A Houston County Alabama Elementary School

A Houston County Alabama Elementary School
Study of the Relationship
Between Retention and SAT-10 Math Scores
A Proposal
Presented to the
Graduate Faculty of
Troy University
In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for
EDU 6691
By
Natalie N. McCord








Chapter I
Introduction

Statement of the problem
One of many problems in Houston County School is retention as it relates to Stanford Achievement Test, Version 10 math scores. This is a study of Houston County Schools in Alabama in which students are retained according to the main academic subjects, such as reading, language, or mathematics. The study is to determine if there is a relationship between the level of student achievement SAT-10 math scores and the retention rate. This study should prove that improving math scores would lessen the chances of retention for students in the elementary school setting.


Purpose of the Study
The purpose of this study is to determine if there is a relationship between retention and SAT-10 math scores in Houston County Schools. This study should help educators to focus on the struggling students.

Significance and Justification of the Study
The significance of the study may show a relationship of test scores and the retention rate of students in Houston County elementary schools. This would help teachers know how to further help the struggling student in the regular education classroom and prevent retention.
Definition of Terms
SAT-10 – Stanford Achievement Test, version 10
Retention – held at the same grade level
Limitations and Delimitations
The limitation of this study is that the study is centralized elementary schools in one county in Alabama. The county involved is Houston County in south Alabama. This study could be used in any elementary school that gives the Stanford Achievement Test, version 10 and retains students.
Hypothesis
My hypothesis is there will be a significant relationship of achievement levels on SAT-10 in the math area in relationship to retention.








Chapter II
Literature Review
Retention in schools has been an issue for a long time. According to the National Association of School Psychologists, 2006, “Grade retention, defined as requiring a student to remain at his or her current grade level the following school year despite spending a full school year at the given grade, remains a relatively frequently used and controversial intervention” (Silberglitt, B., Jimerson, S.R., Burns, M.K., & Appleton, J.J., 2006). With an increased push for accountability in schools, retention has become more prevalent than ever before.
Jimerson (2006) stated, “With national initiatives such as the 2001 No Child Left Behind Act, there has been an increased emphasis on “closing the achievement gap” between minority and nonminority students and improving the performance of all children. In an effort to ensure that all students meet basic competencies, an array of reading, writing, and other academic standards have emerged as indicators of whether students are proficient and should be promoted to the next grade level (Jimerson et al, 2006).
It has been debated whether retention is better in lower elementary or later in school years. It is also debated as to whether ethnic groups and gender has an impact of statistics for retention.

According to The National Association of School Psychologists stated that in kindergarten through 12th grade retention rates increased by 40% over 20 years. By 1995, the annual rate of retention rose to 13.3%. In the meantime, the kindergarten retention rate was about 6% in 1993 and 5% in 1995. Past research has often been inconclusive with regard to the effects of grade retention on child development. Even more controversial is the practice of retaining young children in kindergarten. Retention in a higher grade is often resorted to as a remedy for students who are behind academically. In contrast, at the kindergarten level, many children are retained for behavioral rather than for academic reasons (Hong, G. & Yu, B., 2008).
According to the Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development in 2008 “Although solid statistics are hard to come by, estimates of the number of students retained at least once in their school career range from 10 to 20 percent. Black students are more than twice as likely to be held back as white students, and boys twice as likely as girls” (David, J.L., 2008).
What are we to do as educators to help these struggling students who are falling behind? Does retention really help matters or does it become worse on the student? Literature against retention
On the whole, results of long term studies draw a negative picture of grade retention. Some provide evidence of a few positive effects, which are restricted above all to short-term consequences. According to these studies, retainees achieve the most remarkable benefit during the year of retention, but in the course of time, their academic performances progressively decrease until they drop behind those of their regularly promoted peers again. If the retainees are compared with their new classmates (same-grade comparison), they generally perform better than if they are compared with their former classmates (same-age comparison). This may be due to their difference in age and to the fact that they study the same subject matter over again (Bonvin, P., Bless, G., & Schuepach, M., 2008).
According to Lorence and Dworkin, 2006, retention has been proven ineffective. “Retention is viewed as ineffective because gains in academic achievement during the repeated year are presumed to be either negligible or quickly fade if they do occur” (Lorence, J. & Dworkin, A.G., 2006).
Does age really matter in retention? According to the National Association of Social Workers, 2006, there is no difference in age for retention.
Young children view retention as punishment and experience emotions of fear, anger, and sadness when not promoted. Children perceive it as a strong message the teacher and the school do not consider he student to be capable. Self-esteem, emotional functioning, and peer relations decline while school disengagement, absenteeism, and truancy increase (Leckrone, M.J. & Griffith, B.G., 2006).
According to an article entitled Beyond Grade Retention: A Handbook for Educational Professionals, 2004, the following research was found regarding retention.
• Temporary achievement gains
• Negative impact on achievement and social and emotional adjustment
• Negative long-term effects with emotional distress, low self-esteem, poor peer relations, cigarette use, alcohol and drug abuse, sexual activity, suicidal intentions, and violent behavior
• Retention and dropout correlate
• Consequences during adulthood such as unemployment (Jimerson, S. et al, 2004).
Literature for retention
With all of the negative implications of retention, teachers must work harder to prevent retention.
According to Lisa J. Bowman, 2005, “Standards cannot help students to succeed academically in the absence of quality instruction. One implication is that school districts offer more opportunities for teachers to network-within and among schools- and provide ongoing professional development opportunities. District level personnel also play an important role in developing and carrying out retention policies. However, teacher preparation is a major factor in helping teachers make informed decisions about promoting or retaining students (Bowman, L.J., 2005).
In conclusion, teachers, parents, and administrators should be informed about each student that is being considered for retention. As an educator, it is important to know the effects, both positive and negative, of retention. This along with the child should be considered before retaining a student. Research shows that retention can be detrimental to a child and can harm them for life. Is retention worth that risk?







