Differences in Social Adjustment and Classroom Behavior Between Children Retained in Kindergarten and Groups of Age and Grade Matched Peers

Pianta, Robert C.; Tietbohl, Phillip J.; Bennett, Elizabeth

doi:10.1207/s15566935eed0802_3

Cited by 33 publications

(13 citation statements)

References 4 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Studies investigating effects of grade retention on externalizing problems have produced inconsistent findings, with the majority of studies finding no effects (Alexander, Entwisle, & Dauber, 1994; Jimerson, Carlson, Rotert, Egeland, & Sroufe, 1997; Mantzicopoulos & Morrison, 1992; McCombs Thomas et al, 1992; McCoy & Reynolds, 1999). Some researchers have reported that retention increases students’ externalizing problems (Pianta, Tietbohl, & Bennett, 1997; Pagani et al, 2001), whereas at least one study documented that retention results in a decrease in externalizing problems (Gottfredson, Fink, & Graham, 1994). Variations in the timing of retention, the length of the follow-up, and the adequacy of controls for selection factors may contribute to inconsistent findings.…”

Section: Previous Research On Retention Effects On Psychosocial Outcomesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…A finding of no effect is most common for behavioral engagement (Ferguson, 1991; Gottfredson et al, 1994; Pierson & Connell, 1992), liking for or interest in school (Alexander et al, 1994; Hagborg et al, 1991), and academic self-efficacy (Alexander et al 1994; McCoy & Reynolds, 1999; Phelps, Dowdell, Rizzo, Ehrlich, & Wilczenski, 1992). The few findings of negative effects tend to come from studies with poor controls for preselection differences (Hagborg et al, 1991; Pianta et al, 1997). Importantly, a study using strong controls for preretention vulnerabilities reported positive effects of retention in the kindergarten grades on academic self-efficacy 2 and 4 years later (Hong & Yu, 2008).…”

Section: Previous Research On Retention Effects On Psychosocial Outcomesmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Effect of grade retention in first grade on psychosocial outcomes.

Wu¹,

West²,

Hughes³

2010

Journal of Educational Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In a 4-year longitudinal study, the authors investigated effects of retention in first grade on children's externalizing and internalizing behaviors; social acceptance; and behavioral, cognitive, and affective engagement. From a large multiethnic sample (n = 784) of children below the median on literacy at school entrance, 124 retained children were matched with 251 promoted children on the basis of propensity scores (probability of being retained in first grade estimated from 72 baseline variables). Relative to promoted children, retained children were found to benefit from retention in both the short and longer terms with respect to decreased teacher-rated hyperactivity, decreased peer-rated sadness and withdrawal, and increased teacher-rated behavioral engagement. Retained children had a short-term increase in mean peer-rated liking and school belongingness relative to promoted children, but this advantage showed a substantial decrease in the longer term. Retention had a positive short-term effect on children's perceived school belonging and a positive longer term effect on perceived academic self-efficacy. Retention may bestow advantages in the short-term, but longer term detrimental effects on social acceptance may lead to the documented longer term negative effects of retention.Keywords grade retention; growth curve model; propensity score; optimal matching; psychosocial outcomes For at least the past 4 decades, grade retention, the practice of having a student who has been in a given grade level for a full school year to remain at that level for a subsequent school year, has been a common but controversial educational practice (Holmes, 1989;Jackson, 1975;Lorence, 2006). With the increase in high stakes testing that began in the early 1990s and the related requirement that students meet grade-level academic competencies, grade retention has increased in frequency (Bali, Anagnostopoulos, & Roberts, 2005;Gootman, 2005;Roderick & Nagaoka, 2005). In 2004, U.S. Census data revealed that 9.6% of U.S. youths ages 16-19 years had been retained in grade one or more times. In Texas, the location of the current study, during the 2003-2004 school year, retention in first grade, the focal grade in the current study, was 6. 4%, compared with 5.8% in 1994-1995, prior (Texas Education Agency, 2005). These data suggest an increase of more than 10%, as compared with a decade earlier, in the proportion of children being retained in first grade.Given the prevalence of grade retention, one might expect that it enjoys strong empirical support. On the contrary, the current empirical evidence of the effects of grade retention on both academic and social-emotional adjustment is inconsistent but is widely characterized in published literature as negative (for meta-analyses, see Holmes, 1989;Jimerson, 2001a; for narrative reviews, see Jimerson, 2001b;Shepard, Smith, & Marion, 1996). However, the widely acknowledged methodological limitations of published studies make it difficult to reach firm conclusions regarding a caus...

show abstract

Section: Previous Research On Retention Effects On Psychosocial Outcomesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Previous Research On Retention Effects On Psychosocial Outcomesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Effect of grade retention in first grade on psychosocial outcomes.

