After examining the policies regarding the promotion and reten tion of students in South Carolina and several other states, the authors recommend alternatives to retention as well as considera tions for policy development.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Bossing, L., and Brien, P. "A Review of the Elementary School Promotion Retention Dilemma." 1980. ERIC Document No. ED 212 362.
2.
Cates, J.A., and Ash, P. "The End of a Commonsense Approach to Basics." Phi Delta Kappan65( 1983):136-137.
3.
Frank, C. "Equity for All Students: The New York City Promotion Gates Program . " Educational Leadership41 (1984):62-65.
4.
Frick, R. "In Support of Academic Red Shirting." Education Week , January 1985.
5.
Grandy, F. "A Project To Rescue Pupils Held Back Twice." New York Times, November 14, 1982.
6.
Larabee, D.F. "Setting the Standard: Alternative Policies for Student Promotion." Harvard Educational Review54 ( 1984):67-87.
7.
Levine, S., and Costelloe, M.J. "The John Dewey High School Adventure. " Phi Delta Kappan52(1971):108-110.
8.
Medway, F.J., and Rose, J.S. "Retention May Not Be the Best Answer." The Island Packet, May 1984.
9.
Norton, S.M. "It's Time To Get Tough on Student Promotions—Or Is It?" Contemporary Education54(1983):283-286.
10.
Rose, J.S.,: Medway, F.J.: Cantrell, V.L.: and Marcus, S.H. "A Fresh Look at the Retention-Promotion Controversy." Journal of School Psychology21 ( 1983):201-211.
11.
The South Carolina Education Improvement Act. Subdivision B., Subpart 2: Enacting a Promotion Policy, 1984.
12.
Thompson, S. "Grade Retention and Social Promotion." Burlington , Calif.: Association of California School Administrators. 1980. ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. EA 012266.
13.
Zirkel, Perry A., and Gluckman, Ivan B. "Nonpromotion of Students." NASSP Bulletin, March 1982.
