KI NDERGARTEN RETENTI ON

DETERMI NI NG HOW TO REDUCE KI NDERGARTEN RETENTI ONS
THROUGH TEACHER AND STUDENT SUPPORTS

A Doct oral Capst one Pr oject
Sub mitt ed t o t he School of Gr aduat e St udi es and Research
Depart ment of Secondary Educati on and Ad mi ni strati ve Leadershi p

In Parti al Fulfill ment of the
Require ment for t he Degree of
Doct or of Educati on

Tr aci Kuhns
Califor ni a Uni versit y of Pennsyl vani a
Jul y 2020

i i

KI NDERGARTEN RETENTI ON

Califor ni a Uni versit y of PA
School of Graduat e St udies and Research
Depart ment of Secondary Educati on and Ad mi ni strati ve Leadershi p

We hereby appr ove t he capst one of
Tr aci Kuhns
Candi dat e for t he Degree of Doct or of Educati on

( Defense Dat e, Si gned)

Positi on Titl e of Chair
Doct oral Capst one Faculty Co mmi tt ee Chair

Superi nt

dent

Doct oral Capst one Ext ernal Co mmi tt ee Me mber

i i i

KI NDERGARTEN RETENTI ON

Ac kno wl edge me nts
I woul d li ke t o express my gratit ude t o Dr. Laura Jacob and Dr. Kevi n Lor don for
t heir gui dance and support t hroughout t his doct oral research st udy. I woul d also li ke t o
t hank Mr. Willia m Denny for his pati ence wit h all of my questi ons. Fi nall y, I woul d li ke
t o t hank my husband St eve and my chil dren Luke and Trent for t heir underst andi ng and
support t hroughout my doct oral j our ney.

i v

KI NDERGARTEN RETENTI ON

Tabl e of Cont ents
Abstract . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . viii
Chapt er 1 (Introducti on) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
Chapt er 2 ( Lit erat ure Revi e w) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
Chapt er 3 ( Met hodol ogy) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41
Chapt er 4 ( Dat a Anal ysis and Results) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64
Chapt er 5 ( Concl usi ons and Reco mmendati ons) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 85
Ref erences . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 104
Appendi x A . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 118
Appendi x B . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 120
Appendi x C . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 121
Appendi x D . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 123
Appendi x E . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 128
Appendi x F . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 134

v

KI NDERGARTEN RETENTI ON

Li st of Fi gures
1. The ext ent t o whi ch t eachers beli eve parent i nvolve ment det er mi nes st udent ret enti on
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65
2. The ext ent t o whi ch t eachers beli eve cl ass si ze deter mi nes st udent ret enti on . . . . 66
3. The ext ent t o whi ch t eachers beli eve readi ng achieve ment det er mi nes st udent
ret enti on . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 66
4. The ext ent t o whi ch t eachers beli eve mat he mati cs achi eve ment det er mi nes st udent
ret enti on . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 67
5. The ext ent t o whi ch t eachers beli eve mat urit y deter mi nes st udent ret enti on . . . . . 67
6. The ext ent t o whi ch t eachers beli eve behavi or deter mi nes st udent ret enti on . . . . . 68
7. The ext ent t o whi ch t eachers beli eve preschool attendance det er mi nes st udent
ret enti on . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 69
8. The ext ent t o whi ch t eachers beli eve fa mil y configurati on det er mi nes st udent
ret enti on . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 69
9. The ext ent t o whi ch t eachers beli eve soci al/ e motional concer ns det er mi nes st udent
ret enti on . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 70
10. The ext ent t o whi ch t eachers beli eve i nstructi onal practi ces det er mi nes st udent
ret enti on . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 71

KI NDERGARTEN RETENTI ON

vi

11. Ki nder gart en t eacher belief t hat ret enti ons shoul d be a teacher decisi on . . . . . . . 71
12. Ki nder gart en t eacher belief t hat ret enti on shoul d be a parent decisi on . . . . . . . . . 72
13. Ki nder gart en t eacher belief t hat ret enti on shoul d be a tea m deci si on . . . . . . . . . 73

vi i

KI NDERGARTEN RETENTI ON

Li st of Tabl es
1. A Co mparison of t he Top Fi ve Positi ve Pri nci pal Behavi ors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28
2. ELA descri pti ve st atistics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 77
3. Mat he mati cs descri pti ve st atistics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 78
4. Descri pti ve st atistics DI BELS dat a . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 78
5. Fr equency of referrals for st udent s ret ai ned i n ki nder gart en` . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 79

vi i i

KI NDERGARTEN RETENTI ON

Abstract
There are currentl y a hi gh nu mber of ki nder gart en ret enti ons i n a school district.
Ret enti ons can have negati ve short-ter m and l ong-ter m effects on st udent s and i ncrease
costs t o a district. The pur pose of t he st udy is t o det er mi ne how t o reduce ki nder gart en
ret enti ons t hrough t eacher and st udent supports. To underst and how t his can be done,
t his st udy det er mi ned t he teacher percepti ons t hat constit ut ed a st udent who shoul d be
ret ai ned i n ki nder gart en. An exa mi nati on occurred of what fact ors hel ped predi ct whi ch
st udent s were at-risk for ki nder gart en ret enti on. Thi s st udy anal yzed how the i nf or mati on
fromt his research can be used t o reduce ret enti ons and benefit st udent success i n
ki nder gart en. It det er mi ned how t he i nfor mati on fromt his research can be used t o
support i nstructi on t o mi ni mi ze ret enti on. Teachers were sur veyed i n t his st udy.
De mogr aphi c dat a and behavi oral dat a was anal yzed for t he frequency of charact eristics
of st udent s ret ai ned i n kinder gart en. Acade mi c dat a was anal yzed for measures of central
tendency. St udent s who have poor achi eve ment in readi ng are targets for ret enti on based
on t he results i n t he st udy.

Teachers who parti cipat ed i n t he st udy i ndi cated t hat readi ng

was a criteri a used t o deter mi ne if a st udent was a candi dat e for ret enti on. Achi eve ment
i n t he area of English Language Arts ( ELA) was exa mi ned. Central tendency measures
sho wed t hat st udent s were not achi evi ng i n t his area. St udent birt hdat e was not ed as a
fact or i n ki nder gart en retenti on. Teachers st at ed mat urit y was a fact or when det er mi ni ng
st udent s t o be ret ai ned i n ki nder gart en.

1

KI NDERGARTEN RETENTI ON

Chapt er 1
Introducti on
St ate me nt of t he Probl em
As a pri nci pal of an el e ment ar y school, I a m concer ned si nce t here are currentl y a
hi gh nu mber of ki nder garten ret enti ons i n my rural district. The short-t er m and l ong-t er m
effects of ret enti on need to be fact ored i nt o t he decisi on- maki ng pr ocess when
consi deri ng ret enti on for st udent s i n ki nder gart en. I need t o be abl e t o support teachers
and parent s i n maki ng an appr opri at e decisi on for t he short-t er m and l ong-ter m benefits
of t he chil d.

Thi s decision can t hen be an i nfor med deci si on based on research. Is t here

a bett er way t o predi ct if a st udent is at-risk for kinder gart en ret enti on? This is a questi on
t hat arises ever y year with st udent s who are not progressi ng i n ki nder gart en as expect ed.
Purpose of t he St udy
The pur pose of t his st udy is t o det er mi ne why t here are such a hi gh nu mber of
ret enti ons i n t he school district. The fact ors t hat are causi ng t he hi gh nu mber of
ret enti ons is anot her obj ecti ve of t his st udy. Fi nally, additi onal supports t hat can be put
i nt o pl ace t o ensure ki nder gart en success for all student s attendi ng an el e ment ar y school
i n t he district will be i dentified.
Thi s st udy will exa mi ne the hist or y of ki nder gart en al ong wit h vari ous
perspecti ves on t he t opi c of ki nder gart en ret enti on. Ki nder gart en ret enti on effects will be
researched and predi ct ors of ki nder gart en ret enti on will be obser ved t o see if
de mogr aphi cs and ot her fact ors can hel p det er mi ne who may be at-risk for ki nder gart en

KI NDERGARTEN RETENTI ON

2

ret enti on. Fi nall y, ways to hel p support st udent success i n ki nder gart en will be
exa mi ned. I beli eve l ooki ng at all of t hese areas may hel p t o deci pher why there are so
ma ny ki nder gart en ret enti ons i n t his district. It also may hel p t o i dentify areas t hat The
di strict needs bett er support so t hat st udent s are bei ng successful i n ki nder gart en rat her
t han bei ng ret ai ned.
Justificati on of t he St udy
St udent s co me t o ki nder gart en wit h var yi ng l evels of knowl edge and abilit y.
They co me from different backgr ounds and t heir exposure t o t he worl d can var y greatl y.
The t eachers i n t he district wor k t o cover st at e st andar ds and make sure t he ki nder gart en
st udent s have t he skills to move t o grade one and have success. When t eachers do not
feel t he st udent s are ready, t hey ret ai n t he st udents and have t he m repeat t he ki nder gart en
curri cul u m. Teachers’ perspecti ve on ki nder gart en ret enti on needs t o be consi dered.
What dat a and charact eristi cs do t he ki nder gart en teachers scruti ni ze when consi deri ng
ret enti on for a st udent ? The parent s and ad mi ni strat ors also have perspectives on what
fact ors shoul d go i nt o deci di ng if a st udent shoul d be ret ai ned. These perspecti ves are
exa mi ned i n t his st udy.
Currentl y t here are four ele ment ar y school s i n t he di strict. The district is rural
and 251 square mil es i n area. It has 65 % of st udents i dentified as econo mi call y
di sadvant aged and 22 % of st udent s recei vi ng speci al educati on ser vi ces. There are a t ot al
of fifteen ki nder gart en t eachers acr oss t he four el eme nt ar y school s. One has fi ve
teachers; one has four teachers; and t wo have t hree teachers. In a t ypi cal year mor e t han
t he equi val ent of one ki nder gart en cl assroo mis retai ned i n t he district. This i ncl udes all
of t he ki nder gart en ret enti ons acr oss t he four el e ment ar y school s i n t he district. Looki ng

3

KI NDERGARTEN RETENTI ON

at t he effects of ki nder garten i n ter ms of l ong-t erm out co mes needs t o be done due t o t he
hi gh nu mber of ki nder garten ret enti ons acr oss t he fifteen cl assroo ms.

Anot her area for

consi derati on is how t he di strict can bett er i dentify at-risk st udent s earl y. Thi s will
enabl e supports t o be put i nt o pl ace so t hat st udents are more li kel y t o be ready t o move
ont o grade one wit hout bei ng ret ai ned.
Fi nanci al Fact ors
Ret ai ni ng st udent s adds an additi onal year of educati on costs t o each st udent. The
nu mber of personnel also i ncreases wit h hi gh nu mbers of st udent s bei ng retai ned. When
specifi c grades have a high nu mber of ret enti ons in a si ngl e year, it causes t he district
ad mi ni strati on t o ret hi nk st affi ng and someti mes there is a need t o cut i n other areas t o
support t he i ncreased number of st udent s i n t hat parti cul ar grade. The st udent s bei ng
ret ai ned require an additional year of transport ati on and ser vi ces whi ch add costs t o t he
di strict. If a chil d is lat er di agnosed wit h a lear ni ng disabilit y, t hat is an additi onal cost
wi t h t he added year of schooli ng t hat t he distri ct needs t o pr ovi de. Is t here a mor e
fiscall y responsi bl e way to use t he money t hat woul d be needed t o ret ai n a st udent ? Can
ki nder gart en st udent s can be bett er support ed so t he ret enti on is not necessary? Al so is
t here an i mpact on t he student s’ fut ure out co mes that may affect t he fi nancial success of
t he st udent ? If so, how wi ll t hat pl ay i n t he econo mi cs of t he co mmunit y wi t h t he hi gh
nu mber of ret enti ons t hat are currentl y occurri ng each year? All of t hese t hought s ca me
i nt o pl ay as I devel oped the i dea for t his st udy. These t hought s t hen l ed t o t he research
questi ons t hat were created as present ed i n t he foll owi ng secti on t o i dentify bett er ways t o
support ki nder gart en success for t he st udent s i n t he district.
Research Questi ons

KI NDERGARTEN RETENTI ON

4

Gai ni ng a bett er underst andi ng of t he commonalities of t he st udent s who are
bei ng ret ai ned will be done t hr ough t he foll owi ng research questi ons:
● What are teacher percepti ons of what constit ut es a st udent who shoul d be ret ai ned
i n ki nder gart en?
● Looki ng at st udent s who have been ret ai ned i n ki nder gart en i n t his setti ng, what
fact ors coul d hel p predi ct t hat t hey were at-risk for ret enti on?
● Ho w can t he i nf or mati on fromt his research be used t o reduce ret enti ons and
benefit st udent success i n ki nder gart en?
● Ho w can t he i nf or mati on fromt his research be used t o support i nstructi on t o
mi ni mi ze ret enti on?
Ass u mpti ons
Thi s st udy assu mes t hat teachers will have a sense of t heir percepti ons of what
constit ut es a ret enti on for a ki nder gart en st udent. It is assu med t hat each buil di ng has
kept accurat e dat a on t he st udent s. There is also an assu mpti on t hat achi eve ment t esti ng
has been done by trai ned st aff and was co mpl et ed as was reco mmended i n the trai ni ng
t he teachers had recei ved.

5

KI NDERGARTEN RETENTI ON

Chapt er 2
Li terat ure Revi e w
Ki ndergarten Retenti on
Hi st ory
Ge neral i nf or mati on on ki ndergart en
Fri edri ch Fr oebel was best known as an educat or and t he ori gi nat or of
ki nder gart en. Fr oebel’s specifi c positi on on ki ndergart en pr ovi ded a functional model for
an i mmi grant soci et y i n the l at e 1800’s i n t he United St at es ( Baader, 2004). Baader
(2004) sai d t hat Fr obel’s vi e w, unli ke his Ger man count er part Pest al ozzi, recogni zed t hat
fa mili es al one coul d not int egrat e t heir chil dren wi t h vari ous languages and backgr ounds
i nt o soci et y. The rapi d rise of ki nder gart en was because of t he need for children t o buil d
soci al cooperati on and was seen as a way of “ maki ng citizens” ( Baader, 2004).
Duri ng t he l at e 1800’s and earl y 1900’s reli gi on played a si gnifi cant rol e i n t he
li ves of t he peopl e i n t he Unit ed St at es. Havi ng a large i mmi grant popul ation, reli gi ous
vi e ws vari ed t heref ore, reli gi on pl ayed a rol e i n t he beli efs of how ki nder garten shoul d be
taught. Earl y duri ng t he t wenti et h cent ur y t here was a peri od of debat e between
conser vati ve and li beral ki nder gart en pr ogra ms ( Prochner, 2011). Due t o these different
ways of t hi nki ng, t here were an array of ki nder garten mat eri als creat ed t o appeal t o t he
var yi ng beli efs of i ndi vi dual s ( Pr ochner, 2011). In t he Unit ed St at es, ki ndergart en began
as a pl ay- based enri ch ment pr ogra m ( Perry, 2010). Duri ng t he l at e ni net eent h cent ur y,

KI NDERGARTEN RETENTI ON

6

Milt on Br adl ey, t he fa mous ga me pi oneer, desi gned a li ne of ki nder gart en mat eri als t hat
i ncl uded al phabet bl ocks whi ch were ai med at t he ho me mar ket as well as the
ki nder gart en cl assroo m based on t he i deas of ki nder gart en ( Pr ochner, 2011).
In t he second half of t he Twenti et h Cent ur y, t he Unit ed St at es began ret hi nki ng
educati on once t he Sovi et Uni on had l aunched Sput ni k, t he worl d’s first satellite ( Roos,
2019). Roos (2019) discussed how st udent s were pushed i n t he areas of mat he mati cs and
sci ence but t he e mphasis i n t hose areas was short li ved. Unit ed St at es President Reagan
agai n pushed t he concept of mor e ho me wor k and stronger acade mi cs wit h t he rel ease of
“ A Nati on at Ri sk” ( Roos, 2019). Thi s docu ment expressed concer n about t he lear ni ng of
t he chil dren at t he ti me co mpared t o t he educati onal progress bei ng made in countri es
such as Japan and Sout h Kor ea ( A Nati on at Ri sk, 1983).
In t he l at e t wenti et h centur y soci et y has moved fro m out co mes- based educati on t o
utilizi ng hi gh st akes t esting i n or der t o quantify ho w school s and st udent s are perfor mi ng
i n educati on. St andar di zed assess ment testi ng i n thi s manner has devel oped as a result of
“ No Chil d Left Behi nd” (2002) whi ch pr omi sed t hat all st udent s will be pr ofici ent i n
readi ng and mat he mati cs by 2014 ( Fit zgeral d, 2015). School s and st udent s wer e hi ghl y
scr uti ni zed by t esti ng perfor mance, and modifi cations were made on how the dat a is
i nt erpret ed. The l at est Act si gned by Unit ed St at es Presi dent Oba ma, The Ever y St udent
Succeeds Act (2015), mai nt ai ns positi ve expect ations i n ter ms of gr owt h expect ati ons
( Ever y St udent Succeeds Act, 2015). Perfor mance re mai ns a fact or i n j udgi ng st udent s,
whi ch also affects how educat ors vi e w ki nder garten perfor mance and ki nder gart en
ret enti on. There is pressure on t eachers and ad mi ni strat ors t o make sure student s are
perfor mi ng at grade l evel as earl y as possi bl e.

