Retention: Can We Stop Failing Kids?, The Harvard Education Letter, May/June 1991.
Carstens, Andrea and Andrews, Retention and Social Promotion for the Exceptional Child, School Psychology Review, 1985, 14(1), pp. 48-63.
Charlesworth, Rosalind, "Behind" Before They Start? Deciding How To Deal With the Risk of Kindergarten "Failure", Young Children, March 1989, Professor of Curriculum and Instruction, and Assistant Chairperson for Graduate Studies in the College of Education, Louisiana State University.
Cooke, Gary and John Stammer, Grade Retention and Social Promotion Practices, Childhood Education, March/April 1985, Professors, Department of Elementary and Early Childhood Education, The University of Toledo, Ohio.
Dawson, Margaret M., and Mary Ann Rafoth, Why Student Retention Doesn't Work, Streamlined Seminar, Volume 9, Number 3, January 1, Journal of the National Association of Elementary School Principals.
Frymier, Jack, "Retention in Grade Is ""Harmful' to Students", Education Week, Senior Fellow at Phi Delta Kappa, Bloomington, IN.
Hamilton, Bruce and Sue Burkholder, A Team Approach to Grade Advancement, Streamlined Seminar, Volume 9, Number 3, January 1, Journal of the National Association of Elementary School Principals.
Holmes, C. Thomas and Kenneth M. Matthews, The Effects of Non-Promotion on Elementary and Junior High School Pupils: A Meta-Analysis, Review of Educational Research, Summer 1984, ,
Juel, Connie and Judy A. Leavell, Retention and Non-Retention of At-Risk Readers in First Grade and Their Subsequent Reading Achievement, Journal of Learning Disabilities, 21(9), November 1988, 571-580.
McNergney, Robert and Martin Haberman, Retention Holds Kids Back, NEA Today, November 1989.
Meisels, Samuel, Four Myths About America's Kindergartens, Education Week.
Meisels, Samuel J., High-Stakes Testing, Educational Leadership, April 1989, The use of readiness tests to classify, promote and retain children is inappropriate and costly; we can help young students begin school more successfully by reformulating curriculum and classroom organization.
Meisels, Samuel J., Uses and Abuses of Developmental Screening and School Readiness Testing, Young Children, January 1987, Professor in the School of Education and Research Scientist in the Center for Human Growth and Development at The University of Michigan, Ann Arbor.
Meisels, Samuel J., Iatrogenic Effects: Doing Harm by Doing Good: Iatrogenic Effects of Early Childhood Enrollment and Promotion Policies, Early Childhood Research Quarterly (1991), Center for Human Growth and Development, The University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, "This paper examines the rationale and research data about four practices: Raising the age at entry, retention in grade, extra-year and transition programs, and parental holding out from kindergarten. The problematic effects of these phenomena are identified, and their role in establishing a "four-tiered kindergarten" is described. An alternative approach to conceptualizing readiness that is free of these negative effects is presented."
Meisels, Samuel J., and Liaw Fong-ruey, Retention Effects: Does Early Retention in Grade Reduce the Risk of Later Academic Failure? Center for Human Growth and Development, The University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Submitted: January 11, 1991. This study examined the impact of retention in kindergarten through grade three by using data from the National Education Longitudinal Student of 1988. First, student who were retained in K-3 were compared with those retained in grades 4-8. Second, K-3 retainees were compared with a group of non-retainees who were matched on grade, race, sex and social class. Results show that early retention is not unequivocally superior to later retention, although the negative impact of retention may have been more exaggerated for the late retainees whose experience of failure was a closer proximity to the point of assessment. In comparisons of students retained K-3 with the matched group of non-retainees, the non-retained students had higher grades, test scores, self-concept, and locus of control than the retained group. Arguments against retention policies are strengthened by these findings. The importance of implementing alternative methods of assisting students at-risk for academic failure is noted.
Norton, M. Scott, What Happens If We Fail Johnny?, The Clearing House for the Contemporary Educator in Middle and Secondary Schools, March 1987.
Peterson, Sarah E., et al, A Longitudinal Study of the Effects of Retention/Promotion on Academic Achievement, American Educational Research Journal, 1987, 24(1), 107-18.
Rafoth, Mary Ann, Dawson, Margaret and Karen Carey, Supporting Paper on Retention, CommuniquΘ, December 1988, p. 17.
Rose, Janet S., Frederic J. Medway, V. L. Cantrell, Susan H. Marus, A Fresh Look at the Retention-Promotion Controversy, Journal of School Psychology, December 1981.
Rumberger, Russell W., High School Dropouts: A Review of Issues and Evidence, Review of Educational Research, 1987, 57(2), pp. 101-122.
Shepard, Lorrie A., and Mary Lee Smith, What Doesn't Work: The Practice of Retention in the Elementary Grades, CommuniquΘ, Education Week, September 1989.
Shepard, Lorrie A., Mary Lee Smith (editors), Flunking Grades: Research and Policies on Retention., Falmer Press, New York, 1989.