Wu¹,

West²,

Hughes³

2010

Journal of Educational Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…These studies have yielded inconsistent results. For example, when teachers were asked to rate classroom behavior and peer acceptance, they rated retained students as displaying more problem behaviors in the classroom and as being less well liked by classmates than low-achieving promoted students (Jimerson, 1999;Pianta, Teitbohl, & Bennett, 1997). However, when Pierson and Connell (1992) asked third through sixth graders to rate on a 1 (very true) to 4 (not at all true) Likert scale their feelings in situations in which they are with their classmates (e.g., I feel … relaxed … ignored … happy), responses did not differ for retained children (N = 74) and matched-ability children who were never retained (N = 69).…”

Section: Grade Retention and Peer Relationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Short‐Term Effect of Grade Retention on Peer Relations and Academic Performance of At‐Risk First Graders

Gleason

Kwok

Hughes

2007

The Elementary School Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Using latent variable structural equation modeling, we tested a theoretical model positing that grade retention has a positive effect on children's teacher-and peer-rated academic competencies and on sociometric measures of peer acceptance. We also expected that the positive effect of grade retention on peer acceptance would be mediated by children's ability to meet academic challenges in their classrooms. Participants were 350 (52.6% male) ethnically diverse and academically at-risk first graders attending 1 of 3 school districts in Texas. An individually administered test of academic achievement, teacher-report and peer-report measures of academic competence, and peer-report measures of peer acceptance were collected on children in first grade and 1 year later, at which time 63 children were repeating first grade and 287 were in second grade. The hypothesized model provided a good fit to the data. Children's academic competencies, as perceived by peers and teachers, fully mediated the effect of retention on subsequent peer acceptance.When a child does not exhibit certain minimum academic competencies, teachers and parents face a dilemma. The child can be promoted to the next grade, with the hope that the child will somehow acquire the necessary competencies. This option is known as "social promotion." An alternative is to retain the child in grade to give the child another opportunity to master academic skills for that grade. This option is known as "grade retention." Passage in 2002 of the No Child Left Behind Act, with its emphasis on mastery of minimum grade-level competencies as a condition for promotion, has renewed discussion of grade retention in the public arena. However, many researchers have examined the effects of grade retention during childhood and adolescence (Alexander, Entwisle, & Dauber, 1994 BeebeFrankenberger, Bocian, MacMillan, & Gresham, 2004;Holmes & Matthews, 1984;Jimerson, 1999Jimerson, , 2001Jimerson, Carlson, Rotert, Egeland, & Sroufe, 1997;Mantzicopoulos, 1997;Mantzicopoulos & Morrison, 1992;McCoy & Reynolds, 1999;Meidel & Reynolds, 1999;Meisels & Liaw, 1993;Rumberger, 1995;Shepard & Smith, 1990).Generally, research has suggested that grade retention has a negative effect on the developmental trajectories of children; however, there are several inconsistencies in the graderetention literature. For example, Jimerson (2001) conducted a meta-analysis of 20 studies published between 1990 and 1999 that reported the effects of grade retention on academic and socioemotional development in retained students and a comparison group of promoted students. These 20 studies yielded 175 analyses reporting academic outcomes and a mean effect size (Cohen's d, based on averaging outcomes for each study and weighing each study equally) of −.39. However, effects across studies were varied. Only nine analyses suggested that retained students performed better academically than promoted students. Conversely, 82 analyses indicated that promoted students performed better than retained students, and 8...

show abstract

“…Pupils retained in a grade are less socially and emotionally adapted than pupils who have similar education results but did not repeat a grade (Holmes and Matthews, 1984). In teachers' opinions, pupils who repeat a grade are not liked by their peers (Pianta, Tietbohl and Bennett, 1997), which should translate into the perception that the quality of integration is worse.…”

mentioning

confidence: 95%

The dynamics of perception of social integration in primary school. The latent growth curve model

Grygiel¹

2017

Edukacja

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The article discusses the specific character of changes in the assessment of the sense of social integration in the classroom between primary school third-and sixth-graders, and their social, demographic and cognitive determinants, with special consideration given to a pupil's position in the sociometric network. The analysis of latent growth curves -based on a scalar longitudinal measurement invariance, the bifactor model of the Perceived Peer Integration Questionnaire (PPI) and three rounds of the nationwide study School determinants of educational effectiveness (N = 4349) -indicates that the second stage of learning in primary school is characterised by a more negative perception of peer integration in classroom settings, which cannot be explained by socio--demographic variables nor the relationships taking place within peer networks. This indicates that it may be linked to developmental changes rather than to the actual deterioration of peer relations.

show abstract

Differences in Social Adjustment and Classroom Behavior Between Children Retained in Kindergarten and Groups of Age and Grade Matched Peers

Cited by 33 publications

References 4 publications

Effect of grade retention in first grade on psychosocial outcomes.

Effect of grade retention in first grade on psychosocial outcomes.

The Short‐Term Effect of Grade Retention on Peer Relations and Academic Performance of At‐Risk First Graders

The dynamics of perception of social integration in primary school. The latent growth curve model

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About