Keeping 3rd Graders Behind

(SEE UPDATES BELOW) In his Mlive article, Should third-grade students with reading trouble be held back? Take our poll, Brian Smith describes a proposal introduced on October 29, 2013 by Rep. Amanda Price, (R-District 89). The bill is now being considered by the education committee of the Michigan House of Representatives. House Bill 5111, creates a law that would prevent any student from enrolling in 4th grade who has not achieved a score of "proficient" on the 3rd grade Michigan reading assessment. This applies both to students currently enrolled in a public school or public school academy (charter school) as well as students new to that school. No exceptions.

This is an equity and social justice issue. Below, is the comment I posted in response:

Brian Smith--you've cited one study, I hope you will continue your research into this incredibly important issue. There are hundreds of studies that have been conducted on retention. Overall, they have found that retention is not an adequate solution, for example see this article in ASCD's, Education Leadership (March 2008) that analyzes the research literature on the subject of retention up to that date:

http://www.ascd.org/publications/educational-leadership/mar08/vol65/num06/Grade-Retention.aspx

Not only do short-term gains quickly disappear, students who have been retained continue to struggle, have higher special education placements, are much more likely to drop out, and more than twice as likely to be minorities. The statistics show that "Black students are more than twice as likely to be held back as white students, and boys twice as likely as girls (National Center for Education Statistics, 2006)." The author concludes that "Although individual studies can be cited to support any conclusion, overall the preponderance of evidence argues that students who repeat a grade are no better off, and are sometimes worse off, than if they had been promoted with their classmates."

Other than for symbolic, political reasons, why would we do this to children when we know it doesn't adequately solve the problem? It seems to me that tax dollars that would be required to educate retained students for an additional year (that is, if they don't drop out first) would be much better spent on early interventions in Preschool to 3rd grade, where research has demonstrated it makes a real difference.

Research on early interventions/preschool:

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/10/22/us/language-gap-study-bolsters-a-push-for-pre-k.html?smid=tw-share&_r=0  (Hat tip to @Kyle_Mayer1 Assistant Superintendent, Instructional Services, OAISD)

HighScope Perry Preschool longitudinal study

UPDATE 11-23-13: John Hattie's meta-analysis indicates a negative 'effect size' for retention of -0.16. Check out this graphic of 138 effect sizes that impact learning and student achievement, adapted from Hattie's (2009) Visible Learning: A Synthesis of over 800 Meta-analyses Relating to Achievement
Also, check out Hattie's 2012 book, Visible Learning for Teachers: Maximizing Impact on Learning

UPDATE 12-4-13: Nancy Flanagan's blog post "The Third-Grade Crackdown Club".

UPDATE 1-20-14: Michigan lawmakers and educators continue to work on bill that would flunk 3rd graders via @MichiganRadio http://bit.ly/1e8Dclu

UPDATE 2-21-14: Oakland Schools blog post includes video with Dr. Joan Firestone: Intervention Beats Retention

Teens With an Ax to Grind

In the spring of 2005, when my youngest son A.J. took our state’s high-stakes standardized test, the MEAP, (now the MME) he had an ax to grind. Unfortunately, no one really knew how angry he was until after he took the exam. I received a call from the principal requesting a meeting. It seems that my son had chosen to draw a very large and detailed fist with an extended middle finger where his science graph should have been. And, he chose to bubble in his multiple-choice answer sheet with “AC/DC” and “ABBA”, as well. The principal was quite distressed since my son’s unconventional test responses would most definitely effect the school’s test results and would reflect poorly on the district. So, why would he do this? It turned out that A.J. was upset about one of his teacher’s policies that he had tried unsuccessfully to address with the teacher and administration. Feeling he had not been heard, he took his revenge. I had assumed A.J.’s stunt was an isolated incident—until yesterday.

ClipArt Courtesy FCIT

Fast-forward to March 9, 2011. A colleague who supervises pre-service teachers for a nearby university shared a disturbing conversation he overheard while he was visiting a high school classroom that morning.

At the beginning of the class, he was sitting near a group of four young ladies. As Juniors, they had just taken the Michigan Merit Exam (MME) and ACT last week. One of the other adults in the room asked these girls how the testing had gone. One said, “they’re so stupid, I paid attention for the first couple of pages, then I just started bubbling in randomly.” A second girl said, “Yeah, I couldn’t take it seriously, I don’t want (our school) to do well.” One of the other girls responded, “Yeah, if this was for us and they were still giving out the scholarships, I would have taken it seriously.”

What’s particularly interesting to me is that while A.J. decided to take his frustration out on the science exam, it was a foreign language teacher’s policy he was protesting. In addition, the comment above “I don’t want (our school) to do well,” didn’t target a particular teacher or subject area, but apparently the school in general.  

The standardized test movement is based on the assumption that students are actually going to take the test seriously, that the test will measure achievement and will measure teacher effectiveness. Neither A.J.’s performance on the science MEAP, nor that of the girls mentioned above meets those assumptions. This has me wondering, and it raises questions that I believe need to be addressed.

·      Is there any research about whether or not students actually take high-stakes standardized tests seriously?

·      How many teens out there have an ax to grind with the adults in their lives, particularly with their teachers and their schools?

·      How many angry teens would it take for testing results to be corrupted for a given school district?

·      How often does this happen?

·      Do students understand their teachers and school are being held accountable for how well they do on these exams?

Perhaps some understand it only too well. It’s entirely within a teen’s nature to subvert the adults and authorities in their lives. Why would anyone think it’s a good idea to put teacher’s careers and the viability of a school district in their hands?

ClipArt Courtesy FCIT