KI NDERGARTEN RETENTI ON

7

Pennsyl vani a ki ndergarten regul ati ons
There are many regul ati ons regar di ng ki nder gart en i n t he st at e of Pennsyl vani a.
Si nce 1895, t he Pennsyl vani a School Code required chil dren t o regi st er for school by t he
co mpul sor y age of ei ght ( Ri vera, 2019). Act 16 of 2019 (2019), a mended the publi c code
t o make t he co mpul sor y age for school now si x years ol d. Accor di ng t o t he Pennsyl vani a
Secret ary of Educati on Pedr o Ri vera (2019), l oweri ng t he age is support ed by research
and will benefit chil d devel op ment t hrough hi gh- qualit y educati on pr ogra ms and will
support i nt erventi ons for st udent needs and ensure defi cits are re medi at ed earl y. In
Pennsyl vani a, decisi ons regar di ng earl y entrance int o ki nder gart en are left to t he Local
Educati onal Agency ( LEA) ( Accel erati on Instit ute, n. d.). Di stricts may set t he specifi c
eli gi bilit y dat e for ki ndergart en entrance and if t hey woul d li ke t o have early entrance for
st udent s, t hey are abl e t o set t he require ment s t hat wi ll qualify st udent s for earl y entrance
i nt o ki nder gart en.
Accor di ng t o t he Pennsylvani a Depart ment of Healt h (n. d.), when ent eri ng
ki nder gart en st udent s are required by t he st at e t o have t he foll owi ng vacci nes:
● 4 doses of tet anus, di pht heri a and acell ul ar pert ussis (1 dose aft er t he 4t h birt hday)
● 4 doses of poli o (at least one aft er t he 4t h birt hday and 6 mont hs aft er t he last
dose)
● 2 doses of measl es, mu mps and rubell a ( MMR)
● 3 doses of hepatitis B
● 2 doses of vari cell a (or proof of i mmunit y)

KI NDERGARTEN RETENTI ON

8

St udent s must have t hese vacci nes unl ess t hey have a medi cal or reli gi ous/ phil osophi cal
exe mpti on; st udent s who do not have eit her must have a red/ whit e medi cal card wit h a
pl an and t he next desi gnated dose wit hi n t he first fi ve days of school ( PA Depart ment of
Healt h, n. d.).
Accor di ng t o t he lear ni ng cent er Aa t o Zz (2019), Pennsyl vani a requires t he
foll owi ng docu ment s t o pr ove eli gi bilit y for regi steri ng for ki nder gart en:
● Pr oof of t he chil d’s age such as a birt h certificat e or a passport
● I mmuni zati ons recor ds or a medi cal or reli gi ous/ phil osophi cal exe mpti on
● Pr oof of resi dency such as a dri ver’s license, utility bill, mort gage
st at e ment or rent recei pt.
● A parent registrati on st ate ment t hat att ests t o your chil d’s eli gi bilit y for
school
● Ho me Language Sur vey - t his is for one t o expl ain t he language
predo mi nantl y spoken i n t he ho me
In Pennsyl vani a, parent s can enr oll t heir chil d i n a publi c school ki nder garten, pri vat e
school ki nder gart en, or a ki nder gart en t hat is cent er-based and appr oved by t he st at e.
Emer gence of ki ndergarten ret enti on
Ki nder gart en is t he first ti me so me st udent s st ep int o a school, t hough so me
chil dren have had pri or preschool experi ence bef ore t hey begi n t heir educati onal j our ney.
Unli ke t he pl ay- based model of ki nder gart en used i n t he lat e ni net eent h and earl y
t wenti et h cent uri es, ki nder gart en has beco me much mor e acade mi c- based rat her t han

KI NDERGARTEN RETENTI ON

9

pl ay- based, especi all y wi t h t he i mpl e ment ati on of t he Co mmon Cor e st andards.
Co mmon Cor e st andar ds require st udent s t o have a great er dept h of underst andi ng t han
pri or t o t he i mpl e ment ation of t he Co mmon Core ( Mongeau, 2014). In some st at es t he
ri gor has i ncreased i n such a way t hat ite ms t aught i n second grade pri or t o Co mmon
Cor e are now t aught i n kinder gart en ( Meador, 2019). The i ncrease i n ri gor and t he effect
of hi gh st akes t esti ng has made ki nder gart en ret enti on a t opi c of much debate and
consi derati on. Teachers and school s are hel d more account abl e t o ensure st udent s meet
test ed expect ati ons. Thi s has creat ed a ne w perspecti ve on ensuri ng st udents are
acade mi call y ready t o meet t he expect ati ons of first grade.
Pers pecti ves on ki ndergarten retenti on
Ad mi ni strat or vi ews
The vi e ws of admi ni strators and t heir perspecti ves on ki nder gart en ret enti on have
been revi e wed on several occasi ons. There are numer ous school fact ors regar di ng
ret enti ons t hat admi ni strat ors share wit h teachers. Ki nder gart en st udent s need t o be abl e
t o i nt eract wit h ot hers t o ensure ki nder gart en success is a recurri ng concept t hat All an
(2008) not ed. Range, Holt, Pij anows ki, & Young (2012), i dentifi ed t hat admi ni strat ors
and t eachers felt st udent s who were ret ai ned i n ki nder gart en had a positi ve self-concept
and t hat t his dissi pat ed as st udent s reached l at er grades.
Teacher decisi ons
Research st udi es exa mi ned t eachers’ vi e ws on ki nder gart en ret enti on and teacher
perspecti ves on t he decisi on t o ret ai n chil dren for an additi onal year i n ki nder gart en.

KI NDERGARTEN RETENTI ON

10

There are many reasons teachers may consi der retenti on for a chil d. Teachers report t hat
havi ng ret enti on avail able prevent s fut ure fail ure, moti vat es st udent s t o att end and
i ncreases parent moti vations ( Range et al., 2012). Overall teachers vi e w retenti on i n
pri mar y grades as effective ( Range et al., 2012). In a st udy by Ber gi n, Osbur n, and
Cr yan (1996), chil d i ndependence pr oved t o be a fact or i n teacher ret enti on decisi ons.
Neit her age nor gender were st at ed as si gnifi cant in det er mi ni ng ret enti on (Ber gi n, 1996).
Anot her st udy done by Peel (1997) i ndi cat ed t hat chil dren not ready for first grade were
oft en t he youngest i n t heir cl ass and also i dentified i mmat urit y as a si gnifi cant reason for
ki nder gart en ret enti on. A st udy by Wer nke (2017) suggest ed t hat not onl y chr onol ogi cal
age, but also gender, socioecono mi c st at us, and preschool experi ences i mpact school
readi ness.

There are i nconsi st enci es, however, wit h how t eachers report beli efs and

measures and what t hey do i n t heir act ual practi ce ( Neuhart- Pri chart, 2001).
Teacher beli efs affect t he decisi on on whet her a chil d shoul d be ret ai ned.
Teachers have t o reali ze that some st udent s will be ret ai ned l at er i n t heir schooli ng if t he
st udent s are not ret ai ned no w ( Hong & Yu, 2008). Teachers rat e t he success of st udent s
l owi n t he second year of ki nder gart en whi ch is i ndi cati ve of ret enti on not bei ng a good
way t o support l ong t er m st udent success ( Mendez, Ki m, Ferron & Woods, 2015).
Ki nder gart en t eachers tend t o have a less favorable vi e w of ret ai ned st udents ( Mendez et
al., 2015). Teachers also not e mor e pr obl e m behavi ors wit h ret ai ned st udent s t han wit h
regul arl y pr ogressi ng st udent s ( Anat asi ou, Papachrist ou, & Di aki doy, 2017). Overall, t he
research l ends itself t o t he i dea t hat teachers and pri nci pals have si mil ar t hought patt erns
i n ter ms of t heir vi e ws on ki nder gart en ret enti on.
Parent vi ews

KI NDERGARTEN RETENTI ON

11

When it comes t o ret ention and ki nder gart en readi ness, parent s may have vi e ws
t hat mat ch or differ t hose of teachers and/ or ad mi nistrat ors. West (1993) i dentified t hat
parent s wit h l ess education beli eve sitti ng still, counti ng, kno wi ng t he al phabet, and usi ng
pencils/ pai nt brushes were essenti al skills for ki nder gart en readi ness. These skills are
mor e concret e for parents unli ke soci al mat urit y and t e mpera ment ( West, 1993). Parent s
of preschool ers also agreed wit h ki nder gart en t eachers t hat chil dren need t o be abl e t o
ver bali ze t heir want s and t hought s, and be ent husiasti c i n appr oachi ng ne w i deas and
acti vities ( West, 1993). Pr eschool parent s beli eve t hat t hese skills are necessar y for
ki nder gart en success ( West, 1993).
Parent s wit h struggli ng student s oft en beli eve t hat t hey may ret ai n t he chil d no w
i n ki nder gart en rat her t han waiti ng, when it see ms t he chil d coul d have t he possi bilit y of
bei ng ret ai ned i n t he fut ure ( Winsl er, et al., 2014). Parent s and t eachers report t hat
st udent s ret ai ned earl y sho w l ower rati ngs i n soci al-e moti onal and school co mpet enci es
as compared t o t heir promot ed peers ( Anat asi ou et al., 2017). Parent s, as well as
teachers, are t he mai n deter mi nant s of ki nder gart en ret enti on and bot h, when asked, say it
was benefi ci al for t heir chil d ( Anat asi ou et al., 2017).
Effects of ki ndergarten retenti on
Soci al-e moti onal
The soci al-e moti onal effects of ki nder gart en ret enti on have been t he t opi c of
much research. Chil dren who have been ret ai ned tend t o score l ower on rati ngs by
teachers and parent s i n appr oaches t o lear ni ng, self-control, and i nt erpersonal skills
( Hong & Raudenbush, 2005). St udent s are oft en “rat ed hi gher on e moti onal and

KI NDERGARTEN RETENTI ON

12

behavi oral probl e ms” ( Hong & Raudenbush, 2005). Hong & Yu (2008) compl et ed a
st udy i n whi ch st udent s ret ai ned i n ki nder gart en exhi bit ed t hat t here was no har m done t o
soci al-e moti onal devel opme nt. It also reveal ed retenti on i ncreased self-confi dence i n
acade mi cs and reduced probl e m behavi ors. “Early ki nder gart en ret enti on see ms t o be
associ at ed wit h l ower overall psychosoci al adj ustme nt i n t he short and l ong t er m”
( Anast asi ou et al., 2017). It shoul d be not ed t hat in t he st udy by Hong & Yu (2008),
st udent s ret ai ned i n ki nder gart en di d not see mt o be ali enat ed fromt heir peer group or
devel op negati ve feeli ngs about t he msel ves. Ne w ki nder gart en st udent s were unli kel y t o
creat e negati ve opi ni ons of ret ai ned st udent s i n t he ki nder gart en environ ment ( Hong &
Yu, 2008). It is i mport ant t o keep i n mi nd t hat st udent s promot ed t o first grade also have
feeli ngs of anxi et y, sha me because of fail ure, and mor e i nt ernali zed behavior pr obl e ms
t han peers who had been ret ai ned ( Hong & Yu, 2008).
Acade mi c
The obj ecti ve of ret enti on overall is t ypi call y t o ensure t he acade mi c success of
st udent s over t he course of t heir educati on and make cert ai n t hat t hey do not fall behi nd.
The effects of ki nder garten ret enti on on t he academi c achi eve ment has been exa mi ned i n
pri or research. Hattie (1999) st at es t hat “t he effect is a mong t he ver y l owest of many
possi bl e i nnovati ons and it can be vi vi dl y not ed t hat ret enti on is over whel mi ngl y
di sastrous acr oss many educati onal i nt erventi ons at enhanci ng acade mi c achi eve ment. ”
There are negati ve academi c effects t o ret enti on at all ages i ncl udi ng ki ndergart en
( Hatti e, 1999). Chil dren who have been ret ai ned have conti nuousl y showed l ower
achi eve ment i n literacy, mat he mati cs, and general knowl edge scores on all t ypes of
assess ment s ( Hong & Raudenbush, 2005). Hattie (2009), st at es ret enti on has a negati ve

KI NDERGARTEN RETENTI ON

13

effect on acade mi c achi eve ment i n readi ng and mat he mati cs, al ong wit h affecti ng grade
poi nt average. There is evi dence t hat promot ed chil dren l ear n mor e i n reading and mat h
t han if t hey woul d have been ret ai ned, t heref ore l eavi ng ret ai nees furt her behi nd ( Hong &
Yu, 2007). Ki nder gart en st udent s who were ret ai ned never show achi eve ment hi gher
t han if t hey woul d have been pr o mot ed i nst ead ( Hong & Yu, 2007). Hong & Yu (2008)
cl ai mt hat ret enti on i ncreases t he st udent i nt erest in all subj ects, especi all y readi ng.
Chil dren who were pr omot ed t o first grade rat her than ret ai ned l at er showed t he benefits
t hat foll owed di d not hold up i n subsequent years ( Hong & Yu, 2007). It see ms t hat
all owi ng chil dren t o mat ure t hr ough ret enti on di d not i mpr ove readi ng and mat he mati cs
scores over t he el e ment ary years and t hese chil dren woul d have had t he abilit y t o lear n
first grade mat eri al if promot ed rat her t han ret ai ned. ( Hong & Yu, 2007) “Those who
conti nue t o ret ai n pupils at grade l evel do so despite cumul ati ve research evi dence
sho wi ng t hat t he pot enti al for negati ve effects consist entl y out wei ghs positive out co mes”
( Hatti e, 1999).
Ot her effects
There are ot her effects for ret ai ned st udent s ot her than soci al-e moti onal and
acade mi c effects. Ret enti on greatl y i ncreases t he dr op out risk i n hi gh school for st udent s
who were ret ai ned as compar ed t o st udent s who wer e pr omot ed ( Hughes, We st, Ki m &
Bauer, 2018). That contri but es t o how hi gh school graduat es make mor e money, a
nati onal average of $8, 000 mor e annuall y, and are less li kel y t o be peri odi call y
une mpl oyed, on assist ance, or i n prison ( Hughes et al., 2018). Int eresti ngl y, t hose
ret ai ned earl y and t hose pr o mot ed have t he sa me li keli hood of obt ai ni ng a GED ( General
Educati on Devel op ment Certificat e) ( Hughes et al., 2018). In a st udy done by Mendez et

KI NDERGARTEN RETENTI ON

14

al. (2015), ki nder gart en st udent s who are ret ai ned had t he poorest l ong-t erm out co mes
regar dl ess of t heir soci oecono mi c st at us. Theref ore, accor di ng t o t he literature,
ki nder gart en ret enti on can have l ong t er m effects when it comes t o graduati ng hi gh
school, overall i nco me, and t he abilit y t o mai nt ai n stabilit y i n several areas of life. The
l ong t er m effects need t o be a consi derati on when a decisi on t o ret ai n a ki nder gart en
st udent is bei ng made by parent s, teachers, and admi ni strat ors.
De mographi cs and ot her Fact ors Rel ated to Ki ndergarten Retenti on
Ge nder
Ki nder gart en t eachers percei ve a rel ati onshi p between ki nder gart en readi ness and
gender ( Wer nke, 2017). Thi s percei ved rel ati onshi p coi nci des wit h several st udi es i n
whi ch mal es tend t o be ret ai ned mor e t han fe mal es. Pr ogressi ng st udent groups t end t o
be rel ati vel y equal i n gender, but i n a st udy done by Mendez (2015), t he retai ned st udent
gr oup is i ncli ned t o have mor e boys. When t aki ng i nt o account et hni cit y, gender, free
l unch st at us, and ELL st at us, onl y gender and free l unch st at us were predi ctors of
ret enti on ( Winsl er et al., 2014). The gender effect i n regar ds t o ret enti on disappears
when t he chil d has attended preschool ( Winsl er et al., 2014). The literat ure bri ngs about
t he i dea t hat mal es who do not attend preschool are at-risk, especi all y if t hey are
econo mi call y disadvant aged.
Et hni city
The research regar di ng ethni cit y and its rel ati on t o ki nder gart en ret enti on and
school success has had var yi ng results i n st udi es. Et hni cit y is t oo br oad a mar ker t o

KI NDERGARTEN RETENTI ON

15

predi ct i ndi vi dual effects on ret enti on due t o soci oecono mi c differences withi n an et hni c
gr oup, and i n additi on accult urati on pl ays a rol e i n st udent success ( Cosden & Zi mmer,
1991). In a st udy done by Hughes et al. (2018), mi norit y girls, particul arl y bl ack girls,
have a hi gher li keli hood of dr oppi ng out of hi gh school if t hey have been ret ai ned i n t he
el e ment ar y grades. In general, st udent s fro m mi norit y gr oups are mor e li kel y t o be
ret ai ned ( Mendez et al., 2015). Justi ce et al. (2017) sai d t hat whit e st udents are more
li kel y t o be ready for ki nder gart en. Ki nder gart en readi ness ensures st udents will be more
prepared t o ent er first grade.
Fa mi l y i nco me
There are several st udi es t hat i ndi cat e t hat l ow fa mil y i nco me put s st udent s mor e
at risk for ret enti on. St udent s who recei ve free and reduced- pri ce l unches wer e mor e
li kel y t o be rat ed as not soci all y or behavi orall y ready for school ( Bett encourt, Gr oss, Ho,
& Perri n, 2017). So me parent s consi der a del ayed start for t heir chil dren, thi nki ng it will
gi ve t he m an advant age as t hey pr oceed t hr ough school. Low i nco me st udent s rarel y
have a del ayed st art due to t he fi nanci al constrai nts of parent s needi ng a pl ace for t heir
chil dren t o be whil e t hey are wor ki ng ( Winsl er et al., 2014). Thus, if t here is an
advant age t o lat e entry for ki nder gart en, t hen l owinco me st udent s woul d be less li kel y t o
have t hat advant age. St udent s from hi gh i nco me fa mili es are more li kel y t o be ready for
ki nder gart en (Justi ce et al., 2017). Thi s may be i n part because soci al-behavi or readi ness
skills are essenti all y devel oped bef ore ent eri ng ki nder gart en and t hey are for med
pri maril y i n t he cont ext of t he fa mil y ( Bett encourt et al., 2017). “Chil dren who begi n life
i n povert y already face struct ural disadvant ages like l ack of access t o resources or
struct ural racis mt hat i ncrease t heir risk exposure t o vi ol ence, abuse, and negl ect ”

16

KI NDERGARTEN RETENTI ON
( Hi noj osa, M. S., Hi noj osa, R., Bri ght, M., & Nguyen, J., 2019, p. 405). The defi cits

creat ed by l ow fa mil y i nco me t heref ore i ncrease t he li keli hood of a chil d not bei ng ready
for ki nder gart en and t he st udent ulti mat el y bei ng ret ai ned i n ki nder gart en.
Acade mi c
Readi ng achi eve ment
Achi eve ment has been a focus i n pri or research for det er mi ni ng fact ors t hat are
rel at ed t o, or predi ct ors of ki nder gart en ret enti on. A maj or reason st udent s are hel d i n
ki nder gart en is due t o difficult y i n readi ng ( Dwyer & Rul e 1997). Poor early readi ng
skills are a si gnifi cant predi ct or of ret enti on, and chil dren who perfor m poorl y on t he
earliest assess ment s availabl e are expect ed t o be retai ned mor e frequentl y (Cannon &
Li psco mb, n. d.). Hong & Raudenbush (2005) stat ed t hat ret ai ned st udents usuall y had no
co mput er and fe wer books t o read out si de of school t han pr omot ed st udents. Theref ore, a
lack of resources may pl ay a rol e i n success i n ki nder gart en. The current literat ure poi nts
out t hat defi cits i n earl y readi ng skills can be a predi ct or of ret enti on si nce readi ng skills
are oft en a focus when t eachers, pri nci pals, and parents are consi deri ng ret enti on for a
chil d.
Mat he mati cs achi eve ment
Over all achi eve ment is often a consi derati on when deci di ng if a chil d shoul d be
ret ai ned i n ki nder gart en. Ret ai ned chil dren appear t o under perfor mt heir peers i n readi ng
and mat he mati cs ( Hong & Yu, 2007). Chil dren whose end of year grades were poor are
ret ai ned i n ki nder gart en (Wi nsl er et al., 2014).

