NotesFAQContact Us
Search Tips
ERIC Number: ED492017
Record Type: Non-Journal
Publication Date: 2005-Jan
Pages: 27
Abstractor: ERIC
Grade Retention: A Three Part Series. Policy Briefs. Grade Retention: A Flawed Education Strategy [and] Cost-Benefit Analysis of Grade Retention [and] Grade Retention: The Gap between Research and Practice
Xia, Claire; Glennie, Elizabeth
Center for Child and Family Policy, Duke University (NJ1)
This document compiles a series of three policy briefs focused on the subject of grade retention. The first brief, "Grade Retention: A Flawed Education Strategy," suggests educators and policymakers caution the use of grade retention as a remedy for poor student performance. As concluded by the majority of past studies, grade retention is a failed and expensive strategy to increase academic achievement. This brief asserts alternative remediation strategies such as individualized student instruction, parental involvement, curriculum development, and school restructuring, should be explored and used to bring under-achieving students up to standard. The second policy brief in this document, "Cost-Benefit Analysis of Grade Retention," provides a possible economic framework to quantitatively evaluate the costs and benefits to society of retaining one student in a grade level for an additional year. Using the standard criteria for looking at the costs and benefits of social programs, costs and savings are identified in three areas: education costs, costs associated with economic wellbeing, and costs associated with crime. "Grade Retention: The Gap between Research and Practice" represents the final policy brief in this series. It examines the apparent gap between research findings and retention practice and discusses reasons for its existence in four aspects: public belief, teachers' perspectives, research issues, and politics. (Individual briefs contain references.) [The policy briefs presented in this document were produced by the Center for Child and Family Policy.]
Center for Child and Family Policy, Duke University. 257 Sanford Institute of Public Policy, Box 90264, Durham, NC 27708-0264. Tel: 919-613-7319; Fax: 919-681-1533; e-mail:; Web site:
Publication Type: Opinion Papers; Reports - Descriptive
Education Level: N/A
Audience: Teachers; Policymakers
Language: English
Sponsor: N/A
Authoring Institution: Duke Univ., Durham, NC. Terry Sanford Inst. of Public Policy.
Grant or Contract Numbers: N/A