Is the Glass Half Full or Mostly Empty? Ending Social Promotion in Chicago

Roderick, Melissa; Nagaoka, Jenny

doi:10.1111/j.1744-7984.2005.00032.x

Cited by 12 publications

(14 citation statements)

References 39 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Relevant to this latter point, it is useful to note that the present cross‐sectional findings concur with prior longitudinal research. For example, as noted in the introduction, Alexander et al (1994) found in follow‐up longitudinal data analysis that grade retention was counter‐productive (Alexander et al , 2001); in the Chicago Longitudinal Study, Roderick et al (2005), Temple et al (2004) and Ou and Reynolds (2010) showed negative long‐term effects in academic and post‐secondary education outcomes; and in a 21‐year longitudinal study, Jimmerson (1991) found a significant likelihood of poor educational and employment outcomes for retained students (see also Sandoval & Fitzgerald, 1985). Hence, whilst noting the limitations of the present cross‐sectional design, the findings are supported by longitudinal work.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 97%

“…For example, although Alexander et al (1994) showed early benefits of grade retention, using follow‐up data they concluded it was counter‐productive (Alexander et al , 2001). The Chicago Longitudinal Study also showed early success but later analyses showed the usual long‐term decline in academic outcomes (Temple et al , 2004; Roderick et al , 2005; Ou & Reynolds, 2010). A 21‐year longitudinal study showed a greater likelihood of poor educational and employment outcomes for retained students when compared to promoted students of the same level of achievement (Jimmerson, 1999).…”

Section: Grade Retention Social Promotion and Academic Outcomesmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Holding back and holding behind: grade retention and students’ non-academic and academic outcomes

Martin

2011

British Educational Research Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The present study examined the implications of grade retention (repeating a grade) and social promotion (automatic promotion to the next grade each year) for high school students’ academic and non‐academic outcomes. Based on data from 3261 high school students, structural equation modeling demonstrated that, after controlling for interactions with other factors, demographic covariates and ability, there were significant (p < 0.001) main effects of grade retention. In terms of academic factors, grade retention was a significant negative predictor of academic self‐concept and homework completion and a significant positive predictor of maladaptive motivation and weeks absent from school. In terms of non‐academic factors, grade retention was a significant negative predictor of self‐esteem but was not significantly associated with relationship with peers. In follow‐up analyses using a sub‐sample of retained (n = 186) and promoted (n = 186) students matched by ability, age and gender, findings were confirmed and with stronger effects on some factors. For nations and systems emphasizing grade retention and for those emphasizing social promotion, findings have implications for educational practice, policy and theories of child and academic development.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 97%

Section: Grade Retention Social Promotion and Academic Outcomesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Holding back and holding behind: grade retention and students’ non-academic and academic outcomes

Martin

2011

British Educational Research Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…This research consistently reports that students from poor or single-parent households, or whose parents did not graduate from high school, are at greater risk of dropping out from school than students from families without these risk factors (Alexander, Entwisle, & Horsey, 1997; Goldschmidt & Wang, 1999; Rumberger, 1995; Rumberger & Larson, 1998; Swanson & Schneider, 1999). The earlier research also suggests that students with adult responsibilities (Cairns, Cairns, & Neckerman, 1989; Gleason & Dynarski, 2002; Goldschmidt & Wang, 1999; Neild & Balfanz, 2006), with a sibling who has dropped out (Teachman, Paasch, & Carver, 1996), who have been retained (Goldschmidt & Wang, 1999; Roderick, 1994; Roderick, Nagaoka, Bacon, & Easton, 2000; Rumberger, 1995; Rumberger & Larson, 1998), or who have changed schools (Astone & McLanahan, 1994; Rumberger, 1995; Rumberger & Larson, 1998; Swanson & Schneider, 1999) are more likely to dropout of school.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

High school dropouts: Interactions between social context, self‐perceptions, school engagement, and student dropout^⋆

Fall

Roberts

2011

Journal of Adolescence

269

177

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Research suggests that contextual, self-system, and school engagement variables influence dropping out from school. However, it is not clear how different types of contextual and self-system variables interact to affect students’ engagement or contribute to decisions to dropout from high school. The self-system model of motivational development represents a promising theory for understanding this complex phenomenon. The self-system model acknowledges the interactive and iterative roles of social context, self-perceptions, school engagement, and academic achievement as antecedents to the decision to dropout of school. We analyzed data from the Education Longitudinal Study of 2002–2004 in the context of the self-system model, finding that perception of social context (teacher support and parent support) predicts students’ self-perceptions (perception of control and identification with school), which in turn predict students’ academic and behavioral engagement, and academic achievement. Further, students’ academic and behavioral engagement and achievement in 10th grade were associated with decreased likelihood of dropping out of school in 12th grade.

show abstract

“…For example, two widely used school policies, which we observe as student-level characteristics, involve retention and special education classification. Both may occur in elementary school, but there is much controversy about their validity and subsequent impact on academic achievement, attainment, and earnings (Roderick, Nagaoka, & Allensworth, 2005;Oswald, Best, & Coutinho, 2006). Mobility is a third student-level characteristic, which can be affected by policy decisions.…”

Section: Literature Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

Math Achievement Trajectories Among Black Male Students in the Elementary- and Middle-School Years

Zilanawala

Martin

Noguera³

et al. 2017

Educational Studies

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In this article, we analyze the variation in math achievement trajectories of Black male students to understand the different ways these students successfully or unsuccessfully navigate schools and the school characteristics that are associated with their trajectories. Using longitudinal student-level data from a large urban US city (n = 7,039), we analyze Black male students from one cohort to identify trajectories. We find a lack of growth in standardized math scores, suggesting that, on average, math proficiency among Black male students in our sample is declining over time. We found that the 4th-grade standardized math scores of subsidized-lunch students were somewhat lower than those of nonsubsidized students and those of retained students were substantially lower than their counterparts. The average math score of a Black male student's cohort appears to be the only variable amenable to policy manipulation that has a sizeable association with the growth of their standardized math scores, suggesting that putting Black male students in more challenging learning environments may be the

show abstract

Is the Glass Half Full or Mostly Empty? Ending Social Promotion in Chicago

Cited by 12 publications

References 39 publications

Holding back and holding behind: grade retention and students’ non-academic and academic outcomes

Holding back and holding behind: grade retention and students’ non-academic and academic outcomes

High school dropouts: Interactions between social context, self‐perceptions, school engagement, and student dropout^⋆

Math Achievement Trajectories Among Black Male Students in the Elementary- and Middle-School Years

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About

Is the Glass Half Full or Mostly Empty? Ending Social Promotion in Chicago

Cited by 12 publications

References 39 publications

Holding back and holding behind: grade retention and students’ non-academic and academic outcomes

Holding back and holding behind: grade retention and students’ non-academic and academic outcomes

High school dropouts: Interactions between social context, self‐perceptions, school engagement, and student dropout⋆

Math Achievement Trajectories Among Black Male Students in the Elementary- and Middle-School Years

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About

High school dropouts: Interactions between social context, self‐perceptions, school engagement, and student dropout^⋆