Al t hough mat h is a consi derati on, as

KI NDERGARTEN RETENTI ON

17

st at ed above, readi ng is a maj or reason st udent s are ret ai ned i n ki nder gart en ( Dwyer &
Rul e, 1997). Accor di ng to Cl aessens and Engel (2013), advanced mat he matical skills are
predi ct ors for success acade mi call y for all st udents. Thi s leads one t o concl ude t hat
alt hough mat he mati cs is a consi derati on, it is onl y deli berat ed i n ret enti on when t here are
ot her fact ors such as l ow readi ng achi eve ment or behavi oral concer ns, i n spite of
mat he mati cal skills bei ng a strong predi ct or of st udent success.
Teacher i nstructi onal practi ce
The cl assroo m practi ce and i nstructi onal met hods used by t eachers have an effect
on t he success of t he st udent s i n t heir cl assroo ms. Accor di ng t o All an (2008), st udent s
need t o be abl e t o foll ow rul es and routi nes i n t he cl assroo m. St udent s need t o be abl e t o
show i nt erest i n lear ni ng ne w concept s and beco me i nvol ved i n tryi ng ne w acti vities
( All an, 2008). Teachers need pr ofessi onal devel op ment t o ensure t hey are usi ng t he best
practi ces and engagi ng student s i n lear ni ng. They need t o be abl e t o pr ovi de soci albehavi oral skills i nstruction t o hel p st udent s who are havi ng difficulties i n those areas
( Bett encourt et al., 2017). St udent needs require support t hrough best i nstructi onal
practi ces and st udent engage ment i n cogniti ve and soci al-e moti onal learni ng.
There are ki nder gart en classr oo ms t hat i n practi ce are not desi gned t o meet t he
var yi ng needs of t he st udent s. NAEYC ( n. d.) gi ves t he foll owi ng war ni ng si gns when it
co mes t o t he ki nder gart en cl assroo ms:
● Teachers pr ovi de whol e gr oup i nstructi on most of t he ti me. Chil dren re mai n i n
t heir seats wit h little i nt eracti on wit h one anot her.

KI NDERGARTEN RETENTI ON

18

● Wor ksheet s, wor kbooks, and fl ashcar ds are used. St udent s are expect ed t o learn
abstract i deas such as addi ng wit hout t he use of ma ni pul ati ves.
● Teachers use stickers and treats as re war ds for st udent s t o get wor k done. Expli cit
wor ds are not used by t eachers t o descri be a j ob well done. They onl y use wor ds
such as ni ce or good j ob.
● Teachers onl y use assessme nt i n some areas, at t he end of proj ects or t he school
year, and do not use assess ment s t o adj ust i nstructi on t o fit st udent learni ng.
● Fa mil y cont act is mi ni mal and onl y happens when t here is a probl e m.
The cl assroo m practi ces of teachers have a negative effect on st udent ret enti on out co mes
if hi gh qualit y i nstructi onal practi ces are not used in t he cl assroo m. Teachers need t o use
for mati ve assess ment s t o adj ust i nstructi on and t o support skill defi cits i n many areas so
st udent s can have t he chance t o be successful i n t he ki nder gart en cl assroo m.
St udent-centered
Be havi oral
There are many st udent-cent ered fact ors t hat have been exa mi ned i n past research
t o bett er underst and school readi ness and predi ct ors of ki nder gart en ret ention. The fut ure
expect ati ons of st udent s are shaped by t he responses t hey recei ve t hrough their behavi or
from peers, teachers and ad mi ni strat ors ( Cosden & Zi mmer, 1991). So me of t he skills
st udent s lear n i n ki nder gart en are rel at ed t o soci al nor ms. “In practi ce, many chil dren are
ret ai ned i n ki nder gart en pri maril y for behavi oral reasons” ( Hong & Yu, 2007). St udent s
need t o manage anger safel y and appr opri at el y ( Al lan, 2008). So me st udents are ret ai ned
based on behavi or issues. When st udent s have behavi or issues and are unabl e t o manage

19

KI NDERGARTEN RETENTI ON

t heir anger, t hey beco me di srupti ve t o t he cl assroom. It is expect ed t hat st udent s who are
ret ai ned will reach a devel op ment all y appr opri at e stage for first grade by lear ni ng and
practi ci ng appr opri at e behavi or over t he course of t he ret enti on year ( Hong & Yu, 2007).
It is predi ct ed t hat st udents who are ret ai ned for behavi oral reasons will i mprove t heir
behavi ors duri ng t hat additi onal year i n ki nder garten.

Fr omt his literat ure, behavi or

pl ays a part i n t he decisi ons of parent s, teachers and ad mi ni strat ors t o ret ai n st udent s.
Soci al-e moti onal
The cogniti ve and soci al devel op ment of a chil d at t he begi nni ng and end of t he
ki nder gart en year are maj or fact ors i n t he decisi on t o ret ai n a chil d ( Hong & Raudenbush,
2005). St udent s who are at-risk i n t heir soci al-e moti onal devel op ment are at a
di sadvant age earl y ( Denha m et al., 2014). Several st udi es i dentify boys as bei ng mor e
li kel y t o be at-risk due t o soci al-e moti onal issues. In one st udy by Bett encourt et al.
(2017), st udent s consi dered t o be t ypi call y not sociall y/ behavi orall y ready wer e mal e,
Afri can- Ameri can, poor, chr oni call y absent, and di d not attend school. Hong & Yu
(2007) st at ed t hat “i n t heor y cogniti ve gr owt h and soci al-e moti onal devel op ment are
i nt errel at ed. ” Theref ore, t he research l eads t o social-e moti onal aspects of student s bei ng
a fact or i n st udent success i n ki nder gart en. These soci al-e moti onal aspects affect t he
acade mi c achi eve ment of t he chil d and also t he soci al aspect s t hat pl ay a role i n t he
devel op ment of rel ati onshi ps wit h t heir peers and t heir teacher.
Mat urit y
Mat urit y is an area whi ch is oft en discussed when consi deri ng ki nder gart en
ret enti on. In one st udy, ret enti on i n ki nder gart en is t he onl y age at whi ch t eachers and

KI NDERGARTEN RETENTI ON

20

pri nci pals vi e wed ret ention as a benefit for i mmat ure st udent s ( Range et al., 2012). Ne w
and experi enced t eachers percei ve t here is a rel ationshi p bet ween chr onol ogi cal age and
ki nder gart en readi ness (Wer nke, 2017). Bei ng chr onol ogi call y one year younger i n
ki nder gart en t han t he ot her st udent s has a negati ve i mpact on st udent success ( Dwyer &
Rul e 1997).

Ast udent’s age at ki nder gart en has a measurabl e effect on literacy and

language arts achi eve ment earl y i n t heir schooli ng, but t hese differences disappear by t he
ti me t hey reach t he ei ghth grade ( Perry, 2010). There are cert ai n skills t hat st udent s need
i n ki nder gart en t hat may rel at e t o mat urit y. Ki ndergart en st udent s need t o be abl e t o
list en, ask questi ons t o get i nfor mati on, and also use l anguage t o meet t heir needs ( All an,
2008). The research i dentifies t hat younger ki ndergart en st udent s are more li kel y t o be
ret ai ned ( Peel, 1997).
Fa mi l y confi gurati on
Fa mil y confi gurati on and t he dyna mi c of t he fa mily has an i mpact on st udent
success i n ki nder gart en and t hr oughout t heir schooli ng. Chil dren who had parent s t hat
i nvest ed i n t heir educati on and had bett er fa mil y functi oni ng had hi gher level s of
att ai nment ( Robertson & Reynol ds, 2010). The most disadvant aged fa mil y profil e
consist ed of fa mili es with l ow hu man capit al and l ow fa mil y functi oni ng, especi all y
when t here was chil d abuse or negl ect ( Robertson & Reynol ds, 2010). Children who fall
i nt o t his cat egor y are oft en concer ned wit h getti ng t heir basi c needs met and are not bei ng
support ed t o achi eve acade mi call y. “Chil dren whose mot hers had l ower educati on l evel s
wer e mor e li kel y t o be classified as gl obal risk” (Justi ce et al., 2017). Mot hers are oft en
t he caregi vers t o t he fa mi l y and when t hey have a lo w educati onal att ai nment, t hey oft en
do not have t he capacit y t o support t he acade mi c needs of t heir chil dren i n t heir

KI NDERGARTEN RETENTI ON

21

schooli ng. St udent s who ca me fromfa mili es wit h si ngl e parent s and mor e si bli ngs were
mor e li kel y t o be ret ai ned ( Hong & Raudenbush, 2005). Si ngl e parent s i n t hese sit uati ons
are oft en li mit ed wit h t he ti me t hey devot e t o support each chil d wit h t heir acade mi c
needs. In a st udy done by Hi noj osa et al. (2019), t he strongest predi ct or of grade
ret enti on was parent al i ncarcerati on. The fi ndi ngs i n t he st udy by Robertson & Reynol ds
(2010) i ndi cat e t hat t he educati on of chil dren is affect ed by t he resources avail abl e and
fa mil y functi oni ng, t hus can i mpr ove t he li keli hood of a chil d’s success i n school if t he
fa mil y is functi oni ng i n a positi ve manner. The research l eads us t o beli eve t hat fa mil y
confi gurati on, mot her’s educati onal level, and functi oni ng of t he fa mil y unit pl ays a
si gnifi cant rol e i n school success. St udent s wit h hi gh functi oni ng supporti ve fa mili es are
mor e successf ul t han st udent s who do not have a hi gh functi oni ng fa mil y unit ( Robertson
& Reynol ds, 2010).
Ot her fact ors
Parent i nvol ve ment
The a mount of parent i nvol ve ment vari es from school t o school and fro mfami l y
t o fa mil y. Teachers need t o have t he abilit y t o deal wit h parent s who are not i nvol ved
due t o fi nanci al constrai nts or fa mil y stressors and devi se alt ernat e ways t o reach out t o
t hese fa mili es t o support t he success of t heir st udent s ( Ray & Smit h, 2010). Fro mt he
research, ret ai ned st udents oft en co me from economi call y disadvant aged homes where
parent s may not be abl e to parti ci pat e i n t heir child’s educati on due t o econo mi c fact ors.
Econo mi call y disadvant aged st udent s may not have access t o extracurri cul ar acti vities.
Ret ai ned st udent s are also l ess li kel y t o partici pate i n extracurri cul ar acti vities ( Hong &

KI NDERGARTEN RETENTI ON

22

Raudenbush, 2005). As previ ousl y st at ed, education is affect ed by fa mil y functi oni ng
( Robertson & Reynol ds, 2010). Theref ore, parental i nvol ve ment i n a chil d’s educati on
wi ll affect school success.
Cl ass size
The discussi on around class si ze and t he effect t hat s mall cl ass si ze has on st udent
success is ver y preval ent, especi all y when l ooki ng at ki nder gart en ret enti on. Fiscal
fact ors i n districts oft en hel p t o di ct at e cl ass si ze. When t here are fe wer st udent s i n t he
cl ass, teachers are mor e easil y abl e t o i ndi vi duali ze i nstructi on and meet t he specifi c
needs of t he st udent s i n the cl assroo m. Teachers and pri nci pals vi e w cl ass size as an
i nt erventi on for preventing ret enti on ( Range et al., 2012). The positi ve effects of cl ass
si ze decrease as t he grade l evel i ncreases ( Shi n & Chung, 2009). Overall st udent
achi eve ment i n s mall cl asses is bett er t han st udent achi eve ment i n cl asses that are larger
( Shi n & Chung, 2009). Theref ore, t he research l ends t o t he i dea t hat s maller ki nder gart en
cl ass si zes can gi ve mor e opport unities for supporti ng a br oad range of levels and skill
defi cits of ki nder gart en st udent s. It gi ves t he teacher t he abilit y t o i ndi vi duali ze more
consist entl y for st udent s i n need of specifi c i nt erventi ons for t heir skill deficits and
t heref ore i ncreasi ng t heir li keli hood of success i n school.
Preschool att endance
Anot her area t o consi der is whet her or not a chil d has att ended preschool. Bot h
ne w and experi enced t eachers feel t hat t here is a benefit when st udent s have att ended
preschool ( Wer nke, 2017). Parent s and t eachers view preschool as preparator y for t he
expect ati ons of ki nder garten rat her t han it havi ng intri nsi c val ue ( Hat cher, Nuner, &

KI NDERGARTEN RETENTI ON

23

Paul sel, 2012). Preschool also i mpact s st udent personal and soci al skills devel op ment
( All an, 2008). St udent s who att end preschool already have an underst anding of t he soci al
skills needed t o functi on wi t h t heir peers and wit h t heir teacher. Even when ot her fact ors
co me i nt o pl ay wit h predicti ng ki nder gart en success, chil dren wit h bett er pre- K were
mor e li kel y t o meet ki nder gart en success (Justi ce et al., 2017). Accor di ng t o t he
literat ure, preschool can hel p wit h school readi ness not onl y i n t he areas of acade mi cs,
but also by prepari ng t hem soci all y, e moti onall y, and behavi orall y for ki nder gart en
expect ati ons.
Al t hough preschool gi ves an i nitial advant age t o st udent s i n ki nder gart en, after
first grade t he i nitial advant age dissi pat es ( Ansari, 2018). Chil dren who ent er
ki nder gart en wit hout a backgr ound fromt he preschool experi ences may accel erat e and
cat ch up t o t heir peers, and i n contrast, t hose who ent er wit h a strong skill set from
preschool may make fe wer gai ns t han t heir peers wi t hout preschool and wi t h a less
devel oped skill set ( Ansari, 2008). Theref ore, t he research shows t hat preschool can gi ve
st udent s an i nitial advantage, yet t he disadvant age of not attendi ng preschool can be
overco me. St udent s who di d not attend preschool can have t he abilit y t o lear n qui ckl y
once exposed t o t he curricul um. Achi eve ment of st udent s will adj ust due to abilit y as
t hey pr oceed t hr ough t heir years of schooli ng.
Supporti ng Ki ndergarten Success
St udent
Supporti ng ki nder gart en success for st udent s is necessar y t o avoi d any chance t hat
a st udent may be ret ai ned. Earl y i dentifi cati on helps t o prepare for effecti ve i nt erventi on

KI NDERGARTEN RETENTI ON

24

for ki nder gart en st udent s ( Dwyer & Rul e, 1997). Most st udent s have little or no risk of
ever bei ng ret ai ned ( Hong & Raudenbush, 2005). Denha m, Bassett, Zi nser, & Wyatt
(2014), sai d kno wi ng a student’s e moti onal behavior (bot h positi ve and negati ve), soci al
pr obl e m-sol vi ng abilit y, and soci al-e moti onal behavi ors is i mport ant. Screeni ngs can hel p
a t eacher pl an t o support i nstructi on and i nt eracti on whi ch can l ead t o earl y school
success ( Denha m, et al., 2014).
There are oft en disrupti ons t o t he lear ni ng environme nt by st udent s lacki ng soci al
and personal skills. Bettencourt et al. (2017) addresses pr ovi di ng soci al-behavi oral skills
i nstructi on t o st udent s havi ng difficult y t o support st udent success. Thi s i nstructi on may
be done t hrough i nt erventi on or t hrough cl assroom l essons. St udent s need t o be abl e t o
foll ow rul es and routi nes i n t he lear ni ng environ ment, and also be abl e t o sho w i nt erest i n
learni ng ne w concept s and tryi ng ne w acti vities ( Allan, 2008). Theref ore, int er venti on
and skill buil di ng usi ng free pl ay and or gani zed ga mes can hel p buil d positi ve
rel ati onshi ps, and rel ati onshi p buil di ng i mpact s acade mi cs i n subsequent grades ( Ray &
S mi t h, 2010).

