244013486993
    DOI: 10.1177/2158244013486993
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/2158244013486993
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/2158244013486993?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Jon Lorence & Anthony Gary Dworkin, 2006. "Elementary Grade Retention in Texas and Reading Achievement Among Racial Groups: 1994–2002," Review of Policy Research, Policy Studies Organization, vol. 23(5), pages 999-1033, September.
    2. Carl Frederick & Robert Hauser, 2008. "Have we put an end to social promotion? Changes in school progress among children aged 6 to 17 from 1972 to 2005," Demography, Springer;Population Association of America (PAA), vol. 45(3), pages 719-740, August.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Servaas van der Berg & Gabrielle Wills & Rebecca Selkirk & Charles Adams & Chris van Wyk, 2019. "The cost of repetition in South Africa," Working Papers 13/2019, Stellenbosch University, Department of Economics.
    2. Anastasia Dimiski, 2020. "Factors that affect Students’ performance in Science: An application using Gini-BMA methodology in PISA 2015 dataset," Working Papers 2004, University of Guelph, Department of Economics and Finance.
    3. Yang, Mi-Youn & Chen, Zibei & Rhodes, Judith L.F. & Orooji, Marmar, 2018. "A longitudinal study on risk factors of grade retention among elementary school students using a multilevel analysis: Focusing on material hardship and lack of school engagement," Children and Youth Services Review, Elsevier, vol. 88(C), pages 25-32.
    4. Tafreschi, Darjusch & Thiemann, Petra, 2016. "Doing it twice, getting it right? The effects of grade retention and course repetition in higher education," Economics of Education Review, Elsevier, vol. 55(C), pages 198-219.
    5. Temple, Judy & Arteaga, Irma & Reynolds, Arthur, 2010. "Low birthweight, preschool education, and school remediation," MPRA Paper 46977, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    6. Dong, Yingying, 2010. "Kept back to get ahead? Kindergarten retention and academic performance," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 54(2), pages 219-236, February.
    7. Diederik Boertien & Fabrizio Bernardi, 2019. "Same-Sex Parents and Children’s School Progress: An Association That Disappeared Over Time," Demography, Springer;Population Association of America (PAA), vol. 56(2), pages 477-501, April.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:sae:sagope:v:3:y:2013:i:2:p:2158244013486993. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.