This study of grade-level advancement/retention policies and procedures in 10 school districts shows how retention policy and procedure are disconnected from retention research. Administrators and teachers experience ethical dilemmas when district policy and prescribed practice collide with realities that underlie student failure. However, acts of discretionary insubordination offer compromises. As the study demonstrates, when policy and research align and when educators acknowledge that neither retention nor social promotion is acceptable, viable alternatives and intervention programs can be explored.
Akmal, T. T., & Larsen, D. E. (2004). Keeping history from repeating itself: Involving parents about retention decisions to support student achievement. Research in Middle Level Education Online, 27(2). Available at http://nmsa.org
2.
Alexander, K. A., Entwisle, D. R., & Dauber, S. L. (2003). On the success of failure: A reassessment of the effects of retention in the primary grades. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
3.
Balow, I. H., & Schwager, M. (1992). Retention in grade: A failed procedure. In R. J. Reitz (Ed.), Retention in grade: Looking for alternatives (pp. 7-49). Bloomington, IN: Phi Delta Kappa.
4.
Barksdale-Ladd, M. A., & Thomas, K. F. (2000). What’s at stake in high-stakes testing: Teachers and parents speak out. Journal of Teacher Education, 51, 384-397.
5.
Bogdan, R. C., & Biklen, S. K. (1998). Qualitative research for education: An introduction to theory and methods. Boston: Allyn and Bacon.
6.
Bourdieu, P. (1977). Outline of a theory of practice. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
7.
Bourdieu, P., & Passeron, J. C. (1990). Reproduction in education, society, and culture (2nd ed.). London: Sage.
8.
Byrnes, D. A. (1989). Attitudes of students, parents, and educators toward repeating a grade. In L. A. Shepard & M. L. Smith (Eds.), Flunking grades: Research and policies on retention (pp. 108-131). New York: Falmer.
9.
“Columbia” School District. (1995). Middle school promotion/retention policy. “Columbia,” WA: Author.
10.
Commission on Excellence in Education. (1983). A nation at risk. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.
11.
Darling-Hammond, L. (1998). Alternatives to grade retention. The School Administrator, 55(7), 18-21.
12.
Dutro, E., Collins, K. M., & Collins, J. (2002, April). Teachers’ responses to the standards movement: Perspectives from literacy practitioners in three states. Paper presented at the meeting of the American Educational Research Association, New Orleans, LA.
13.
Dworkin, A. G., Lorence, J., Toenjes, L. A., Hill, A. N., Perez, N., & Thomas, M. (1999). Elementary school retention and social promotion in Texas: An assessment of students who failed the reading section of the TAAS. Houston, TX: Sociology of Education Research Group, University of Houston.
Fowler, F. C. (2004). Policy studies for educational leaders: An introduction (2nd ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Education.
16.
Gottfredson, D. C., Fink, C. M., & Graham, N. (1994). Grade retention and problem behavior. American Educational Research Journal, 31(4), 761-784.
17.
Grissom, J. B., & Shepard, L. A. (1989). Repeating and dropping out of school. In L. A. Shepard & M. L. Smith (Eds.), Flunking grades: Research and policies on retention (pp. 34-63). New York: Falmer.
18.
Hanson, E. M. (1996). Educational administration and organizational behavior (4th ed.). Boston: Allyn and Bacon.
19.
Harrington-Lueker, D. (1998). Retention vs. social promotion. The School Administrator, 55(7), 6-12.
20.
Hauser, R. M. (2001). Should we end social promotion? Truth and consequences. In G. Orfield & M. Kornhaber (Eds.), Raising standards or raising barriers? Inequality and high stakes testing in public education (pp. 151-178). New York: Century Foundation Press.
21.
Jimerson, S. R. (2001). Meta-analysis of grade retention research: Implications for practice in the 21st century. School Psychology Review, 30, 420-437.
22.
Johnson, B., & Christensen, L. (2000). Educational research: Quantitative and qualitative approaches. Boston: Allyn and Bacon.
23.
Kaase, K. (2002, April). Promotion/retention of students in grades K-8. Paper presented at the meeting of the American Educational Research Association, New Orleans, LA.
24.
Kidder, R. M. (1995). How good people make tough choices: Resolving the dilemmas of ethical living. New York: Fireside.
25.