There are many reasons t hat st udent s i n ki nder gart en may need

i nt erventi ons t o be successful. These reasons may be acade mi c, behavi oral, or soci ale moti onal. Int erventi ons can be i mpl e ment ed as easil y i n first grade as t hey can be i n
ki nder gart en, it reduces the cost of t he additi onal year of schooli ng, and avoi ds t he
e moti onal and soci al costs of ret enti on ( Peel, 1997). Thus st arti ng i nt erventi ons i n
ki nder gart en and conti nui ng t he mi nt o first grade is benefi ci al. In additi on, less
i ndependent chil dren may be mor e chall engi ng t o a t eacher, but it is not an adequat e
reason for ret enti on ( Bergi n 1996). In t hese circumst ances, Ber gi n (1996) says a bett er
strat egy is changi ng t he environ ment t o fit t he child t o support st udent success.

KI NDERGARTEN RETENTI ON

25

Ki nder gart en i deall y needs t o support bot h t he cogniti ve and soci al devel op ment
of chil dren ( Ray & Smit h, 2010). Pi npoi nti ng t he defi cits of st udent s earl y can l ead t o
effecti ve i nt erventi on ( Dwyer, 1997). The research l ends t o supporti ng both cogniti ve
and soci al devel op ment thr ough i nt erventi ons. Skill buil di ng will hel p support st udent s
t o be successful i n ki ndergart en. Wit hout t hese necessar y skills, st udent s will have
diffi cult y fi ndi ng success duri ng t heir ti me i n school. Identifyi ng st udent s who are most
at-risk is i mport ant. If student s are mal e, non- Hi spani c, l owi nco me, have not attended a
care cent er, and were young ent eri ng ki nder gart en, t hen t hey had a great er li keli hood of
bei ng at-risk ( Hong & Raudenbush, 2005). Identifyi ng risk and weaknesses, t hen
conti nuousl y monit ori ng t o make adj ust ment s t o support t hose skill defi cits will provi de
opport unit y for ki nder garten success.
Teacher
The success of st udent s in ki nder gart en is directl y i mpact ed by t eachers.
Teachers feel a l ot of guilt if t hey cannot teach well si nce t hey have t he responsi bilit y of
t he st udent s’ well-bei ng and educati on i n t heir hands on a dail y basis ( Cheng, 2013). It is
i mport ant t o not e t hat teachers’ beli efs i n st udent abilities lead t o st udent perfor mance
consist ent wit h teacher expect ati ons ( Gol dst ei n, East wood, & Behuni ak, 2014).
Theref ore, it is ver y i mport ant t hat teachers have t he t ool s t o support struggli ng st udent s
i n all skill defi cits. Thi s wi ll hel p teachers have t he confi dence t o know t hey can hel p
t heir st udent s i n multi pl e areas and t he expect ati ons for t he st udent s can t hen be positi ve.
The positi ve outl ook will i ncrease expect ati ons and support st udent success.

KI NDERGARTEN RETENTI ON

26

Al l an (2008) st at ed t hat there is a lack of professional devel op ment for teachers i n
t he areas of soci al and personal skills devel op ment . Cert ai n e moti onal assess ment t ool s
can be used by t eachers and “t he preli mi nar y fi ndings can show co mpl ex relati onshi ps
bet ween preschool ers’ soci al e moti onal learni ng and earl y school success” ( Denha m et
al., 2014). Thus, teachers who recei ve pr ofessi onal devel op ment on t ool s that cali brat e
soci al and personal learning defi cits is si gnifi cant so t eachers can support t hat skill for
st udent success. Thi s professi onal devel op ment can hel p t o i dentify at-risk st udent s earl y
and support t he m mor e expli citl y. Supporti ng st udent s t his way can l ead to ki nder gart en
success for at-risk st udents.
Teachers can also est ablish some routi nes and rel ati onshi ps wit hi n t heir own
cl assroo ms t o support st udent success. Ot her concept s t hat were consensus concept s
wer e pr ovi di ng consist ency i n t he cl assroo m, i ndivi duali zi ng i nstructi on, seeki ng
assist ance from parent s, and usi ng cl assroo m r outi nes t o pr omot e soci al and personal
learni ng ( All an, 2008). Ens uri ng t hat teachers have t he pr ofessi onal develop ment i n
t hese areas and are i mpl eme nti ng t he m wit h fi delity, can hel p support ki ndergart en
success for t he st udent s that t hey ser ve.
Accor di ng t o NAEYC ( n. d.) i n What does a hi gh-qualit y ki ndergart en l ook like?,
t he foll owi ng are areas t hat teachers can focus on to hel p t heir st udent s learn best:
● Cr eati ng a co mmunit y of learners where st udent s feel t hey bel ong and can
hel p one anot her and share i deas.

KI NDERGARTEN RETENTI ON

27

● Supporti ng devel op ment and l ear ni ng by havi ng a vari et y of learni ng
spaces, provi di ng i nt eresti ng acti vities, and encouragi ng chil dren t o t hi nk
deepl y.
● Pl anni ng curri cul ar learning experi ences where t he i nt erests of t he
chil dren are expl ored and creat e goal s wit h fa mili es based on curri cul ar
experi ences.
● Li st eni ng t o, encouragi ng, and respecti ng fa mili es. Al so shari ng
i nfor mati on about st udent learni ng wit h t he fa milies.
These are all supporti ve cl assroo m practi ces t hat pr o mot e l ear ni ng, i nvol ve fa mili es, and
buil d rel ati onshi ps for student s i n t he school setting. The current literat ure supports t hese
practi ces for teachers so that t hey can hel p t heir student s achi eve and be successful i n
ki nder gart en. Thi s i n t urn will hel p reduce t he li keli hood t hat t he st udent wi ll be
ret ai ned.
Pri nci pals also can support teachers i n a vari et y of ways. Ri char ds (2007)
co mpil ed a list of t he t op fi ve behavi ors effecti ve pri nci pals use t o encourage t heir
teachers and co mpared t he t op fi ve fro mt he t eachers and pri nci pal perspecti ves ( Tabl e
1):

28

KI NDERGARTEN RETENTI ON
Tabl e 1
A Co mpari son of t he Top Fi ve Positi ve Pri nci pal Behavi ors
Teacher Ranki ng Order
1. Res pects and val ues t eachers
as pr ofessi onal s
2. Supports teachers i n matters
of st udent disci pli ne.
3. Has an open- door poli cy.
4. Is fair, honest, and
trust wort hy.
5. Supports teachers wit h
parent s.

( Ri char ds, 2007)

Pri nci pal Ranki ng Order
1. Encourages t eachers t o impr ove i n
areas of teachi ng practi ce and
pr ofessi onal devel op ment.
2. Hol ds consist ent, hi gh standar ds for all
me mbers of t he school fami l y.
3. Res pects and val ues t eachers as
pr ofessi onal s.
4. Is fair, honest, and trust wort hy.
5. Has an open- door poli cy.

Cr eati ng a coll aborati ve and positi ve environ ment bet ween t he adults i n t he school will
ensure t hat teachers feel support ed as t hey adj ust their efforts i n creati ng an environ ment
t o ensure ki nder gart en success for t heir st udent s.
Parents
Parent s pl ay a si gnifi cant part i n supporti ng st udents i n ki nder gart en so t hat t hey
can be successful.

When chil dren are st arti ng kinder gart en, t his can be a ti me of

apprehensi on for parent s. Parent s may mi ss t he eager anti ci pati on of t he kinder gart en
experi ence by havi ng an overall anxi et y regar di ng what will occur as t heir chil dren
pr oceed i nt o ki nder gart en ( Hat cher 2012). There are t wo co mponent s when consi deri ng
ki nder gart en success and parent s; how parent s can be support ed t o hel p t heir chil dren and
ho w t he parent s t he msel ves can make a positi ve effect i n t he ki nder gart en success for
t heir chil dren. It is necessar y t o support parent s and parenti ng skills earl y for
ki nder gart en st udent s ( Bett encourt et al., 2017). Teachers and ad mi ni strators need t o

KI NDERGARTEN RETENTI ON

29

parti ci pat e and co mmuni cat e wit h parent s regar ding personal and soci al skills, gi vi ng
i ndi vi dual i nstructi on when necessar y ( All an, 2008). When it comes t o retenti on, parent s
and ad mi ni strat ors oft en j udge ki nder gart en st udent success by grades, rul e foll owi ng,
and rel ati ons wit h peers and t he ki nder gart en t eacher ( Owens, et al., 2015). Gui di ng
parent s on how t o support t heir chil dren is an i mport ant concept i n buil di ng a foundati on
for st udent success i n ki nder gart en.
Oft en chil dren who are goi ng t o be ret ai ned have parent s who are less co mmi tt ed
t o parenti ng responsi bilities and have l ower expectati ons for t heir chil dren at t he
begi nni ng of t he ki nder gart en year ( Hong & Raudenbush, 2005). Fi ndi ng ways t o
i ncrease t he expect ati on of t he parent s for t heir chil dren coul d make a difference i n t he
success of t he chil d t hroughout t heir schooli ng. School s need t o fi nd ways t o educat e
parent s earl y on t he benefits of supporti ng t heir chil dren as t hey ent er ki ndergart en.
Wa ys t o support parent s and fa mili es t hrough t he school and co mmunit y can ai d i n
i mpr ovi ng parenti ng responsi bilities and bett eri ng t he chances for school success.
Ad mi ni strat or
Pri nci pals pl ay a rol e i n the ki nder gart en success. They can support teachers and
t hey can also support fami li es. One co mmon key aspect of t he i mport ance of t he
pri nci pal i n ki nder gart en success is t he need for t he mt o pr ovi de gui dance and directi on
t o all parties i nvol ved. In a st udy by All an (2008), concept s e mer ged for ad mi ni strati ve
support when st udent s have soci al and personal skill defi cits. These concept s i ncl uded
pr ovi di ng gui dance and directi on, serve as a bri dge bet ween school and home, and t he
pri nci pals pr ovi des school- wi de behavi or expect ations ( All an, 2008). Pri ncipal s need t o

KI NDERGARTEN RETENTI ON

30

be accessi bl e t o teachers and fa mili es, and t he guidance counsel or needs t o be avail abl e
t o wor k wit h st udent s who have personal and social skill defi cits ( All an, 2008). The
literat ure suggests t hat pri nci pals need t o co mmunicat e wit h all parties, support and hel p
t hose i nvol ved, and navigat e t hr ough concer ns t o ensure st udent s have t he best possi bl e
chance of success.
Pri nci pals need t o be e mpat heti c t o pr o mot e t eacher perfor mance ( Cheng, 2013).
When addressi ng t eachers, re war ds and puni sh ment s may not have any benefit si nce
ki nder gart en t eachers relat e most cl osel y wit h e mpat hy and care ( Cheng, 2013). The
research l ends t o t he i dea t hat pri nci pals pr ovi di ng support and a cari ng environ ment
pr ovi des t he best opport unit y t o have ki nder gart en success for t he st udent s that t hey
ser ve.
Accor di ng t o Hel sel and Kr asnoff (2015), t he follo wi ng are ways i n whi ch
pri nci pals can hel p t o support transiti on i nt o ki ndergart en:
● Ki nder gart en transiti oni ng shoul d i nvol ve fa mili es and co mmuniti es.
● Pr ofessi onal devel op ment shoul d have opport unities t o focus specifi call y t o
teachi ng young chil dren.
●

Curri cul um and i nstruction shoul d be ali gned t o the st andar ds.

● St udent’s dat a shoul d be anal yzed, used t o make adj ust ment or i nt erventi ons, and
shared wit h teachers and wi t h fa mili es.
● St udent s need t o attend school regul arl y and fa milies shoul d call when t he chil d
wi ll be absent.

KI NDERGARTEN RETENTI ON

31

● Pri nci pals need t o ensure t hat t here is a buil di ng of a wareness when it co mes t o
transiti oni ng pr ogra ms.
These i deas are hel pf ul in supporti ng t he transiti on i nt o ki nder gart en for t he ne w
ki nder gart en st udent s. They can hel p pri nci pals support t he success of t he ki nder gart en
st udent s t hat attend t heir buil di ng.
Supporti ng Instructi onal Practi ce
Screeni ngs
Ki nder gart en regi strati on is a nat ural pl ace t o gai n i nsi ght on ki nder gart en
st udent s. Screeni ng met hods t o i dentify at-risk student s earl y, hel ps st udent success i n
ki nder gart en ( Mendez et al., 2015). Parent s need to gi ve i nfor mati on on functi oni ng and
behavi ors ( Owens et al., 2015). Screeni ngs obt ai n i nfor mati on pri or t o ki nder gart en t o
support ki nder gart en success and shoul d be co mprehensi ve, multi-for mat, multi-st ep and
li nked t o servi ce deli ver y ( Owens et al., 2015). Earl y screeni ngs gi ve st aff ti me t o assess
needs and make decisi ons regar di ng monit ori ng and i nt erventi on ( Owens et al., 2015).
There are chall enges i n usi ng screeni ng wit h young chil dren and it is difficult t o i dentify
risk at a ti me when vari ati ons i n devel op ment al behavi or is nor mal ( Owens et al., 2015).
Fr a me wor ks are used t o strengt hen needs assess ment s t o mor e effecti vel y t arget and
tail or servi ces, and are also used t o target and reeval uat e popul ati ons on a regul ar basis
( Robertson & Reynol ds, 2010). Effecti ve pl anni ng and use of t he dat a from t he
screeni ngs make a difference i n t he success of a ki nder gart en st udent who is st arti ng wit h
one or more skill defi cits.

KI NDERGARTEN RETENTI ON

32

Ar eas for screeni ng need t o be i n soci al-e moti onal and cogniti ve areas. Most
predi ct ors of ki nder gart en ret enti on are pretreat ment measures i n soci al-emoti onal
out co mes and cogniti ve areas ( Hong & Yu, 2008). Havi ng i nf or mati on from screeni ngs
hel p i dentify st udent s at risk of ret enti on and support is t hen pr ovi ded i n t heir skill
defi cits. Low scores i n language, cogniti ve, and fi ne mot or assess ment, as well as mor e
behavi ors and soci al issues, are hel pf ul i n i dentifyi ng chil dren who may be at-risk for
ret enti on ( Winsl er et al., 2014). In t he st udy done by Winsl er et al. (2014), chil d
language and soci al skills are key t argets i n i dentifyi ng t hose wit h t he most li keli hood of
ret enti on si nce parent s and t eachers consi der t hese when fi nal ret enti on decisi ons are
ma de. There needs t o be poli ci es i n pl ace so st udent s ent er ki nder gart en wit h an easy
transiti on ( Ray & Smit h, 2010). The literat ure reflects t hat screeni ngs are needed t o
ensure supports are i n pl ace so t hat transiti ons are s moot h i nt o ki nder gart en and
t hroughout t he ki nder garten year. Thi s will gi ve student s t he best possi bl e chance at
ki nder gart en success.
The Pennsyl vani a Offi ce of Chil d Devel op ment and Earl y Lear ni ng (n. d.)
suggests assessi ng a child’s do mai ns of learni ng thr ough t he foll owi ng:
1. Appr oaches of lear ni ng thr ough pl ay
2. Language and literacy
3. Cogniti ve Devel op ment
4. Healt h, well ness, and physi cal devel op ment
5. Soci al and e moti onal devel op ment

KI NDERGARTEN RETENTI ON

33

Thi s shoul d be done t hrough screeni ngs, di agnostic assess ment s as needed, for mati ve
assess ment s and summative assess ment s and t he i nfor mati on can t hen be used t o make
i nfor med decisi ons.
Cl assroo m practi ce
Cl assroo m practi ce vari es not onl y from di stri ct t o district, but also bet ween
cl assroo ms wit hi n t he same buil di ng. Differences i n cl assroo m and distri ct poli ci es have
an i mpact on earl y experiences i n school ( Cosden & Zi mmer, 1991). It is import ant t o
support teacher cl assroom practi ce t hrough pr ofessi onal devel op ment t o ensure t eachers
have best practi ces i n pl ace. St udent s who have personal and soci al skill needs are oft en
di srupti ve i n t he cl assroom and t here is oft en a lack of opport unit y for professi onal
devel op ment i n t hese areas t o support cl assroo mteacher practi ce ( All an, 2008). Soci al
devel op ment i nvol ves i nteracti ng wit h peers constructi vel y ( Ray & Smit h, 2010). Ray
and Smit h (2010) also poi nt out t hat communi cation skills and confli ct resol uti on are
devel oped al ong wit h buil di ng a co mmunit y of mut ual underst andi ng. Teachers need t o
be abl e t o i ncor porat e all of t hese practi ces i nt o t heir cl assroo m and consist ent cl assroo m
practi ce i mpl e ment ed with fi delit y will hel p t o support st udent s. Pr ovi di ng pr ofessi onal
devel op ment is one way to make t his happen.
Acade mi call y t here are ma ny cl assroo m practi ces t hat can be used wit h fidelit y t o
support ki nder gart en success. Repeat ed practi ce of me mor y skills, strat egies for lear ni ng,
acade mi cs of mat he mati cs, language arts, and sci ence can hel p st udent s attai n t hese
concept s and strat egi es mor e effi ci entl y and builds fl uency ( Ray & Smit h, 2010). A
predi ct or of ki nder gart en success as defi ned by Ray and Smit h (2010) is fl uency i n all

KI NDERGARTEN RETENTI ON

34

acade mi c areas i n ki ndergart en. Theref ore, buil ding fl uency i n readi ng and mat he mati cs
skills coul d be key i n supporti ng st udent s i n ki ndergart en and eli mi nati ng the possi bilit y
of ret enti on.
Teacher also can support st udent s t hrough cl assroom practi ce by devel opi ng
st udent i nt erests and trying ne w acti vities ( All an, 2008). All an (2008) suggests
i mpl e menti ng i nstructi on i n conj uncti on wit h t he regul ar curri cul umt o support soci al
strat egi es. Engagi ng st udent s i n t heir learni ng while i ncor porati ng acade mi c and soci al
skill buil di ng can support st udent success i n t he kinder gart en cl assroo m.
Addi ti onal supports
“Top- perfor mi ng syst e ms have well-devel oped, highl y coherent and ver y
de mandi ng i nstructi onal syst e ms t hat i ncor porat e st udent perfor mance st andar ds,
curri cul u m, assess ment s and i nstructi onal met hods” ( NI SL, 2018, para. 2). It is
i mport ant t hat t he school itself is also functi oni ng wi t h a syst e mi n pl ace t hat supports
hi gh perfor mance t eachers and t eachi ng, hi gh qualit y ali gned i nstructi on, and hi gh qualit y
or gani zati on and manageme nt ( About NI SL, 2019). Maki ng sure all of t he syst e ms i n t he
school are functi oni ng t oget her hel ps t o i ncrease st udent achi eve ment and creat es hi gh
perfor mance school s ( About NI SL, 2019). Pri nci pal s need t o make sure all syst e ms are
wor ki ng t oget her. When syst e ms are wor ki ng t oget her, supports are more readil y
avail abl e and t eachers underst and how t o access t hose supports for t heir st udent s. Thi s
wi ll i mpr ove achi eve ment not onl y i n ki nder gart en, but acr oss t he grades i n t he school.
Ot her supports may also need t o be consi dered t o ensure i nstructi onal practices
are i mpl e ment ed t o support st udent success. Di stricts may focus on cl ass size reducti on

KI NDERGARTEN RETENTI ON

35

t o ensure t hat ki nder gart en cl assroo ms are a manageabl e si ze and t eachers have t he
abilit y t o support all st udent needs on an i ndi vi dual level. Ad mi ni strat ors need t o engage
i n dat a-dri ven decisi on maki ng t o use accu mul at ed i nfor mati on t o support student defi cits
( Har vey, & Ohl e, 2018).

