Walberg, H. J., Reynolds, A. J., & Wang, M. C. (2004). Can unlike students learn together? Grade retention, tracking, and grouping. Reviewed by Meg Carroll, Saint Xavier University

Walberg, H. J., Reynolds, A. J., & Wang, M. C. (2004). Can unlike students learn together? Grade retention, tracking, and grouping. Greenwich, CT: Information Age Publishing. Pp. viii + 215 $65.95 (Hardcover) ISBN 1-59311-115-0 $31.95 (Paperback) ISBN 1-59311-114-2 Reviewed by Meg Carroll Saint Xavier University May 12, 2005 Walberg, Reynolds, and the now late Margaret Wang have collaborated on at least three articles and six books, typically acting as editors as they round up top researchers (though not always well known and not always full professors), to collect ideas and research findings on provocative topics, many related to special education or other areas of students failing in school. This volume grew out of a conference sponsored by the Laboratory for School Success, the Mid-Atlantic Regional Educational Laboratory, at Temple University Center for Research in Human Development and Education through a contract with the now Institute of Education Sciences at the U.S. Department of Education. Margaret Wang, former director of LSS and the Center at Temple University, approved the selection of authors and participants at the conference. At the conference, the chapter authors engaged in discussions among themselves, policy makers, educators, parents, and other scholars. The recommendations that grew from this diverse group of persons appear in the concluding chapter. The purpose of this book is to examine the topics of tracking, ability grouping, and grade retention, especially in light of the federal No Child Left Behind Act and new education legislation in all 50 states which together have created enormous pressure on educators and schools to produce learning success for all students, a challenge no other nation accepts. The authors of the eight chapters (there are 10 in all with an introductory chapter and a chapter of recommendations, both authored by Walberg) do not necessarily agree on the topics about which they write, but all are heavily research-based, at least in summarizing and drawing conclusions from a number of studies or, more typically, reporting results from their own studies. The overwhelming and seemingly irrefutable result with regard to retention in grade is not to retain. On the face of it, doesn’t it make sense to hold back the student who is struggling in school? That student will get a chance to repeat appreciably the same experiences and be exposed to the same knowledge base and skill set. This child will be the “expert” among novices in the repeated grade, right? This would necessarily result in academic improvement, would it not? The results of some studies DO support retention in some cases, but only through grade eight. When examined through the age of 20, the students who were retained are significantly more likely to have dropped out of school, significantly less likely to have achieved high school completion by any means, and less likely to have achieved employment success. These results are even borne out when students who were similarly poor in their academic achievement but were not retained are compared to retained students. We end up with older, more aggressive, more sexually mature students in elementary schools and students who are too embarrassed and too old to face several more years in high school. Speaking of age, it seems that the older the student is when retained, the more negative the outcome is likely to be. Retention, a seemingly good idea with disastrous results, is an idea to which American schools not only subscribe, but mandate, especially in urban districts. Well written longitudinal studies, meta-analyses with extensive bibliographies of studies crunched for effect size, and page after page of convincing tables, the issues of tracking and grouping are also systematically reviewed. Many of these reports touch on the topic of grade retention as well. Factors of race-ethnicity and social background as well as what causes and results from tracking/grouping practices are addressed. The vocabulary is sophisticated but the writing is accessible; readers who want to be informed about what they are really choosing or supporting in terms of retention, grading, and tracking decisions will find thoughtful, well-supported answers in this book. Readers who may despair of what WILL work if some common educational practices do NOT work will also find ammunition. Jimerson, who has provocatively entitled his chapter “Is Grade Retention Educational Malpractice?,” provides readers with several options, including the use of mnemonic devices to help low-achieving students conquer and retain more information in school. Alexander, Entwisle, Dauber, and Kabbani also explore options. In the concluding chapter, Walberg provides some general and perhaps misleading suggestions, citing the need for high expectations and asserting: “If high expectations are placed on students, it seems reasonable to hold similarly high expectations of teachers.” Considering the typical reliance on achievement test data to determine whether teachers and students have met expectations and the problems revolving around that practice, the suggestion seems disingenuous. Other practical suggestions, such as developing tip sheets for parents to get them involved in helping students long before grade retention is even considered, may give readers cause for optimism. At the very least, this book of essays and important research findings gives information that is research-based. None of the practices reviewed are accepted merely because they “have always been done;” each is subjected to the standard of data-based effectiveness. Every public policy maker should have this information and can do no better than to begin with this book. About the Reviewer Meg Carroll, Professor of education at Saint Xavier University in Chicago teaches classes in middle and secondary school methods as well as courses in special education and curriculum. Her area of interest is classroom implementation of research-based information, especially for students who struggle.