Kornhaber, M. L., & Orfield, G. (2001). High-stakes testing policies: Examining their assumptions and consequences. In G. Orfield & M. L. Kornhaber (Eds.), Raising standards or raising barriers? Inequality and high-stakes testing in public education (pp. 1-18). New York: Century Foundation Press.
26.
Larsen, D. E. (2002). When students don’t “make the grade”: A qualitative study of educators’ ethical reasoning and decisions about student retention. Unpublished manuscript, Washington State University.
27.
Lenarduzzi, G. P., & McLaughlin, T. F. (1995). The effects of nonpromotion in junior high school on academic achievement and scholastic effort. Reading Improvement, 27(3), 212-217.
28.
Moore, D. R. (2000). Rejoinder to [Ending social promotion: Results from the first two years]. Retrieved August 22, 2002, from Designs for Change Web site, www.dfc1.0rg
29.
Noddings, N. (1999). Introduction. In M. S. Katz, N. Noddings, & K. A. Strike (Eds.), Justice and caring: The search for common ground in education (pp. 1-4). New York: Teachers College Press.
30.
Noddings, N. (2000). A morally defensible mission for schools in the 21st century. In F. W. Parkay & G. Hass (Eds.), Curriculum planning: A contemporary approach (7th ed., pp. 9-14). Boston: Allyn and Bacon.
31.
Oliva, P. F. (2005). Developing the curriculum (6th ed.). Boston: Pearson, Allyn and Bacon.
32.
Owings, W. A., & Kaplan, L. S. (2001). Alternatives to retention and social promotion. Bloomington, IN: Phi Delta Kappa Educational Foundation.
33.
Parker, D. R. (2001). Social promotion or retention? Leadership, 30(4), 12-16.
34.
“Ponderosa” School District. (1988). Placement, promotion, advancement, and retention of students. “Ponderosa,” WA: Author.
35.
Reeves, D. B. (2004). Accountability for learning: How teachers and school leaders can take charge. Alexandria, VA: Association for Curriculum and Supervision Development.
36.
Roche, K. (1999). Moral and ethical dilemmas in Catholic school settings. In P. T. Begley (Ed.), Values and educational leadership (pp. 255-272). Albany: State University of New York Press.
Sergiovanni, T. J. (1992). Moral leadership: Getting to the heart of school improvement. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
39.
Shapiro, J. P., & Stefkovich, J. A. (2001). Ethical leadership and decision making in education: Applying theoretical perspectives to complex dilemmas. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
40.
Shepard, L. A. (1989). A review of research on kindergarten retention. In L. A. Shepard & M. L. Smith (Eds.), Flunking grades: Research and policies on retention (pp. 64-78). New York: Falmer.
41.
Shepard, L. A., & Smith, M. L. (1989a). Academic and emotional effects of kindergarten retention. In L. A. Shepard & M. L. Smith (Eds.), Flunking grades: Research and policies on retention (pp. 79-107). New York: Falmer.
42.
Shepard, L. A., & Smith, M. L. (1989b). Introduction and overview. In L. A. Shepard & M. L. Smith (Eds.), Flunking grades: Research and policies on retention (pp. 1-15). New York: Falmer.
43.
Smith, M. L., Heinecke, W., & Noble, A. J. (1999). Assessment policy and political spectacle. Teachers College Record, 101, 151-191.
44.
Spring, J. (2002). Conflict of interests: The politics of American education (4th ed.). Boston: McGraw-Hill Higher Education.
45.
“St. Helens” School District. (1991). Placement. “St. Helens,” WA: Author.
46.
Strauss, A. L. (1987). Qualitative analysis for social scientists. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
47.
Strike, K. A., Haller, E. J., & Soltis, J. F. (1998). The ethics of school administration (2nd ed.). New York: Teachers College Press.
48.
Thomas, V. G. (2000). Ending social promotion: Help or hindrance? Kappa Delta Pi Record, 37(1), 30-32.
49.
Tyack, D. B. (1974). The one best system: A history of American urban education. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
50.
U.S. Department of Education. (2004). No child left behind. Retrieved October 2, 2004, from http://www.ed.gov/nclb/landing
51.
Valencia, R. R. (1997). The evolution of deficit thinking: Educational thought and practice. Bristol, PA: Falmer.
52.
Whipple, A. (2002, April). Impact of retention and the link to dropping out. Paper presented at the meeting of the American Educational Research Association, New Orleans, LA.
53.
Willower, D. J., & Licata, J. W. (1997). Values and valuation in the practice of educational administration. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin.