Bett encourt et al. (2017) suggest t hree sust ai nable strat egi es

t hat can be used t o support st udent s and fa mili es:
1. Duri ng t he earli est years, parent s need t o be supported and t he school
needs t o hel p t o strengt hen parenti ng skills.
2. Educat ors of st udent s with e moti onal and behavi oral chall enges need
pr ofessi onal devel op ment on ment al healt h t opi cs and consult ati ons from
me nt al healt h pr ofessi onal s.
3. Al l st udent s need t o be provi ded experi ences t hat wi ll strengt hen t heir
soci al-behavi oral skills.
Soci al-behavi oral skills also coul d be deli vered t hrough a school- wi de positi ve
behavi or support fra me wor k ( S WPBS) t o ensure all st udent s are pr ovi ded consi st ent
expect ati ons for behavi or (Scott, Gagnon, & Nel son, 2008). S WPBS is a tiered deli ver y
model t hat provi des model ed behavi ors wit h tiered supports ( Scott et al., 2008).
Screeni ngs are done t o ensure t hat all st udent s who need support can get t he behavi or
support t hat t hey may require ( Scott et al., 2008). Hong and Raudenbush (2005) st at ed
t hat ret ai ned st udent s tend t o recei ve l ower scores i n self-control and are rated hi gher on
e moti onal and behavi or probl e ms. The fut ure expect ati ons of t he chil d are shaped by t he
responses of t he chil d’s peers, teachers, and ad mi nistrat ors ( Cosden & Zi mmer).
Theref ore a pr ogra m such as a school- wi de positive behavi or support progra m woul d
hel p t o support ki nder garten st udent s earl y i n t he area of behavi or. It woul d also tier

KI NDERGARTEN RETENTI ON

36

support for st udent s who struggl e wit h de monstrating appr opri at e behavi ors i n t he school
setti ng. Ker n and Manz (2004) expl ai n t he tiers as foll ows:
● The first tier is focused on preventi on, is appli ed school- wi de by all staff
i n all setti ngs.
● The second tier is for at-risk st udent s who coul d be at-risk for behavi or
issues.
● The t hird tier, t he fi nal tier, is for i nt ensi ve support of st udent s who have
ongoi ng behavi or probl ems.
Over all S WBPS has beco me a ver y pr omi si ng appr oach t o support st udents ( Ker n &
Ma nz, 2004). Usi ng t his syst e mf or st udent s who are at-risk i n t he ki nder gart en setti ng
woul d be benefi ci al i n t argeti ng st udent s and supporti ng st udent s who woul d ot her wi se
have behavi oral or soci al-e moti onal issues whi ch woul d i nhi bit t heir learning and
decrease t heir li keli hood of bei ng successful i n ki nder gart en.
Progra ms such as t hese can be expensi ve for districts ( Bett encourt et al., 2017).
Al t hough t hey can be expensi ve, t he literat ure contri but es t o t he i dea t hat ma nagi ng
st udent behavi or can be a si gnifi cant fact or i n ki nder gart en ret enti on. It is likel y t hat
school wi de behavi or support syst e ms will gui de school s t o adopt effecti ve i nstructi on
strat egi es t o support st udent behavi or skills ( Ker n & Manz, 2004). The cost of st udent s
repeati ng a year is ver y costl y t o a distri ct and also coul d have negati ve effects for t he
st udent i n t he fut ure. Theref ore, it makes sense t hat t he upfront cost woul d be much l ess
t han t he l ong t er m cost not onl y fiscall y t o t he district, but i n multi pl e ways t o t he
st udent.

KI NDERGARTEN RETENTI ON

37

Concl usi on
Ki nder gart en ret enti on is a t opi c of debat e by all stakehol ders. The i dea at t he
i ncepti on of ki nder gart en was t hat it woul d be pl ay- based and now it has beco me an
acade mi c endeavor j ust as grades one t hrough t wel ve are i n t he educati onal syst e m.
Testi ng account abilit y and t he i mpl e ment ati on of the Co mmon Core have brought
att enti on t o t he achi eve ment of st udent s and t heir readi ness t o move t o first grade. Thi s
has l ed t o a deeper exa mi nati on of ki nder gart en retenti on and bett er ways for supporti ng
st udent skill defi cits.
Ad mi ni strat ors, parent s, and t eachers are i nconsistent wit h t heir perspecti ves on
ki nder gart en ret enti on and ki nder gart en readi ness skills. Parent s and t eachers feel t hat
st udent s ret ai ned earl y benefit fromt he ret enti on (Anat asi ou, 2017). There are several
skill sets t hat t hese t hree gr oups feel are i mport ant for ki nder gart en success. Parent s tend
t o focus on concret e skills such as kno wi ng t he literacy skills, nu mer acy skills, sitti ng
still, and hol di ng a pencil/ pai nt brush ( West, 1993). Alt hough t hose skill sets are
so meti mes i ncl uded, teachers and ad mi ni strat ors woul d e mphasi ze “de monstrati ng t he
abilit y t o l earn from experiences”, “seeki ng hel p when t he st udent needs it”, and “bei ng
abl e t o i nt eract appr opri atel y” ( All an, 2008).
When consi deri ng ki ndergart en ret enti on, t here are many concer ns t hat come i nt o
pl ay. Teachers not ed more pr obl e m behavi ors with ret ai ned st udent s ( Anat asi ou 2017).
Ki nder gart en st udent s who were ret ai ned never sho w achi eve ment hi gher t han if t hey
woul d have been pr o mot ed rat her t han ret ai ned. (Hong & Yu, 2007) Ret enti on i ncreased
self-confi dence i n academi cs and reduced pr obl em behavi ors ( Hong & Yu, 2008).
Ret enti on greatl y i ncreases t he dr op out risk i n hi gh school for st udent s who were

KI NDERGARTEN RETENTI ON

38

ret ai ned i n co mparison t o st udent s who were pr omot ed. ( Hughes et al., 2018). The
literat ure also reveal s t hat st udent s who are ret ai ned i n ki nder gart en may do bett er duri ng
t he ret enti on years and possi bl y for t he next fe w, but event uall y t hey will lose t he gai ns
t hat had i nitiall y occurred t hr ough t he ki nder gart en ret enti on ( Hong & Yu, 2007). There
is no real benefit for ki nder gart en ret enti on i n rel ati on t o t he i nfor mati on provi ded fro m
t he literat ure.
The literat ure i nst ead suggest t hat supports need t o be put i nt o pl ace for acade mi c,
soci al-e moti onal, and behavi oral skill sets. Earl y i dentificati on hel p det ermi ne
appr opri at e i nt erventi ons for ki nder gart en st udents ( Dwyer & Rul e, 1997). Teachers can
put appr opri at e i nstructi on i n pl ace when st udent s are screened for acade mi cs. The sa me
is true for soci al-e moti onal skills. When st udent s are screened t eachers can pl an
i nstructi on i n t he area of soci al-e moti onal learni ng t o support t he ki nder garten st udent s i n
t heir cl assroo m ( Denha m et al., 2014). Behavi or supports can be put i nt o place wit h a
fra me wor k such as S WBPS where it woul d tier support for st udent s who struggl e wit h
de monstrati ng appr opri ate behavi ors i n t he school setti ng. ( Ker n & Manz, 2004).
There are several specific recurri ng fact ors t hat coul d put a st udent at-risk. A
strong fact or i n det er mi ning at-risk st udent s was povert y. Winsl er et al. (2014) not ed t he
strong rol e fa mil y i nco me pl ays i n st udent performa nce. Boys t end t o be ret ai ned mor e
oft en wit h t he gender effect disappeari ng if t he student att ended preschool ( Winsl er et al.,
2014). St udent s who are at-risk i n t heir soci al-e moti onal devel op ment are at a
di sadvant age earl y. ( Denha m et al., 2014). The literat ure also reveal s t hat chil dren wit h
mot hers wit h l ower educati onal attai nment, chil dren of si ngl e parent fa milies, and

39

KI NDERGARTEN RETENTI ON

fa mili es wit h l owl evels of functi oni ng (abuse, negl ect, et c.), are chil dren who will be atrisk.
The literat ure expresses that supporti ng ki nder garten success t hrough screeni ng
and i nt erventi ons is ver y i mport ant t o support st udent success i n ki nder garten and
t hroughout t heir years i n school. Ad mi ni strat ors need t o make sure all of t he syst e ms i n
t he school are functi oni ng t oget her whi ch hel ps t o i ncrease st udent achi eveme nt and
creat e a hi gh perfor mance school ( About NI SL, 2019).

By doi ng t his, supports can be

put i nt o pl ace and easil y accessi bl e. Teacher can be gi ven pr ofessi onal devel op ment.
Thi s shoul d i ncl ude pr ofessi onal devel op ment and ment al healt h consult ati ons for t he
ki nder gart en t eachers who can wor k wit h chil dren on soci al-e moti onal and behavi oral
issues ( Bett encourt, 2017). Ad mi ni strat ors need t o support teachers wit h care and
concer n.
Fi nall y, teachers and admi ni strat ors need t o support parent s. Parent s need t o be
support ed earl y wit h parenti ng skills ( Bett encourt, 2017). Parent s of ret ai ned st udent s
have l ower expect ati ons and are l ess co mmi tt ed t o t heir parenti ng responsi bilities. ( Hong
& Raudenbush, 2005). The literat ure present s t he i dea t hat teachers and admi ni strat ors
need t o co mmuni cat e with parent s, even if t here is a need t o be creati ve i n ho w t hey
co mmuni cat e. Thi s will ensure parent s are i nfor med of t he st udent s’ progress and are
bei ng support ed wit h what ever hel p t hey may need.
The literat ure researched directs us t o t he i dea t hat at-risk st udent s need support ed
t hrough i nt erventi ons. These i nt erventi ons need to be soci al-e moti onal, behavi oral, and
acade mi c. Screeni ngs need t o be done earl y, l ooking for at-risk st udent s, and keepi ng i n

KI NDERGARTEN RETENTI ON

40

mi nd key i dentifiers such as l owi nco me. Ki nder gart en ret enti on has mi nimal t o no
val ue, rat her it oft en has negati ve consequences for t he chil d ret ai ned.
Research Questi ons
Currentl y t here are a hi gh nu mber of ki nder gart en ret enti ons i n a rural district.
The pur pose of t his st udy is t o i nvesti gat e four research questi ons. First, what are t he
crit eri a used by t eachers to det er mi ne a st udent shoul d be ret ai ned i n ki ndergart en?
Second, l ooki ng at st udent s who have been ret ai ned i n ki nder gart en i n t his setti ng, what
fact ors predi ct t hat t hey wer e at-risk for ret enti on? Third, how can t he i nfor mati on fro m
t his research be used t o reduce ret enti ons and benefit st udent success i n kinder gart en?
Fi nall y, how can t he i nf or mati on fromt his research be used t o support i nstructi on t o
mi ni mi ze ret enti on?

41

KI NDERGARTEN RETENTI ON

Chapt er 3
Met hodol ogy
Introducti on
The title of t he st udy, deter mi ni ng how t o reduce ki nder gart en ret enti ons thr ough
teacher and st udent supports, will be discussed. The pur pose of t he st udy is t o det er mi ne
why t here is a hi gh nu mber of ret enti ons, what fact ors are causi ng a hi gh nu mber of
ret enti ons, and i dentifyi ng additi onal supports t hat can be put i nt o pl ace t o ensure
ki nder gart en success for all st udent s attendi ng an el e ment ar y school i n t he di strict. The
setti ng where t he research t ook pl ace will be descri bed, al ong wit h det ails on t he
parti ci pant s. The research pl an and how it rel at es t o t he literat ure will be revi e wed. A
descri pti on of t he research pl an will be discussed al ong wit h any fiscal i mplicati ons.
Fi nall y, t he research design, t he met hods used, and a descri pti on of t he data coll ecti on
wi ll be expl ai ned.
Purpose
There are currentl y a hi gh nu mber of ki nder gart en ret enti ons i n a school district.
The pur pose of t his st udy is t o det er mi ne why t here is a hi gh nu mber of ret enti ons, what
fact ors are causi ng a hi gh number of ret enti ons, and i dentifyi ng additi onal supports t hat
can be put i nt o pl ace t o ensure ki nder gart en success for all st udent s att ending an
el e ment ar y school i n t he di strict. Det er mi ni ng commonalities of t he st udent s bei ng
ret ai ned i n ki nder gart en and why t he ret enti ons are felt t o be warrant ed by t he teachers

KI NDERGARTEN RETENTI ON

42

wer e exa mi ned. Identifyi ng areas of teacher and st udent support t hat woul d reduce t he
nu mber of st udent s bei ng ret ai ned were i dentifi ed. The st udy l ooked at t he crit eri a bei ng
used t o ret ai n st udent s i n ki nder gart en. The fact ors t hat were co mmon a mong st udent s
who were ret ai ned were investi gat ed t hr ough t he de mogr aphi c, behavi oral, and
achi eve ment dat a for each ki nder gart en st udent retai ned duri ng t he 2018- 19 school year.
A det er mi nati on of whether t hese fact ors contri bute t o t he li keli hood t hat these st udent s
wer e ret ai ned can gi ve i nsi ght t o how t o bett er support t he st udent s and t eachers i n t hose
areas t o reduce t he nu mber of ki nder gart en ret entions i n t he school district. The reasons
t hat teachers felt st udent s shoul d be ret ai ned i n ki nder gart en were i dentified by sur veyi ng
t he teachers. Additi onal supports t hat coul d be put i nt o pl ace t hat can hel p reduce t he
nu mber of ki nder gart en ret enti ons were consi dered. Bot h st udent-cent ered supports and
teacher-cent ered supports i n areas t hat need additional att enti on were i dentified so
pr ofessi onal devel op ment can be t arget ed t o bett er support ki nder gart en st udent s.
Teacher pr ofessi onal learni ng can hel p t o reduce the nu mber of ki nder gart en ret enti ons.
Wi t h t he i ncrease of t he acade mi c ri gor i n ki ndergart en, ki nder gart en ret enti on
has beco me mor e preval ent ( Mongeau, 2014). Common Core st andar ds require a great er
dept h of underst andi ng than what was t aught pri or t o t he i mpl e ment ati on of t he Co mmon
Cor e ( Mongeau, 2014). Teachers and school s are hel d mor e account abl e due t o hi gh
st akes t esti ng, and t his account abilit y has creat ed a ne w perspecti ve on what makes a
st udent co mpl eti ng ki ndergart en ready t o meet t he expect ati ons of first grade. Theref ore,
it is i mport ant t o fi nd commonalities a mong t hose ki nder gart en st udent s who are ret ai ned
t o det er mi ne if i nt erventions can be put i nt o pl ace t o reduce t he nu mber of ki nder gart en
ret enti ons.

