Social promotion or retention? two wrongs still don't make a right

Leadership, March, 2001 by Dennis R. Parker

The case against traditional retentions

Typical of western thought is the habit of generating either/or choices. The issue of social promotion or retention is a perfect example. Alfred Korzybski, in "Science and Sanity" (1933), pointed out that either/or options contribute to maladjustments or "unsanity" by making us blind to all the possibilities both outside as well as in between the two options. Although it appears "logical" to choose retention as the alternative to social promotion, perching ourselves on the horns of an either/or dilemma -- where both horns have a history of doing damage -- is no solution.

Unfortunately, as pressure for improved student performance has grown, the number of retentions and the number of laws calling for them has also grown. Although formal data are scarce, one report says, "Research suggests that retention is on the rise ... from 1980 to 1992 the national percentage of retained students increased from approximately 20 percent to nearly 32 percent" (Owings and Magliaro, 1998).

And this has occurred in the face of a sizeable literature on the negative effects of traditional retentions:

* Approximately 60 percent of students retained once drop out of school by grade 12.

* An average of 30 percent of students retained once drop out by grade nine.

* Students retained twice have a 90 percent chance of dropping out before graduating.

Although some studies show modest academic gains for students retained in kindergarten or grade one, the gains of retained students seem to wash out by grades two and three. In fact, the only major difference between students who were retained vs. like students who were socially promoted is the emotional stigma carried by the former for the rest of their lives (California Department of Education, 1998).

As one research summary put it, "Few practices in education have such overwhelming negative research findings arrayed against them" (ACSA, 1998).

Clearly, traditional, year-long retention is not the solution to problems of social promotion or educational inequity. Although the admonition of the medical profession to "at least do no harm" could easily be applied here, maintaining the status quo of social promotion is also unacceptable.

An alternative: strategic schooling

As an antidote to traditional views of social promotion and retention, consider the following three constructs. They form the basis of what might be called "strategic schooling." They are drawn from the principles of Psycho-Cybernetics (M. Maltz, 1960) and the notion that the brain and other complex systems, like schools, are "goal-seeking devices." These systems can only function optimally when the following elements are in place and fully functional.

Targets

The first element is targets: both students and content. By law, there are three types of students to be targeted in any district retention policy: struggling, at risk of retention and retained. The implication is that there should be assessments and remedies in place to accelerate the learning of each student -- by name -- in each group.