Bracey, G. W. (1999, June). Failing children-twice. Education Week on the Web,
Retrieved on January 18, 2001, from the World Wide Web, http://edweek.org/ew/1999/40bracey.h18

     This article dealt with the issue of retaining children when they are not performing at grade level. Retention has been presented by some as an alternative to social promotion to the next grade or as a threat to make children work harder. The author's stance is that this policy simply does not work.
     According to the article, many studies have proven the negative impact of retaining a student. Though some students perform better the following year, they do not show significant academic gains. In a comparison of low achieving students, those who were promoted to the next grade did at least as well as those who were held back. A 1991 study ranked 49 educational innovations in terms of impact on academic achievement and power. Retention was ranked in last place and was one of the few techniques that had negative results. In examining the policies of other countries, such as Finland and Japan, it was found that promotion of students for social reasons had no damaging effect on achievement.
     The author's other arguments against grade retention included greater cost to the school district, higher drop out rates, and negative emotional impact on the child. One study found that children felt retention in school was nearly as frightening as the loss of a parent or losing their sight. More positive alternatives listed by the author included extra help during the school year or summer school.
     After reading the article, I find that I am in complete agreement with the author. My own son, who is a low achieving student, was terribly frightened that he would be held back after second grade. When he registered for school and we examined the class list for third grade, he breathed an audible sigh of relief. He told me that he had been afraid all summer that he was going to “flunk”.
     I am also in agreement that the children who fail in school fare much better with extra assistance they receive from Title I services or special education programs for children with learning disabilities. Retention only makes the child conspicuous within his new peer group and serves to ostracize him.  The best example I can cite is the case of a student I once tutored in an after-school program. Though he should have been in fifth grade based on chronological age, he was only in third. This child had serious self-esteem problems which resulted in behavioral issues. He often referred to himself as "dumb" or "stupid," because he had been held back. Most of the other children had little to do with him not only due to his behavior but also due to his larger physical size. This child is a prime example of how damaging grade retention can be.