Students who were promoted made larger achievement gains than students with the same propensity for retention who were retained, in almost all grades¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · causal r2 · q2
Currency · newest study 1995 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q2 i? In almost all cases, students who were retained made smaller gains than students who were promoted, holding propensity for retention constant. → Stuart Luppescu 1995

Evidence¶

Stuart Luppescu 1995¶

Stuart Luppescu, Anthony S. Bryk, Paul Deabster, John Q. Easton, and Yeow Meng Thum. (1995). School Reform, Retention Policy, and Student Achievement Gains. University of Chicago draft report. https://consortium.uchicago.edu/publications/school-reform-retention-policy-and-student-achievement-gains

q2 · i? · causal · r2

Quasi-experimental comparison of equated ITBS gain scores (1987-1992, ~one million records) matching retained and promoted students on a logistic-regression propensity-for-retention measure. The article reports that retained students "made smaller gains than students who were promoted" in almost all cases; no standardized effect size is printed.

"Comparing gains made by the students who were retained with those who were not retained shows that in almost all cases, students who were retained made smaller gains than students who were promoted."

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• The propensity-for-retention measure discriminates retained from not-retained students, with first-grade log-odds of retention more than three times greater for actually retained students — related
• Third grade is the notable exception where retained students did not make smaller gains, likely due to the ITBS Level 8 to Level 9 test format change — a narrower finding that bears on this claim
• Retained students showed smaller three-year achievement gains than previously socially promoted students, though Rasch adjustment erased the gap for once-retained third graders — related
• Students in the top propensity-for-retention category showed higher gains than students not in the top category — related
• Third-grade retention under the Chicago policy produced no sustained academic benefits or substantial negative effects — related