Chapter III
Research Methodology
Retention and SAT-10 math scores will be analyzed to determine if a relationship exists between the two variables. The following steps will be used to analyze this study.
Research Question
1. Is there a relationship between SAT-10 math scores and retention of Houston County elementary students?
2. Does gender make a difference in retention rate?
3. Does socioeconomic status make a difference in retention rates?
4. Does race make a difference in retention rates?
Population
The population of the study would include all Houston County elementary students who were being considered for retention in grades K-5.
Data Collection
Data would be taken from the SAT-10 math scores of students. The student scores would be analyzed according to SAT-10 scores and classroom performance grades to see if a relationship exists between the two scores. Students would be selected randomly and then a stratified sampling would follow by gender, socioeconomic status, and by race.
Instrumentation
This study would use SPSS with a paired t-test to analyze the data. The scores would be compared to determine if there is a significant relationship between the variables.
Ethical Treatment of Human Subjects
No student would be harmed in this study. By using random and stratified sampling, student identities would be protected and only their genders would be revealed through this study.
Data Analysis
A t-test will be used to determine if there is a relationship between SAT-10 scores and retention. If no significant difference is noticed, the null hypothesis would be accepted. If a significant difference is gathered, the alternate hypothesis is accepted and the null hypothesis is rejected through this study.



















References
Bonvin, P., Bless, G. & Schuepbach, M. (2008 March). Grade retention: decision making and effects on learning as well as social and emotional development. School Effectiveness and School Improvement. 19 (1). 1-19.
Bowman, L.J. (2005 Spring). Grade retention: Is it a help or hindrance to student academic success?. Preventing School Failure.
David, J.L. (2008 March). What research says about grade retention. Educational Leadership.
Hung, G. & Yu, B. (2008). Effects of kindergarten retention on children’s social- emotional development: An application of propensity score method to multivariate, multilevel data. Developmental Psychology. 44 (2). 407-421.
Jimerson, S.R. et al. (2006). Beyond grade retention and social promotion: Promoting the social and academic competence of students. Psychology in the Schools. 43 (1).
Leckrone, M.J. & Griffith, B.G. (2006 January). Retention realities and educational standards. Children & Schools. 28 (1).
Lorence, J. & Dworkin, A.G. (2006). Elementary grade retention in Texas and reading achievement among racial groups: 1994-2002. Review of Policy Research. 23(5).
Silberglitt, B., Jimerson, S.R., Burns, M.K., & Appleton, J.J. (2006). Does the timing of grade retention make a difference? Examining the effects of early versus later retention. School Psychology Review. 35 (1). 134-141.