As I discussed in the Center for Public Education’s Starting Out Right report, third grade reading is essential to a student’s future success. Recognizing this, policymakers around the country want to make sure all students do in fact know how to read before moving onto the fourth grade by proposing policies to retain third graders who fail their state reading exams.
These policymakers are correct to point out the need to ensure students can in fact read before entering the fourth grade. But research is also clear that students who are retained are much less likely to graduate, among other negative outcomes. So are policymakers simply stomping out the flames or pouring gas on the fire?
Unfortunately, there is no clear answer. Similar retention policies have been used in the past, with limited success at best. Yet, such policies always seems to come into vogue every decade or so.
Looking at past attempts at similar policies doesn’t provide a clear answer on whether retaining students will boost their future achievement or not, but I’d have to agree with John Wilson, a reading specialist, who wrote in EdWeek that interventions are the way to go, not retention. Of course, Wilson advocates for interventions by reading specialists when a third grader is unable to read adequately; that is, a response when there is already a problem. The best solution is to not just provide interventions when there is already a problem, but to prevent a problem in the first place.
Research is clear that expanding access to high-quality pre-k programs is one of the most effective solutions to improving third grade reading scores and other student outcomes. Unfortunately, many of our most disadvantaged students, who would benefit most from pre-k, have the least access to such high-quality programs. And while access has been improving over the past decade or so, the current recession has put a damper on the expansion of high-quality pre-k programs.
However, school districts around the country are still pushing hard to provide high-quality pre-k programs to their students, especially their neediest students. But budgets are tight. Many school board members are struggling to determine what would be best for their students: offering pre-k and retaining their half-day kindergarten programs, or expanding their half-day kindergarten programs to full-day programs?
The findings from our Starting Out Right report point to the fact that including pre-k along with half-day kindergarten provides a better chance for disadvantaged students to be able to read by the third grade than providing full-day kindergarten alone. Of course, offering both pre-k and full-day kindergarten is best, but when budgets are tight providing pre-k along with half-day kindergarten can be an effective intervention solution to increase the chances students know how to read when they start the fourth grade. Providing pre-k is a much more effective solution than simply retaining a third grader who can’t read.—Jim Hull