KI NDERGARTEN RETENTI ON

43

Ret enti on can l ead t o i ncreased dr opout rat es ( Hughes, West, Ki m & Bauer,
2018). One st udy det er mi ned t hat st udent s ret ai ned i n ki nder gart en had t he poorest l ongter m out co mes regar dl ess of t heir soci oecono mi c stat us ( Mendez, 2015). The l ong-t er m
effects of ki nder gart en retenti on need t o be consi dered. Screeni ngs can help a t eacher
pl an t o support i nstructi on and i nt eracti on whi ch can l ead t o school success ( Denha m, et
al., 2014). Screeni ng shoul d be compr ehensi ve, multi-for mat, multi-st ep, and li nked t o
ser vi ce deli ver y ( Owens et al., 2015). Winsl er et al. (2014) st at es screeni ng i nf or mati on
can hel p i dentify st udents who are at-risk t hrough l ow cogniti ve, language, and fi ne
mot or assess ment s, as well as ki nder gart en st udents wit h behavi oral and social issues.
Underst andi ng specifi c inf or mati on on t he st udents bei ng ret ai ned i n t he district may also
gi ve admi ni strat ors and teachers focus on what screeners woul d be benefi cial t o t he
ki nder gart en st udent s i n the district so t hat st udents can have bett er supports pri or t o
ret enti on.
The goal of t his st udy was t o devel op ways t o reduce t he nu mber of ki nder gart en
ret enti ons i n t he district. Ki nder gart en i deall y needs t o support t he cogniti ve, behavi oral,
and soci al devel op ment of chil dren ( Ray & Smit h, 2010). Supporti ng st udent s i n t hese
areas will hel p t o reduce t he nu mber of ki nder garten ret enti ons t hat occur in t he school
di strict each year. Teachers also need pr ofessi onal devel op ment t o support the needs of
t he st udent s i n t heir cl assroo ms.
Setti ng/ parti ci pants
The school distri ct has appr oxi mat el y 4, 167 st udents i n grades Ki nder gart en
t hrough t wel ve. The number of st udent s has decli ned over t he past decade. Enr oll ment
was appr oxi mat el y 5, 300 st udent s a decade ago ( Crabtree, Rohr baugh, and Ass oci at es,

KI NDERGARTEN RETENTI ON

44

2011). The distri ct encompasses appr oxi mat el y 251 square mil es. The district
popul ati on is roughl y 36,500 resi dent s. The st aff consists of about 325 t eachers, 222
support personnel, and twent y-t hree ad mi ni strat ors. There is a hi gh school, mi ddl e
school, four el e ment ar y school s, and t he distri ct also has its own career and techni cal
cent er. The distri ct runs its own K- 12 cyber school i n additi on t o t he bri ck and mort ar
buil di ngs. The hi gh school houses grades ni ne t hrough t wel ve. The career and t echni cal
cent er consists of st udents i n grades ni ne and t en part-ti me and it houses a co mpr ehensi ve
pr ogra m whi ch pr ovi des a full-ti me experi ence for st udent s i n grades el even and t wel ve.
The mi ddl e school servi ces grades si x t hrough ei ght. The el e ment ar y school s cont ai n
grades ki nder gart en t hrough fi ve. There is no district-funded Pre- Ki nder gart en avail abl e
for st udent s. There is Head St art, Pre K Count s, and several pri vat e preschool s l ocat ed
i nsi de t he district bor ders. So me of t he Head St art cl assroo ms and Pre K Count s
cl assroo ms rent space i n di strict buil di ngs.
The four el e ment ar y school s i n t he distri ct var y in si ze. Duri ng t he 2018-2019
school year, t he l argest ele ment ar y school housed appr oxi mat el y 588 st udent s. The
second l argest served about 517 st udent s. The t wo s mall er served appr oximat el y 412 and
348 st udent s. Pri or t o t he 2017- 18 school year, t he district had ei ght el e ment ar y school s.
Due t o decreasi ng enr ollme nt, four of t he el e ment ar y school s mer ged i nt o the four current
el e ment ar y school buil dings. The district conti nues decli ne i n enr oll ment nu mbers each
school year whi ch is a trend t hat is expect ed t o conti nue.
Ni net y-four percent of t he district popul ati on i dentify as whit e. Si xt y-fi ve percent
of t he district popul ati on i dentify as qualifyi ng for free and reduced meal s. The
el e ment ar y buil di ngs range from fift y-seven percent i dentifyi ng as econo mi call y

KI NDERGARTEN RETENTI ON

45

di sadvant aged at t he l owest end of t he range t o sevent y-ei ght percent i dentifyi ng as
econo mi call y disadvant aged at t he upper end of t he range. Twent y-t wo percent of t he
di strict st udent s are i dentified as speci al educati on and t hree percent are i dentified as
eli gi bl e for gift ed servi ces. There are a t ot al of ei ght st udent s who i dentify as English
Language Lear ners i n t he entire distri ct.
The Head St art progra ms and t he Pre Kcount s pr ogra ms wit hi n t he district wor k
wi t h t he district t o prepare t he st udent s t hey serve t o be ready for ki nder garten. The
di strict shares t he ki ndergart en curri cul um wit h t hese pr ogra ms. Head St art st udent s are
br ought t o t he buil di ngs they will be att endi ng t o tour t he ki nder gart en cl assroo ms.
These st udent s partici pate i n an acti vit y and see what t he buil di ng is li ke so t hat t hey are
fa mili ar wit h t he setti ng. Thi s is desi gned t o hel p ease t he mt hr ough t he transiti on t o
ki nder gart en.
Occasi onall y t here is an event where pri mar y st udent s from a buil di ng and t he
Head St art st udent s will att end t oget her. These are hel d i n a distri ct buil ding and done t o
hel p make sure t he pr ogra ms are wor ki ng t oget her. The Head St art coor di nat or will
cont act t he buil di ng pri nci pal and use an area at the school, such as t he gymnasi u m.
Head St art st udent s are bussed t o t he pr ogra m and some of all of t he pri mary st udent s at
t he school att end. Thi s hel ps creat e an easi er transiti on for st udent s as t hey ent er
ki nder gart en. The distri ct also pr ovi des a Ki nderca mp for all ki nder gart en registrant s
pri or t o t he st art of each school year t o hel p wit h student transiti on t o ki ndergart en.
St udent s and parent s spend t he day doi ng acti vities wit h t he teachers, learning how
co mmuni cati on occurs bet ween t he school and home, and l ear ni ng t he day-t o-day
functi ons such as how t o pr oceed t hr ough t he cafeteri a li ne t o get breakfast or l unch.

KI NDERGARTEN RETENTI ON

46

Parent s are pr ovi ded a copy of t he curri cul umt he st udent s will be lear ni ng each ni ne
weeks. St udent s are taken on a bus ri de so t hat t hey know what it will be like t o ri de on a
bus bef ore t he first day of school. They are taught what t he expect ati ons? of behavi or are
when ri di ng and how t o stay safe on t he bus.
There is preschool agency coor di nati on i n t he district for st udent s wit h
di sabilities. Thi s is done i n several ways. First, t he district coor di nat es with agenci es
t hat serve preschool children who have disabilities. The district ensures physi cal access
and pr ogra m access t o t hese st udent s. Next, t he district wor ks wit h preschool s t o
coor di nat e pr ogra ms operat ed directl y by t he LEA and also by ot her communit y agenci es
under contract wit h t he LEA. The distri ct wor ks wi t h t he Int er medi at e Unit t hrough t he
Chil dFi nd pr ocess t o ensure easy transiti on for st udent s who were bei ng provi ded earl y
i nt erventi on ser vi ces.
Fi ft een ki nder gart en t eachers were i nvit ed t o partici pat e i n t his st udy. Ni ne
agreed t o partici pat e i n t he sur vey. There are currentl y fifteen ki nder gart en cl assroo ms i n
t he district. The district has a t ot al of four el e mentary buil di ngs. Two of t he buil di ngs
have t hree ki nder gart en classroo ms, one has four ki nder gart en cl assroo ms, and t he last
buil di ng has fi ve ki nder gart en cl assroo ms. All kinder gart en cl assroo ms are t aught by
fe mal e teachers wit h varyi ng years of experi ence. The t eachers are all consi dered hi ghl y
qualified by t he Pennsyl vani a Depart ment of Educati on. Accor di ng t o PSEA ( 2016), i n
t he articl e The Every St udent Succeeds Act: “Hi ghl y Qualified Teacher ” Requi re ment s,
t o be hi ghl y qualified i n the st at e of Pennsyl vani a, teachers must:
•

Hol d at least a bachel or’s degree;

•

Hol d a vali d Pennsyl vania t eachi ng certificat e

KI NDERGARTEN RETENTI ON
•

47

De monstrat e subj ect mat ter compet ency for t he core cont ent area t hey t each.

Al l fifteen ki nder gart en teachers were sent t he survey. Ni ne of t he ki nder gart en t eachers
responded t o t he sur vey.
There were fort y-t wo st udent s who were ret ai ned i n ki nder gart en duri ng t he 20182019 school year. Each of t he four buil di ngs had st udent s who were ret ai ned i n
ki nder gart en duri ng t he 2018- 2019 school year. Mul ti pl e st udent s were retai ned i n each
of t he buil di ngs and t he st udent s were not all from t he sa me cl assroo mi n any of t he
buil di ngs.
Ki nder gart en t eachers were gi ven i nfor mati on regardi ng t heir partici pati on in t he
st udy bef ore co mpl eti ng t he sur vey. The ki nder garten t eachers gave consent t o use t he
i nfor mati on upon co mpl eti on of t he sur vey as st at ed i n t he i nfor mati on ( Appendi x A).
The school boar d appr oved t he research bei ng done i n t he district ( Appendi x B). The
superi nt endent ( Appendi x C) and t he pri nci pals (Appendi x D) all gave consent for t he
st udent i nfor mati on t o be used i n t he st udy. No st udent s or parent s were directl y
i nt ervi e wed t o gar ner t he i nfor mati on cont ai ned wit hi n t his research st udy.
Research Pl an
The ri gor i n so me st at es has i ncreased so t hat concept s taught i n grade t wo pri or
t o t he Co mmon Cor e st andar ds are now t aught i n ki nder gart en ( Meador, 2019). Thi s has
creat ed a ne w perspecti ve on what makes a st udent ready for grade one. Hatti e (1999)
st at ed t hat ret enti on is one of most disastrous i nt erventi ons at enhanci ng acade mi c
achi eve ment. The literature suggests t hat supports need t o be put i nt o pl ace for acade mi c,
soci al-e moti onal, and behavi oral skill sets. There are several specifi c fact ors t hat coul d
put a st udent at-risk for ki nder gart en ret enti on. Wi nsl er et al. (2014) not ed t hat t here is a

KI NDERGARTEN RETENTI ON

48

strong rel ati onshi p bet ween fa mil y i nco me and st udent perfor mance. Ret ained st udent
gr oups are i ncli ned t o have mor e boys ( Mendez, 2015). St udent s are oft en “rat ed hi gher
on e moti onal and behavioral pr obl e ms” ( Hong & Raudenbush, 2005). Ret ai ned st udent s
al so under perfor mt heir peers i n readi ng and mat he mati cs ( Hong & Yu, 2007). So me
st udent s co me i nt o ki ndergart en t hat had attended preschool. Alt hough preschool gi ves
an i nitial advant age, t hat advant age dissi pat es aft er grade one ( Ansari 2018). Taki ng i nt o
consi derati on t he above poi nt s fro mt he literat ure revi e w, t he research st udy was
desi gned t o pi npoi nt if t here are any specifi c commonalities a mong t he st udent s who are
bei ng ret ai ned i n ki nder gart en.
Accor di ng t o t he literat ure, teachers report havi ng ret enti on avail abl e prevent s
fut ure fail ure, moti vat es st udent s, and moti vat es parent s ( Range et al., 2012). Teachers
rat e t he success of st udents l owi n t he second year of ki nder gart en, whi ch is i ndi cati ve of
ret enti on not bei ng a good way t o support st udent l ong-t er m success ( Mendez et al.,
2015). Thus, sur veyi ng the t eachers i n t his st udy is cruci al i n underst andi ng what criteri a
t hey use t o reco mmend a st udent for ki nder gart en ret enti on.
Looki ng at t he reasons t eachers reco mmend ret enti on can pr ovi de i nsi ght t o why
st udent s are bei ng ret ai ned and what i nt erventi ons can be used t o support t hese st udent s.
Once specifi c probl e m areas are i dentified, t he areas t hat need t o be screened or screened
earlier can be deci ded. Earl y screeni ng gi ves st aff ti me t o assess needs and ma ke
deci si ons regar di ng moni t ori ng and i nt erventi on (Owens et al., 2015). Accor di ng t o t he
literat ure, l ow scores i n language, cogniti ve fi ne mot or assess ment, as well as behavi or
and soci al issues are hel pful i n i dentifyi ng st udents who are at-risk for ret enti on ( Winl ser
et al., 2014). It was i mport ant duri ng t his research t hat acade mi c, soci al-emoti onal, and

49

KI NDERGARTEN RETENTI ON

behavi oral fact ors, as wel l as de mogr aphi c i nfor mati on, were l ooked at so co mmonalti es
a mong ret ai ned st udent s coul d be det er mi ned. These co mmonalti es can t hen be
addressed t o reduce t he nu mber of ki nder gart en retenti ons i n t he distri ct.
Usi ng t he research fromthe literat ure revi e w, co mmon at-risk fact ors were not ed
a mong t he ki nder gart en st udent s t hat were ret ai ned duri ng t he 2018- 2019 school year.
Identifyi ng t hese fact ors gave t he opport unit y t o tar get additi onal areas where supports
need t o be put i nt o pl ace t o hel p ensure t hat more st udent s are successful i n ki nder gart en
and t he nu mber of ki ndergart en ret enti ons i n t he district can be reduced.

Supports may

be acade mi c, soci al-e mot i onal, or behavi oral. Supports for teachers may be put i nt o
pl ace so t hat t hey can better address t he acade mi c, soci al-e moti onal, or behavi oral needs
of t hese st udent s.
Thr ough dat a exa mi nati on, underst andi ng t he decisi on- maki ng pr ocess of teachers
when reco mmendi ng ret enti on was i nvesti gat ed. Underst andi ng whet her the deci si onma ki ng pr ocess i n t he district was consist ent acr oss all of t he el e ment ar y buil di ngs and
consist ent wit h all of t he ki nder gart en t eachers needed det er mi ned. Identifyi ng co mmon
fact ors t hat t he ki nder garten t eachers were usi ng to deci de if a st udent shoul d be
reco mmended for ret ention needed t o be exa mi ned. Are t here co mmon demogr aphi cs,
behavi oral concer ns, and achi eve ment concer ns t hat teachers pri oritized as reasons for a
st udent t o be det er mi ned as a candi dat e for ki ndergart en ret enti on? The reasons t hat
teachers i dentifi ed as factors i n t he decisi on- maki ng pr ocess for ret ai ni ng kinder gart en
st udent s needed t o be underst ood. Underst andi ng consist ency a mong t eacher decisi on
ma ki ng woul d hel p t o target supports t hat need t o be put i nt o pl ace for st udent s. Thi s
al so woul d hel p i dentify areas of professi onal devel op ment t hat woul d be benefi ci al for

KI NDERGARTEN RETENTI ON

50

all ki nder gart en t eachers i n t he district. If consist ency is lacki ng, t hen a focus may need
t o be mor e t eacher specific i n ter ms of pr ofessi onal devel op ment. Inconsistency woul d
al so si gnify t hat ad mi ni strati on needs t o wor k on specifyi ng mor e cl earl y what fact ors
shoul d be consi dered when det er mi ni ng a st udent has successf ull y compl eted
ki nder gart en.
Once co mmon fact ors are i dentifi ed a mong t he student s who are ret ai ned,
supports need put i nt o place t o hel p ensure mor e st udent s are successful i n ki nder gart en
and t he nu mber of ki ndergart en ret enti ons can be reduced i n t he district. School s need t o
have syst e ms t hat i ncor porat e st udent perfor mance, curri cul um, assess ments, and
i nstructi onal met hods ( NI SL, 2018). When l ooking at t he co mmon fact ors t hat i dentify
st udent s for ki nder gart en ret enti on, t hese syst e ms can be used or modifi ed to support t he
ki nder gart en st udent s t o be successf ul. Looki ng at t he co mmon fact ors t hat teachers use
i n det er mi ni ng t hat a st udent is a candi dat e for ret enti on is also a way t o deter mi ne what
supports may be i mport ant t o have for st udent s. Det er mi ni ng t eacher criteria also will
gi ve i deas t o bett er support teachers i n hel pi ng st udent s i n t he areas i dentified. These
crit eri a may also be a way t o pr ovi de pr ofessi onal devel op ment for t he t eachers and st aff
i n underst andi ng t he effect s of ret enti on and t he import ant fact ors t hat need t o be
consi dered bef ore ret ention is consi dered for a st udent.
Accor di ng t o current fi gures pr ovi ded by t he busi ness offi ce, it costs
appr oxi mat el y $10, 845 doll ars t o educat e a regul ar educati on st udent i n t he district. It
costs appr oxi mat el y $23, 801 t o educat e a speci al educati on st udent. When st udent s are
ret ai ned i n ki nder gart en there is an additi onal year of costs for each st udent over t he

51

KI NDERGARTEN RETENTI ON

course of t heir educati on of t he equi val ent of t hat year. Thi s st udy l ooked at t he pot enti al
savi ngs t o t he district with a reducti on i n t he nu mber of ret enti ons.
In additi on t o pot enti al savi ngs i n fi nanci al ter ms, the literat ure lends t o t he idea
t hat ret enti on has a short-ter m and l ong-t er m negati ve i mpact on st udent s. As st at ed
bef ore, Hattie (1999) said t hat ret enti on is one of t he most disastrous i nt erventi ons for
acade mi c achi eve ment.

Theref ore, t he costs of supporti ng st udent s t hrough screeni ngs

and i nt erventi ons was l ooked at duri ng t his st udy. The st udy exa mi ned both t he savi ngs
i n ter ms of doll ars and t he fiscal i nvest ment t hat can reduce t he nu mber of st udent s bei ng
ret ai ned. Successful st udent s will make a positi ve i mpact t o t he co mmunit y t hrough
acade mi c success and a bett er qualified wor kf orce.
Research Desi gn, Met hods, and Dat a Coll ecti on
A mi xed met hods appr oach was used i n t his st udy. It t ook i nt o consi derati on
qualitati ve dat a and quantitati ve dat a. There are several ite ms t hat were exa mi ned duri ng
t his st udy. De mogr aphi c dat a of t he st udent s was anal yzed. Achi eve ment dat a was
exa mi ned for each st udent. The behavi or dat a of each ki nder gart en st udent who was
ret ai ned was also i dentified duri ng t his st udy.

