Retention Under Chicago’s High-Stakes Testing Program: Helpful, Harmful, or Harmless?

By Melissa Roderick, J. Nagaoka. 2005

166 citations recorded by the source corpus.

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

Revisiting Grade Retention: An Evaluation of Florida's Test-Based Promotion Policy (2007, unknown): “…in fact harms later academic progress (Peterson, DeGracie, and Ayabe 1987; Holmes 1989; Alexander, Entwisle, and Dauber 1994; Jimerson et al. 1997; Roderick and Nagaoka 2005) and increases rates of students dropping out of school (Grissom and Shepard 1989; Roderick 1994; Jimerson 2001a, 2001b;…”
Reading and School Completion: Critical Connections and Matthew Effects (2010, background): “The marriage of grade retention and accountability appears to increase the likelihood of students being placed in special education (Roderick & Nagaoka, 2005 ), which is, for a number of students, a precursor of later dropout.”
Translating the Statistical Representation of the Effects of Education Interventions Into More Readily Interpretable Forms (2012, background): “The apparent magnitude of intervention effects, and even the direction of those effects, can be influenced by this inconsistency in GE units across grade levels (Roderick and Nagaoka 2005).”
Early-Grade Retention and Children’s Reading and Math Learning in Elementary Years (2007, background): “…found that retention in third grade did not lead to greater achievement growth 2 years later, that retention in sixth grade was associated with lower achievement growth, and that retention in eighth grade slightly increased the risk for dropping out (Allensworth, 2005; Roderick & Nagaoka, 2005).”