Paul Thomas writes that education policies now being decided by elected officials who don’t know that there is a research base, actual evidence that should be considered before acting. Some policies are popular despite the evidence about them, not because of it.
Thomas cites two policies, both promoted by former Florida Governor Jeb Bush, that are popular these days despite the evidence: charter schools and third-grade retention.
The evidence about charter schools is that there are some with high scores, some with low scores, but on average they do not perform better than public schools, and they frequently perform much worse. They are not a miracle cure. They divert money from the public schools, weakening them, to take a chance on a charter that may fold. Charters are also more segregated than public schools. Why not improve the schools we have rather than create a separate school system that is not better?
The third-grade retention policy is a simple idea: If students in third-grade can’t pass a third-grade reading test, they must be held back in third grade. Here too the evidence is strong. Thomas quotes a review of studies about the effects of third grade retention that shows that this policy yields little or no benefit to students and contributes ultimately to higher dropout rates.
Thomas encourages his own state of South Carolina to follow the example of Oklahoma, where parents and educators rose up to fight the third-grade retention policy. So determined were they that the legislature overwhelmingly voted to abolish the policy. Students who have not learned to read by the end of third grade need extra help, not a repetition of methods that didn’t work for them.

I couldn’t agree more. Also, on third grade retention, it is horribly unfair to the child held back, divorcing him or her from classmates. It also creates major problems for the receiving class as an older, alienated student interacts with the younger kids. I was an elementary school teacher and never found a primary age child who didn’t want to learn to read, so using the pressure of being held back after 3rd as a strategy is aiming at the wrong culprit and several years too late. As Paul Thomas argues–look instead to instruction and support in K-2.
LikeLike
Re: “aiming” at K-2, is it actually that clear in those grades which kids are on track and need additional “support” and which are just operating on a different developmental timeline? In the case of my son, my wife and I had to repeatedly beat back the school’s efforts to get him reading earlier than we believed he was ready to.
LikeLike
Thank you for your comments on South Carolina education . I enjoy reading your blogs daily and then opening and reading the many good articles you cite. I used quite a few of them in a recent blog I wrote on the threat of public charters in SC. I am a retired principal and current School Board member still fighting for public schools. Thanks you for your voice of sanity.
http://janesharp-schoolboard.com/2014/08/12/charter-invest-opps/
LikeLike
Student readiness is critical for a student to learn any skill. Many five year old students are not ready to learn academics at that time for a variety of reasons, such as immaturity, especially for boys, English not spoken in the home, single parenting with many other responsibilities, and so forth. The list is endless. Finland, for example, one of the highest performing countries in the world in math and science, does not start formal academics until the age of seven. Although Finland does have pre-schools, the country’s educators via experience, research and student successful performance understand better than most the importance of the student’s age and maturity directly effects the student’s readiness to maximize student learning. If the research and common sense supports the idea that the student’s readiness varies with the child’s readiness and the child’s situation why not develop a model that addresses the student’s situation and readiness. One practical model is the two year kindergarten in which the K teacher and school provides each parent the OPTION of repeating the K experience to improve the student’s readiness to learn academics. School should be challenging, but fun! Another model is to have the student stay in a pre-school for an additional year before starting K. Another option, as does Finland, require the student to be older before starting formal academics. One of the advantages of starting later, other than better academic performance, is that the student will finish high school one year later allowing the student an additional year of maturity time before following post high school options – college, vocational training, military training, or traditional work. If additional comments with research is desired contact me at ekangas @juno.com( Eric Kangas retired instructor including several years of pre-K parent-teacher experience)
LikeLike
Vandykel@michigan.gov
LikeLike