The perspecti ves of ki nder gart en t eachers

wer e det er mi ned t hr ough anal yzi ng qualitati ve and quantitati ve sur vey data.
Ki nder gart en ret enti on was consi dered fromt he t eacher perspecti ve. Teachers were
sur veyed on t he foll owi ng t opi cs: parent i nvol veme nt, cl ass si ze, readi ng achi eve ment,
mat h achi eve ment, mat urit y, behavi or, preschool attendance, fa mil y confi gurati on,
soci al/ e moti onal concer ns, and i nstructi onal practices. Teachers were also asked whet her
ret enti on shoul d be a teacher, parent or tea m deci sion. Teachers gave t heir perspecti ves
on supports t hat mi ght reduce ki nder gart en ret ention, and supports t hat can be put i nt o

KI NDERGARTEN RETENTI ON

52

pl ace t o bett er support kinder gart en t eachers and staff. Ki nder gart en t eachers gave
i nfor mati on regar di ng t heir t hought s on co mmuni cati on wit h t he parent s of a st udent who
is a candi dat e for ki nder gart en ret enti on. Chi-square tests and ANOVA were used t o
exa mi ne Li kert scal e data. Open-ended questi ons were coded and t hen exami ned.
De mogr aphi cs of st udents who have been ret ai ned duri ng t he 2018- 19 school year
wer e anal yzed t hr ough a quantitati ve appr oach. The fact ors chosen t o be i nvesti gat ed
wer e based on t he i nfor mati on gat hered fromt he literat ure revi e w pr ocess. Gender,
et hni cit y, econo mi call y disadvant aged st at us, age, fa mil y confi gurati on, and speci al
educati on st at us were all areas dat a will be anal yzed for commonalities. Preschool
att endance is anot her factor t hat was exa mi ned i n thi s st udy. Frequency of charact eristics
wer e exa mi ned. Thi s al ong wit h usi ng chi-square tests, t-tests and ANOVA were used t o
anal yze cat egori cal i nformati on on st udent s t hat wer e ret ai ned i n ki nder garten duri ng t he
2018- 2019 school year.
Co mmonalities i n achi eve ment a mong st udent s who were ret ai ned duri ng the
2018- 2019 school year were anal yzed. Report card grades i n ELA ( English Language
Art s) and mat he mati cs were exa mi ned. In additi on, DI BELS scores were eval uat ed from
t he begi nni ng of t he year ( BOY), t he mi ddl e of t he year ( MOY), and t he end of t he year
( EOY). Ki nder gart en screeni ng scores for t he st udent s t hat were ret ai ned will also be
exa mi ned. Tests of central tendency were done t o l ook at t he grade and achi eve ment dat a
for t he st udent s who were ret ai ned i n ki nder gart en. Speci al educati on st atus for ret ai ned
ki nder gart en st udent s was exa mi ned, i ncl udi ng specifi c cat egori cal i nfor mati on.
Behavi oral dat a was l ooked at for t he st udent s who were ret ai ned duri ng t he
2018- 19 school year. An anal ysis of how behavi or may be a fact or i n ki nder gart en

KI NDERGARTEN RETENTI ON

53

ret enti on was done. Dat a docu ment ed i n t he st udent i nfor mati on syst e m was anal yzed.
Behavi ors t hat occurred wer e pl aced i nt o cat egories. The nu mber of i nci dent s t hat
occurred for each of t he st udent s who were ret ai ned i n ki nder gart en was deter mi ned t o
see if behavi or was a factor i n t he decisi on t o ret ain t he st udent. Frequency was l ooked at
t o exa mi ne how oft en t here were behavi or referrals for each st udent ret ai ned i n
ki nder gart en. In additi on, t he frequency of t he t ype of behavi or issue was also exa mi ned.
Once t he I RB gave appr oval for t he research st udy ( Appendi x F), coll ecti on of
dat a began. De mogr aphi c dat a was coll ect ed t hr oughout t he mont hs of Dece mber,
Januar y and Febr uar y. Also coll ect ed duri ng t his ti me were ELA and mat he mati cs
grades, ki nder gart en screeni ng dat a, pri or preschool experi ence i nfor mati on, and DI BELS
scores. All of t his dat a was pre-exi sti ng dat a availabl e on t he st udent s who wer e ret ai ned
i n ki nder gart en duri ng t he 2018- 19 school year. Dat a was coll ect ed as avail abl e for each
st udent. The t eacher survey was sent out i n Google For ms i n mi d-Januar y and t eachers
wer e gi ven one week t o parti ci pat e i n t he sur vey. Are mi nder was sent out a fe w days
pri or t o t he cl ose of t he sur vey. Once t he sur vey ti meli ne cl osed, access was also
di sconti nued t o t he teachers. Dat a was or gani zed i nt o a spreadsheet as it was coll ect ed on
st udent s. Teacher sur vey dat a was ent ered i nt o a spreadsheet i n Mar ch t o be anal yzed.
Dat a anal ysis occurred duri ng t he mont h of Mar ch and April.
Accor di ng t o t he literat ure, admi ni strat ors need t o use dat a-dri ven decisi on
ma ki ng t o use accu mul ated i nf or mati on t o support st udent defi cits ( Har vey & Ohl e,
2018). Infor mati on was looked at t o det er mi ne t he fact ors t hat are pr oduci ng t he hi gh
nu mber of ki nder gart en ret enti ons i n t he school district. St udent s ret ai ned i n
ki nder gart en duri ng t he 2018- 19 school year were i dentified. St udent dat a was coll ect ed

KI NDERGARTEN RETENTI ON

54

from several sources. These sources i ncl uded t he st udent i nfor mati on syst em,
achi eve ment dat a coll ection t ool s, teacher ret enti on for ms, and ot her avail abl e st udent
recor ds. The ki nder gart en st udent dat a was de mographi c, behavi oral, and acade mi c.
Ki nder gart en t eachers were sur veyed on t he criteria t hey use t o det er mi ne if a chil d
shoul d be ret ai ned i n ki nder gart en. The ki nder garten t eachers t hat were surveyed are t he
current 2019- 20 ki nder garten t eachers i n t he school district.
The four el e ment ar y school pri nci pals provi ded a list of t he st udent s from each of
t heir el e ment ar y buil di ngs t hat were ret ai ned duri ng t he 2018- 19 school year. Those
ki nder gart en st udent s were t hen pl aced ont o a master list. The ki nder gart en st udent s
wer e coded t o ensure all of t heir dat a re mai ned anony mous. Additi onal i nfor mati on was
t hen gat hered about each ki nder gart en st udent. The i nfor mati on gat hered i ncl uded
achi eve ment dat a, behavioral dat a, and de mographic dat a.
Acade mi c achi eve ment dat a was coll ect ed on each st udent who had been retai ned
i n ki nder gart en. DI BELS t esti ng scores were availabl e for t he ret ai ned ki nder gart en
st udent s. Begi nni ng of the year ( BOY), mi ddl e of t he year ( MOY) and end of t he year
( EOY) bench mar ki ng data was pr ovi ded for each st udent (if avail abl e). The dat a was
t hen pl aced i nt o a spreadsheet i n preparati on t o deter mi ne any trends i n t he dat a. Grade
i nfor mati on for ELA and mat he mati cs was pr ocured fromt he st udent i nformati on syst e m.
Ni ne week grades and fi nal grades for each subj ect were gat hered. In addition t o
DI BELS bench mar ki ng scores, report card grades, and ki nder gart en screening scores t hat
wer e avail abl e were coll ect ed and pl aced i nt o a spreadsheet t o det er mi ne if there were
any not abl e trends for t he st udent s t hat were ret ai ned i n ki nder gart en at t he end of 201819 school year.

KI NDERGARTEN RETENTI ON

55

A ki nder gart en screeni ng takes pl ace at ki nder garten regi strati on each year i n t he
di strict. The ki nder gart en screeni ng t ool for t he 2018- 19 st udent s had a t otal of 59 poi nts
and consist ed of assessi ng t he foll owi ng areas:
● Fi rst na me writi ng - st udent s needed t o de monstrate t heir abilit y t o writ e t heir first
na me (1poi nt).
● Col ors - St udent s were t o poi nt t o t he correct col or (9 poi nts).
● Nu mber recogniti on - Student s were t o say t he number when t he person doi ng t he
screeni ng poi nt ed t o it (10 poi nts).
● Basi c mat h skills - st udent s had t o i dentify t he box wit h a cert ai n nu mber of
obj ects, t he great est nu mber, and count t he obj ects i n a box (6 poi nts).
● Shapes - St udent s had t o poi nt t o t he shape sai d by t he assessor (4 poi nts).
● Capit al/l ower case al phabet recogniti on - St udents had t o say t he l etter when it
was poi nt ed t o by t he assessor (18 poi nts).
● Phone mi c a wareness (bl endi ng and rhy mi ng) - Word were sai d br oken i nt o
phone mi c seg ment s and st udent s poi nt ed t o t he correct pi ct ure of t he wor d (6
poi nt s). St udent s t hen repeat ed t hree wor ds whi ch were sai d as t hey l ooked at a
pi ct ure of each. They had t o i dentify whi ch t wo of t he t hree were rhy mi ng wor ds
(5 poi nts).
The t ot al nu mber of poi nts correct were count ed for each st udent assessed and pl aced i nt o
a spreadsheet.
Begi nni ng of t he year DIBELS dat a was co mpared t o t he ki nder gart en screeni ng
dat a t o see if t here was any correl ati on bet ween t he t wo sets of dat a. Anot her co mparison
was made bet ween t he end of t he year DI BELS scores and t he fourt h ni ne weeks ELA

KI NDERGARTEN RETENTI ON

56

grades. Bot h of t hese were done t o see if t here was any si gnifi cant rel ati onshi p bet ween
t he sets of dat a.
DI BELS scores were also l ooked at t o see if t here was appr opri at e growt h in t he
st udent s i n ELA t hr oughout t he ki nder gart en school year i n whi ch t he st udent s were
ret ai ned. Trends i n ELA and mat he mati cs grades thr oughout t he year were al so l ooked at
t o see if t here were trends i n st udent perfor mance. These anal yses were done t o see if a
patt ern coul d be est ablished t o recogni ze st udent s who may need support ed earlier i n t he
ki nder gart en year. Thi s in t ur n woul d pr ovi de st udent s support i n t heir areas of weakness
and pot enti all y hel p t o deter t he need for ret enti on at t he end of t he ki nder garten year.
Behavi oral dat a was also gat hered on each st udent. Di sci pli ne i nfracti ons for
each ret ai ned ki nder gart en st udent was pull ed from t he st udent i nfor mati on syst e m. Each
i nfracti on was pl aced i nto a cat egor y dependi ng on t he nat ure of t he i nfracti on. These
cat egori es were bus behavi or, i nappr opri at e behavi or, i nsubor di nati on, fi ghti ng, physi cal
aggressi on/ cont act, i nappropri at e language, and other. The t ype of disci pline i nfracti ons
wer e exa mi ned al ong with t he nu mber of disci pli ne i nfracti ons for each st udent ret ai ned
i n ki nder gart en duri ng t he year i n whi ch a det er mi nati on for ret enti on was ma de.
De mogr aphi c dat a was also coll ect ed for t he st udent s who were ret ai ned i n
ki nder gart en duri ng t he 2018- 19 school year. Data was coll ect ed fromt he st udent
i nfor mati on syst e m and placed i nt o a spreadsheet. The foll owi ng de mographi c i ndi cat ors
wer e coll ect ed for each student:
● Gender ( mal e/fe mal e)
● Dat e of birt h
● Speci al educati on st at us

KI NDERGARTEN RETENTI ON

57

○ Specifi c Lear ni ng Di sabilit y
○ Int ellect ual Di sabilit y
○ Ot her Healt h I mpair ment
○ Speech
● Econo mi call y disadvant aged st at us
● Race/ Et hni cit y
The dat a for each of t hese areas were recor ded as t hey were avail abl e for each ret ai ned
ki nder gart en st udent.
There are fact ors t hat put st udent s at risk for ret enti on. Anal ysis of de mographi c
i nfor mati on can pr ovi de inf or mati on t hat may pi npoi nt a specifi c group t hat is at-risk i n
t he district. Accor di ng to t he literat ure, when t aki ng i nt o account, et hni city, gender,
econo mi call y disadvant aged, and English Language Lear ner st at us, onl y gender and free
l unch st at us were predi ctors of ret enti on ( Winsl er et al., 2014). Accor di ng t o Justi ce et
al. (2017), whit e st udent s are mor e li kel y t o be ready for ki nder gart en. With t hese
exa mpl es i n mi nd, it is import ant t o l ook at t he de mogr aphi c i nfor mati on in t his st udy t o
see if t here are de mogr aphi c patt erns wit h t he st udent s who are bei ng ret ai ned i n
ki nder gart en i n t he district. It also may i dentify professi onal devel op ment t hat is needed
for t he teachers and st aff rel ati ng t o t he specifi c demogr aphi c i ndi cat or(s) t o ensure t hat
st udent s are lear ni ng i n the way t hat is best for t heir gender, et hni cit y, econo mi c st at us, or
any ot her i dentifyi ng factor t hat mi ght be i mpacti ng t heir learni ng.
A sur vey was gi ven t o t he current ki nder gart en t eachers i n t he school district.
The sur vey was done with co mpl et e anony mit y. The sur vey was sent t hrough Googl e
For ms and dat a was coll ect ed. There were fifteen ki nder gart en t eachers and ni ne of t hose

KI NDERGARTEN RETENTI ON

58

ki nder gart en t eachers chose t o co mpl et e t he sur vey. The sur vey asked both quantitati ve
and qualitati ve questi ons. The first t wo secti ons of t he sur vey used Li kert scal es and
wer e quantitati ve i n nat ure. The first secti on had ten questi ons t hat parti cipant s
ans wer ed. The parti ci pant s were asked t o respond t o t hree questi ons i n t he second
secti ons of t he sur vey. The l ast secti on used open ended questi ons, t heref ore were
qualitati ve. There were three questi ons i n t he t hird secti on of t he sur vey. The responses
t o t he open ended questi ons were coded. The sur vey responses were anonymous.
Parti ci pant s gave t heir consent t o t he sur vey when t hey sub mitt ed t heir responses as
outli ned i n t he cover letter expl ai ni ng t he st udy being conduct ed.
The sur vey was devel oped t o det er mi ne what fact ors ki nder gart en t eachers
beli eve t hey shoul d consider when deci di ng if a student is a candi dat e for ki nder gart en
ret enti on. The first section of t he sur vey was set up wit h a Li kert scal e. The choi ces on
t he Li kert scal e were “highl y si gnifi cant, some what si gnifi cant, sli ghtl y si gnifi cant, and
not si gnifi cant ”. The ki nder gart en t eachers were gi ven t en ite ms t o rat e as t o what ext ent
fact ors det er mi ne st udent ret enti on. The ite ms t hey rat ed were “parent i nvol ve ment. cl ass
si ze, readi ng achi eve ment, mat h achi eve ment, mat urit y, behavi or, preschool attendance,
fa mil y confi gurati on, social/e moti onal concer ns, and i nstructi onal practi ces”. All of
t hese ite ms were revi e wed when l ooki ng at t he literat ure. A quantit ati ve anal ysis was
used for t his secti on of t he sur vey.
The second secti on of t he sur vey consist ed of t hree stat e ment s. Each of t hese
st at e ment s was i n a Li kert for mat. The choi ces were “al ways, someti mes, occasi onall y,
and never”. The t hree stat e ment s were:
● Ret ai ni ng a st udent shoul d be a teacher decisi on

KI NDERGARTEN RETENTI ON

59

● Ret ai ni ng a st udent shoul d be a parent decisi on
● Ret ai ni ng a st udent shoul d be a tea m deci si on
A quantitati ve anal ysis was also used for t he dat a coll ect ed fromt his secti on of t he
teacher sur vey. Teacher, parent, and ad mi ni strat or perspecti ves on ret enti on were
exa mi ned duri ng t he revie w of literat ure for t his study.
The t hird secti on of t he sur vey cont ai ned open ended questi ons. There were t hree
questi ons asked i n t his secti on. These questi ons were qualitati ve. The questi ons were as
foll ows:
● What supports are necessar y t o reduce t he possi bilit y of a chil d bei ng ret ai ned?
● What supports for teachers/st aff can be put i nt o place t o reduce t he possi bilit y of a
chil d bei ng ret ai ned?
● Descri be t he co mmuni cati on t hat shoul d occur with a parent of a st udent who is a
candi dat e for ret enti on?
These responses were coded based on t he responses fromt he ki nder gart en teachers who
chose t o partici pat e i n t he sur vey as part of t his study. A qualitati ve anal ysis was used t o
l ook at t he dat a fro mt his secti on of t he sur vey compl et ed by t he ki nder garten t eacher
parti ci pant s. When revi ewi ng literat ure for t his study, vari ous acade mi c, behavi oral, and
soci al-e moti onal supports were exa mi ned.
Vali dity
Construct vali dit y was used i n t his st udy. A sur vey of teachers showed t he
beli eved t eacher criteri a used for det er mi ni ng a student who shoul d be reco mmended for
ki nder gart en ret enti on. The questi ons were desi gned based on rel evant existi ng
kno wl edge on ki nder garten ret enti on. Face and cont ent vali dit y were also used i n t his

KI NDERGARTEN RETENTI ON

60

st udy. The sur vey appears t o gat her t he i nfor mation on what fact ors caused st udent s t o
be ret ai ned i n ki nder garten and what criteri a t hey are usi ng for t he ret enti on. Thi s is t he
crit eri a for face vali dit y.

