Kindergarten retention effects on long-term student academic outcomes

Running Head: KINDERGARTEN TEACHERS\\\' AND STAFF PERCEPTIONS OF GRADE RETENTION 1

Kindergarten Teachers\\\' and Staff Perceptions of Grade Retention

Student’s name Institutional Affiliation

Kindergarten Teachers\\\' and Staff Perceptions of Grade Retention-Literature Review Children appearing to be unprepared to attend primary school are usually allowed more time at the kindergarten level. But prior quasi-experimental studies illustrate adverse, although declining, impacts of retention at the kindergarten level on scholastic learning in early primary school. Extant proofs dealing with post-treatment scholastic trajectories in kids are extended by this research. Vandecandelaere and coworkers’ (2016) analysis of information from an extensive longitudinal research reveals that pupils repeating kindergarten largely exhibit improved performance in math until fifth grade, as compared to their performance if they weren’t retained in kindergarten. Further, if they weren’t retained, repeaters would be more likely to get stuck in the first grade, besides exhibiting retarded development and poor scores in math until fifth grade. Vandecandelaere and colleagues’ (2016) research finding indicates the psychological impacts of retention on kindergarten pupils. The authors reveal, indubitably, that the practice of retention, perhaps, has more negative, than positive, long-term impacts. Raffaele and coworkers (2016) studied the long-run results for kindergarten repeaters and delayed kindergarten entrants using a cohort comprising of 6,841 pupils. The aim was comparison of this cluster’s members to one another and to normally progressing students based on early childhood and demographic variables. To gauge long-run school-based results, propensity score examination helped look into pretreatment variances between clusters. Results were examined based on paid lunch against decreased-cost or free-of-cost status. Study results indicated that repeaters depicted increased early risk as compared to normally-progressing pupils and delayed entrants, in addition to poorer results in the long run despite controlling for extant variations (Rafaela et al., 2016). Besides special education placement, not many variations were evident between normally-progressing pupils and delayed entrants. Authors address research implications for progression-related decision-making as well. This study clearly establishes that retention is more harmful as compared to delayed entry for kindergarten pupils. Rafaela and colleagues (2016) firmly disagree with the claim that repeating kindergarten improves a child’s scholastic performance and overall growth. This finding is in sharp contrast to staff and educators’ views. Robertson’s (2016) study aimed at ascertaining whether retaining low performers at the kindergarten level improved academic scores by the time they complete grade three or not. A total of seventy pupils, segregated into 3 clusters (kindergarten repeaters, pupils who appropriately finished kindergarten and received promotion to the next academic level, and those advised to repeat kindergarten but promoted anyway based on their parents’ wish). Final language arts/English and math grades were scrutinized using the Honest Significant Difference examination by Tukey, analysis of variance, and other statistical techniques. Outcomes revealed scores in both the aforementioned areas weren’t appreciably different upon completion of the third grade in case of kindergarten repeaters and pupils advised to repeat but promoted anyway. These two clusters exhibited statistically significant decreased mean math grades as compared to successful kindergarten completers. Pupils with poor mathematical ability advised to repeat kindergarten struggled with math even in the third grade, irrespective of whether they repeated or didn’t repeat kindergarten. But no significant variation was witnessed in the three clusters with respect to language arts/English scores following culmination of grade III (Robertson, 2016). Pupils depicting poor language arts/English skills at the kindergarten level seemed to largely remedy these deficits when completing grade III. Discussion encompasses suggestions and recommendations with regard to repeating kindergarten. Experiences in math at the kindergarten level and three years hence ought to be improved for strengthening and improving pupils’ mathematical ability. Further, kindergarten repeaters retained owing to several deficits are recommended shared placement within transition kindergarten covering enhanced learning opportunities that facilitate their transition to the first grade (Robertson, 2016). School administrators, educators and children’s parents are typically responsible for determining whether or not a given pupil warrants promotion to the next grade without demonstrating a grasp of and mastery over kindergarten abilities or whether repeating kindergarten would prove more beneficial for him/her. Robertson’s (2016), Vandecandelaere and coworkers’ (2016), and Raffaele and colleagues’ (2016) studies attempt to resolve the problem. Their findings establish that repeating a grade doesn’t work. Further, the authors cite the need for additional studies on staff and educator views on this subject. Robertson (2016), in particular, explores suggestions and recommendations with regard to repeating kindergarten.