School Retention vs. Social Promotion Discussion Chapter

Pages: 4 (1335 words)  ·  Bibliography Sources: ≈ 8  ·  File: .docx  ·  Level: Doctorate  ·  Topic: Teaching

School retention vs. social promotion

Effect of school retention or social promotion on teacher and student performance

From the respondents, it emerged that there is a lot of pressure on the schools to retain students who do not perform well in their academics. However, it emerged that there is little benefit of school retention since though the students are retained, they run the risk of being retained for a second time if their academics do not improve. This is similar to the result that was found by Tsao, Lin, Pitt, and Campbell (2009)

that though nearly three out of every ten students had to be retained or to attend summer school, they still made insufficient progress during their repeat year. Therefore they run the risk of being retained for another year.

A good number of the respondents also stated that schools have over the years tightened their strict promotion standards in order to reduce the accommodation of social promotion. They felt that though it is integral for students to be together with their peers regardless of their academic achievement, academic performance is important in order to maintain high standards in schools. As highlighted by / /, schools must always have benchmarks or gateways which can only be achieved by eliminating social promotion.

The result of the study also highlighted the importance of accountability in school retention. Some respondents pointed at the commonsense nature of accountability though it emerged that it was not so common. The reason why accountability is important can be drawn from Jacob and Lefgren (2009)

Download full Download Microsoft Word File
paper NOW!
who argues that in retaining students, there is need for the decision-making process to be transparent and to allow for accountability. Borderline students should be socially promoted since the negative effects of school retention may outweigh the positive effects expected to be achieved from retention.

The findings of this study are slightly different from those that are reported in Rumberger and Palardy (2005)

TOPIC: Discussion Chapter on School Retention vs. Social Promotion Assignment

. The authors argue that school retention does not have any positive effects at all. The findings of their study were that the practice of school retention did not help the students to improve their test scores and in fact was harmful to their self-esteem which created a vicious cycle. They said that it does not 'buy them extra time' neither does it provide them with an opportunity to 'consolidate their skills' which are the desired effects of retention. They also argued that to some extent, school retention contributed to the high number of dropouts from schools. A similar account is given in Lee and Burkam (2003)

. This can be associated with the self-esteem problems that those who are retained experience. According to the authors, the students who are retained are simply required to repeat the same curriculum which they have already failed once. This, according to the authors, is a prescription for further failure since no extra effort is put in for the children to improve their performance.

The argument presented by these authors is also supported by one respondent from this study who stated that children do not get better over time even though they are retained. Instead of retaining the underperforming students, it may be better to analyze their need for special education or extra effort in order to improve their performance. This is the only way which their performance can be improved. The assumption that children will perform better once they are forced to repeat and an expectation of better performance is placed on them is simply horribly wrong and misdirected.

Criterion used to determine social promotion or retention

The criteria for social promotion according to most of the respondents were majorly based on age and presence of disability. According to the respondents, each case of social promotion was handled uniquely since they had to sit in and decide whether the child met specific guidelines for social promotion. Students with disability were majorly given a free pass since it is thought that their disability impacts negatively on their performance. This was… [END OF PREVIEW] . . . READ MORE

Two Ordering Options:

Which Option Should I Choose?
1.  Download full paper (4 pages)Download Microsoft Word File

Download the perfectly formatted MS Word file!

- or -

2.  Write a NEW paper for me!✍🏻

We'll follow your exact instructions!
Chat with the writer 24/7.

School Retention vs. Social Promotion Term Paper

Social Promotion or School Retention Research Proposal

Gaming as an Instructional Strategy in Nursing Education Term Paper

Satisfaction of Registered Nurses (Kovner, Brewer, Cheng Research Proposal

Caffarella and Merriam Thesis

View 200+ other related papers  >>

How to Cite "School Retention vs. Social Promotion" Discussion Chapter in a Bibliography:

APA Style

School Retention vs. Social Promotion.  (2013, June 30).  Retrieved September 24, 2021, from

MLA Format

"School Retention vs. Social Promotion."  30 June 2013.  Web.  24 September 2021. <>.

Chicago Style

"School Retention vs. Social Promotion."  June 30, 2013.  Accessed September 24, 2021.