Page 175 - Štremfel, Urška, and Maša Vidmar (eds.). 2018. Early School Leaving: Contemporary European Perspectives. Ljubljana: Pedagoški inštitut.
P. 175
the interplay of factors contributing to esl at the system level
availability and quality of ECEC, curriculum, working conditions (e.g. sal-
aries), teacher-student ratio etc. (also see Bridgeland, DiIulio, & Morison,
2006). In the present article, we review the following ESL education sys-
tem factors: grade retention, socio-economic segregation of schools, ear-
ly tracking, ECEC, transition to (upper) secondary education and VET,
all of which are also highlighted in the European Commission/EACEA/
Eurydice/Cedefop report (2014) and other review articles (e.g. EC, 2014b;
Jimerson, Anderson, & Whipple, 2002).
Grade retention
Grade retention means a student is held back a year (i.e. repeats a year) due to
their lack of progress, with this year giving them an opportunity to acquire
the knowledge they need to continue schooling (European Commission/
EACEA/Eurydice/Cedefop, 2014). The EACEA/Eurydice study (2011)
showed that, even though grade retention is possible in most countries with
similar basic regulation (restrictions), practices vary greatly between coun-
tries; in some countries, the rates are very low (< 3%) while in others they
are very high (around 30%, e.g. Spain, France, Luxembourg). Similar grade
retention rates were found 3 years later (European Commission/EACEA/
Eurydice/Cedefop, 2014). It seems that grade retention is more common
in countries where the view that this may benefit the student still prevails
among teaching staff, the education community and parents (EACEA/
Eurydice, 2011).
However, this assumption has been challenged in many studies. Janosz,
LeBlanc, Boulerice, and Tremblay (1997) followed two samples of adoles-
cents and found that grade retention significantly increased the risks of
ESL in both samples. Roderick (1994) and Alexander, Entwisle and Horsey
(1997) obtained similar results. Cairns, Cairns and Neckerman (1989) es-
tablished a clear relationship between ESL and grade retention (i.e. stu-
dents who were 1 to 3 years older than their peers in seventh grade were
more likely to leave school within the next 4 years). This effect was more
pronounced for Caucasian students than their African-American counter-
parts (ibid.). Jimerson’s (2001) metaanalysis of 20 studies showed no clear
benefits of retaining students in grades for their academic, social-emo-
tional or behavioural outcomes. When comparing retained students with
a matched control group, 16 studies (80%) concluded that grade retention
is ineffective (either nonsignificant or negative effects were found). The au-
thor also emphasised that, despite some positive short-term effects of grade
175
availability and quality of ECEC, curriculum, working conditions (e.g. sal-
aries), teacher-student ratio etc. (also see Bridgeland, DiIulio, & Morison,
2006). In the present article, we review the following ESL education sys-
tem factors: grade retention, socio-economic segregation of schools, ear-
ly tracking, ECEC, transition to (upper) secondary education and VET,
all of which are also highlighted in the European Commission/EACEA/
Eurydice/Cedefop report (2014) and other review articles (e.g. EC, 2014b;
Jimerson, Anderson, & Whipple, 2002).
Grade retention
Grade retention means a student is held back a year (i.e. repeats a year) due to
their lack of progress, with this year giving them an opportunity to acquire
the knowledge they need to continue schooling (European Commission/
EACEA/Eurydice/Cedefop, 2014). The EACEA/Eurydice study (2011)
showed that, even though grade retention is possible in most countries with
similar basic regulation (restrictions), practices vary greatly between coun-
tries; in some countries, the rates are very low (< 3%) while in others they
are very high (around 30%, e.g. Spain, France, Luxembourg). Similar grade
retention rates were found 3 years later (European Commission/EACEA/
Eurydice/Cedefop, 2014). It seems that grade retention is more common
in countries where the view that this may benefit the student still prevails
among teaching staff, the education community and parents (EACEA/
Eurydice, 2011).
However, this assumption has been challenged in many studies. Janosz,
LeBlanc, Boulerice, and Tremblay (1997) followed two samples of adoles-
cents and found that grade retention significantly increased the risks of
ESL in both samples. Roderick (1994) and Alexander, Entwisle and Horsey
(1997) obtained similar results. Cairns, Cairns and Neckerman (1989) es-
tablished a clear relationship between ESL and grade retention (i.e. stu-
dents who were 1 to 3 years older than their peers in seventh grade were
more likely to leave school within the next 4 years). This effect was more
pronounced for Caucasian students than their African-American counter-
parts (ibid.). Jimerson’s (2001) metaanalysis of 20 studies showed no clear
benefits of retaining students in grades for their academic, social-emo-
tional or behavioural outcomes. When comparing retained students with
a matched control group, 16 studies (80%) concluded that grade retention
is ineffective (either nonsignificant or negative effects were found). The au-
thor also emphasised that, despite some positive short-term effects of grade
175