For cont ent vali dit y, t he st udy addresses t he reasons for

ki nder gart en ret enti on l ooki ng at de mogr aphi c, behavi oral, and acade mi c concer ns. The
st udy t akes i nt o account acade mi c pr ogress t hroughout t he year and t eacher perspecti ves
on t he criteri a t hey use for det er mi ni ng if a st udent is a candi dat e for ki ndergart en
ret enti on. Additi onal demogr aphi c, behavi oral and acade mi c dat a on t he student s who
wer e ret ai ned were exa mi ned. Once t he co mmonalities a mong st udent s were det er mi ned
and t he reasons t eachers defi ned as a st udent who shoul d be ret ai ned i n ki nder gart en, t hen
areas for st udent and t eacher supports coul d be deter mi ned t o reduce t he number of
ki nder gart en ret enti ons in t he school district.
Dat a was caref ull y coll ected t o ensure it was accurat e and fromreli abl e sources.
Al l dat a anal ysis was reviewed for accuracy. Reporti ng of t he i nfor mati on occurred
based on t he results of t he anal ysis of t he dat a.
In t his st udy, triangul ati on of dat a was done for t he reasons of st udent ret enti on.
Met hodol ogi cal triangul ati on was used by gat heri ng dat a and docu ment ati on, sur vey
i nfor mati on and t hr ough t he research fromt he literat ure revi e w. Multi pl e sources of dat a
wer e used. These sources i ncl uded i nf or mati on fro m t he st udent i nfor mation syst e m,
teacher sur vey i nfor mation, ki nder gart en entrance exa mi nf or mati on, DI BELS t esti ng
i nfor mati on, and i nf or mati on pr ovi ded t hrough st udent recor ds. Teachers wer e sur veyed
on t heir vi e ws of what t he criteri a were for t he retenti on of a ki nder gart en st udent.
Teachers were asked questi ons t o underst and t heir reasons for t he ret enti on of
ki nder gart en st udent s. Grades were exa mi ned t o see trends i n achi eve ment.

KI NDERGARTEN RETENTI ON

61

Ki nder gart en DI BELS scores were consi dered t oo, when eval uati ng achi eveme nt of t he
ki nder gart en st udent s. Ki nder gart en entrance exams scores were exa mi ned al ong wit h
whet her t he st udent s had att ended a Pre K pr ogra m. Behavi oral dat a was also gat hered
fromt he st udent i nfor mati on syst e m.
Peer debri efi ng was done by consulti ng wit h t he Capst one Facult y Co mmi ttee
Advi sor and t he Capst one Ext er nal Co mmi tt ee Advi sor. Peer debri efi ng occurred wit h
cohort peers on a regul ar basis. Peer debri efi ng hel ped t o refl ect on t he dat a coll ecti on
pr ocess, anal ysis of t he dat a, and i nt erpret ati on of t he dat a t hat result ed from t he st udy.
The COVI D- 19 pande mi c reduced t he a mount of consult ati on and debri efing begi nni ng
i n Mar ch 2020 due t o t he soci al dist anci ng and additi onal wor k de mands by t hose
i nvol ved.
Car e was t aken t o ensure t he research dat a coll ected was accurat e and consist ent.
Usi ng t he st udent i nfor mati on syst e m gave accurate fi nal grades, exact registrati on
i nfor mati on and de mographi cs pr ovi ded by t he parent s duri ng t he regi stration pr ocess.
Al l behavi oral recor ds were cont ai ned wit hi n t he st udent i nfor mati on syst em. The sa me
st udent dat abase is used thr oughout t he district. All registrati on i nfor mati on is i nputt ed
t hrough t he regi strati on offi ce. The report car ds were generat ed fromt he student
i nfor mati on syst e m. DI BELS scores are recor ded by t he trai ned Titl e I staff who gave
t he bench mar ki ng t ests to each of t he ki nder gart en st udent s.
The goal of t his research is t o fi nd a way t o reduce t he nu mber of ki nder garten
ret enti ons i n t he school district. The t echni ques used i n t his st udy were done wit h a
syst e mati c appr oach. Most, if not all, i nfor mati on coll ect ed woul d be availabl e i n all
school districts. Usi ng t he sa me t echni ques, t his research st udy coul d be used i n anot her

KI NDERGARTEN RETENTI ON

62

co mparabl e district wit h a si mil ar issue wit h ki ndergart en ret enti on. The met hod used for
coll ecti ng sur vey dat a woul d easil y be used i n t he sa me way wit h results reflecti ve of t he
di strict i n whi ch t he st udy is bei ng done.
If a district wit h a sa me or different de mographi c di d t he st udy, t he sa me
techni ques coul d be used. Based on t he literat ure, t he results may be different due t o t he
reasons t eachers are ret aini ng or t he de mogr aphi c ma keup of t he st udent popul ati on. Thi s
woul d result i n different supports required t o be put i nt o pl ace t o address the needs of t he
at-risk st udent s. Pr ofessional devel op ment needs ma y also be uni que t o t he district based
on t he results of t he st udy and t he specifi c needs of t heir ki nder gart en t eachers and st aff.
Underst andi ng t he setti ng of t he st udy, what t he st udy is tryi ng t o gat her
i nfor mati on on, and t he parti ci pant s who were used i n t he st udy, contri but ed t o t he
dependabilit y. Theref ore, det ail ed research was done on t he setti ng of t he di strict.
Inf or mati on was gat hered on t he de mogr aphi cs of t he st udent parti ci pant s. The
ki nder gart en t eachers i n the setti ng bei ng st udi ed wer e used t o gat her sur vey i nf or mati on
t o pr ovi de setti ng perspecti ve on t he st udent s who were ret ai ned i n ki nder gart en i n t he
school district. Det ail was pr ovi ded on how t he st udy was done and also ho w t he dat a
was gat hered, whi ch will contri but e t o t he reliabilit y of t he st udy det er mi ning why t here
are a hi gh nu mber of ki nder gart en ret enti ons i n t he school district and what supports can
be put i nt o pl ace t o support t he st aff and st udent s t o reduce t he nu mber of ki nder gart en
ret enti ons.
Dat a coll ect ed was from t he vari ous sources i n t he st udy. Dat a was doubl e
checked for accounti ng errors. Pr ocedures for data coll ecti on were consistent wit h t he
pl an outli ned for t he Int ernal Revi e w Boar d as t hey were appr oved. Alt hough I a m a

63

KI NDERGARTEN RETENTI ON
pri nci pal i n one of t he ele ment ar y buil di ngs, all of t he dat a used had been inputt ed by
ot her parties. The onl y excepti on t o t hat is t he behavi oral dat a i nputt ed from t he
el e ment ar y buil di ng I serve. Dat a from st udent s who were ret ai ned was used i n t his
st udy. Teachers t hat were asked t o parti ci pat e i n the sur vey where assi gned t o t he

cl assroo ms i n t he district. There is sa mpli ng bi as in t his st udy due t o t he st udy sur veyi ng
a specifi c set of teachers i n a si ngl e school district.

There is also t he possibilit y of

response bi as i n t his st udy if t he teachers tried t o ans wer t he questi ons i n a way t hat t hey
t hought t hey are expect ed t o ans wer rat her t han i dentifyi ng t heir true beli efs t hrough t heir
ans wers.
The research i n t his st udy will i mpr ove educati onal practi ce. First, it will impr ove
practi ce i n t he district by i dentifyi ng fact ors t hat are causi ng st udent s t o be ret ai ned i n
ki nder gart en. It will l ook at de mogr aphi c, behavioral, and soci al e moti onal fact ors. It
wi ll exa mi ne t he t eacher perspecti ve on what criteria det er mi nes a ki nder garten st udent
shoul d be reco mmended for ret enti on. The research will hel p gai n understandi ng of what
supports need t o be put int o pl ace t o reduce t he large nu mber of ki nder garten ret enti ons
i n t he districts. The st udy will hel p t o pi npoi nt t he pr ofessi onal devel op ment t hat is
needed t o be pr ovi ded t o teachers and st aff t hat is based i n best practi ce t o bett er support
st udent s t o reduce t he number of ki nder gart en ret enti ons. The research will contri but e t o
t he overall literat ure by contri buti ng t o t he overall dat a on t he causes of ki nder gart en
ret enti on i n cert ai n setti ngs. It will also contri but e t o t he overall literat ure by pr ovi di ng a
vali d st udy usi ng met hods t hat may support t he same research i n ot her districts
experi enci ng a hi gh nu mber of ki nder gart en ret enti ons.

KI NDERGARTEN RETENTI ON

64

Chapt er 4: Dat a Anal ysis and Res ults
Introducti on
Dat a was coll ect ed i n t he foll owi ng areas for t his research st udy; st udent
de mogr aphi cs, behavi or, acade mi c, and t eacher criteri a used for ki nder gart en ret enti on.
Teacher sur vey results were exa mi ned. Ot her results were anal yzed based multi pl e
sources concer ni ng de mographi c, behavi oral, and acade mi c dat a. De mogr aphi c dat a was
coll ect ed t o see t he frequency of charact eristics among st udent who were ret ai ned i n
ki nder gart en. Frequency of behavi or referrals t o the offi ce were coll ect ed and t he t ypes
of behavi ors t hat occurred were i dentifi ed. Academi c dat a was gat hered and exa mi ned
for measures of central tendency. The next st ep was t o anal yze t he dat a t hat has been
coll ect ed.
The research questi ons consi dered duri ng t his st udy were:
● What are t he criteri a used by t he teacher t o det ermi ne a st udent who
shoul d be ret ai ned i n ki nder gart en?
● Looki ng at st udent s who have been ret ai ned i n ki nder gart en i n t his setti ng,
what fact ors predi ct t hat they were at-risk for ret enti on?
● Ho w can t he i nf or mati on fromt his research be used t o reduce ret enti ons
and benefit st udent success i n ki nder gart en?
● Ho w can t he i nf or mati on fromt his research be used t o support i nstructi on
t o mi ni mi ze ret enti on?

KI NDERGARTEN RETENTI ON

65

Duri ng t he dat a anal ysis for t his st udy, st atistical met hods were used t o anal yze t he dat a
avail abl e t o gai n i nsi ght to t he research questi ons. Then a det er mi nati on of why t here is a
hi gh nu mber of ret enti ons, what fact ors are causi ng a hi gh nu mber of ret enti ons, and
i dentifyi ng additi onal supports t hat can be put i nto pl ace t o ensure ki nder gart en success
for all st udent s att endi ng an el e ment ar y school i n the district.
Res ults
Ki nder gart en t eachers were gi ven a sur vey cont ai ni ng t wel ve Li kert scal e
questi ons and t hree open ended questi ons. Fifteen teachers were sent t he survey. Ni ne
teachers agreed t o participat e i n t he sur vey. The first ni ne questi ons asked t he ext ent t o
whi ch cert ai n fact ors deter mi ne st udent ret enti on. The first fact or was parent
i nvol ve ment ( Fi gure 1). 77. 8 % of t he teachers felt parent i nvol ve ment was a “hi ghl y
si gnifi cant ” fact or i n det er mi ni ng st udent ret enti on. 22. 2 %st at ed t hat parent i nvol ve ment
was “so me what si gnifi cant ” i n det er mi ni ng st udent ret enti on.

Fi gure 1. The ext ent t o whi ch teachers beli eve parent i nvol ve ment det er mi nes st udent
ret enti on.

The ext ent t o whi ch t he ki nder gart en t eachers believed cl ass si ze was a
det er mi nant of ki nder garten ret enti on was exa mi ned next ( Fi gure 2). 66. 7 % of teachers

KI NDERGARTEN RETENTI ON

66

felt t hat cl ass si ze was “hi ghl y si gnifi cant ”. 33. 3% beli eved it was “so mewhat
si gnifi cant ”.

Fi gure 2. The ext ent t o whi ch teachers beli eve cl ass si ze deter mi nes st udent ret enti on.

Readi ng achi eve ment ( Figure 3) was t he next factor t hat ki nder gart en t eachers
wer e asked. All of t he kinder gart en t eachers st at ed t hat readi ng achi eve ment was “hi ghl y
si gnifi cant ” i n det er mi ning if a st udent was a candi dat e for ki nder gart en retenti on. Mat h
achi eve ment was also a fact or t hat teachers were sur veyed on as a det er mi nant for
ki nder gart en ret enti on ( Fi gure 4). 55. 6 % beli eved t hat mat h achi eve ment was a “hi ghl y
si gnifi cant ” fact or i n det er mi ni ng ki nder gart en ret enti on, whil e 44. 4 %felt it was
“so me what si gnifi cant ”.

Fi gure 3. The ext ent t o whi ch teachers beli eve readi ng achi eve ment det er mi nes st udent retenti on.

KI NDERGARTEN RETENTI ON

67

Fi gure 4. The ext ent t o whi ch teachers beli eve mat h achi eveme nt det er mi nes st udent ret enti on.

Mat urit y was anot her fact or ki nder gart en t eachers wer e sur veyed t o det er mi ne if
t hey felt it was a fact or i n t he decisi on for ki nder garten ret enti on ( Fi gure 5). A “hi ghl y
si gnifi cant ” response was gi ven by 88. 9 % of t he kinder gart en t eachers. 11.1 % chose
“so me what si gnifi cant ” for mat urit y bei ng a det ermi ni ng fact or of ki nder gart en ret enti on.

Fi gure 5. The ext ent t o whi ch teachers beli eve mat urit y det er mi nes st udent ret enti on.

Ki nder gart en t eachers were asked t o consi der if behavi or was a criteri on used t o
det er mi ne if a st udent is a candi dat e for ki nder garten ret enti on ( Fi gure 6). 44. 4 %st at ed

KI NDERGARTEN RETENTI ON

68

t hat behavi or is a “hi ghl y si gnifi cant ” criteri a when consi deri ng a st udent for ki nder gart en
ret enti on. 22. 2 % beli eved t hat it was “so me what si gnifi cant ”. 11. 1 % consi dered it t o be
“sli ghtl y si gnifi cant ”. 22. 2 %st at ed it was “not si gnifi cant ” as a det er mi nant for
ki nder gart en ret enti on.

Fi gure 6. The ext ent t o whi ch teachers beli eve behavi or deter mi nes st udent ret enti on.

Next, ki nder gart en t eachers were asked if preschool attendance was a det ermi nant
for ki nder gart en ret enti on ( Fi gure 7). 44. 4 % of kinder gart en t eachers ans wered t hat
preschool attendance was “hi ghl y si gnifi cant ” i n det er mi ni ng if a st udent woul d be a
candi dat e for ki nder gart en ret enti on. 33. 3 %sai d preschool attendance was a “some what
si gnifi cant fact or” det ermi ni ng ki nder gart en ret enti on. 22. 2 %felt preschool attendance
was “not si gnifi cant ” i n det er mi ni ng if a st udent woul d be ret ai ned i n ki ndergart en.

KI NDERGARTEN RETENTI ON

69

Fi gure 7. The ext ent t o whi ch teachers beli eve preschool deter mi nes st udent ret enti on.

Teachers were asked t o what ext ent fa mil y configurati on can det er mi ne
ki nder gart en ret enti on ( Fi gure 8). Teachers t hat repli ed “hi ghl y si gnifi cant” cont ai ned
22. 2 % of t he teachers who parti ci pat ed i n t he st udy. 55. 6 %sai d t hat fa mily confi gurati on
was “so me what si gnifi cant ” i n det er mi ni ng ki ndergart en ret enti on. “Not signifi cant ” was
t he response by 22. 2 % of t he ki nder gart en t eachers who parti ci pat ed i n t he st udy.

Fi gure 8. The ext ent t o whi ch teachers beli eve fa mil y configur ati on det er mi nes st udent retenti on.

KI NDERGARTEN RETENTI ON

70

The next ite mt hat t he kinder gart en t eachers considered was soci al/e moti onal
concer ns ( Fi gure 9). 33.3 % of t he ki nder gart en t eachers who partici pat ed stat ed t hat
soci al/ e moti onal concer ns were “hi ghl y si gnifi cant” i n det er mi ni ng a candidat e for
ki nder gart en ret enti on. “So me what si gnifi cant ” was t he response from 44. 4 % of t he
ki nder gart en t eachers and 22. 2 %st at ed t hat soci al/e moti onal concer ns were “sli ghtl y
si gnifi cant ”.

Fi gure 9. The ext ent t o whi ch teachers beli eve soci al/ e motional concer ns det er mi ne st udent
ret enti on.

Fi gure 10 shows responses fro mt he parti ci pant s regar di ng i nstructi onal practi ces.
44. 4 % of t he ki nder gart en t eachers who partici pated i n t he st udy responded t hat
i nstructi onal practi ces were “hi ghl y si gnifi cant ”. “So me what si gnifi cant ” was t he
response from 44. 4 % of the ki nder gart en t eachers who responded. 11. 1 %responded t hat
i nstructi onal practi ces were “sli ghtl y si gnifi cant ”.

KI NDERGARTEN RETENTI ON

71

Fi gure 10. The ext ent t o whi ch t eachers beli eve i nstructi onal practi ces det er mi ne st udent
ret enti on.

The next t hree questi ons i n t he sur vey asked whet her t he teacher, parent or tea m
shoul d make t he decisi on on whet her a st udent shoul d be ret ai ned. As shown i n Fi gure
11, 22. 2 % of t he ki nder gart en t eachers who responded chose “al ways” when asked
shoul d ret ai ni ng a st udent be a teacher decisi on. 55. 6 %responded “sometimes” and
22. 2 %responded “occasionall y. ”

Fi gure 11. Ki nder gart en t eacher beli ef t hat ret enti on shoul d be a teacher decisi on.

KI NDERGARTEN RETENTI ON

72

When t he ki nder gart en t eachers were asked if ret enti on shoul d be a parent
deci si on ( Fi gure 12). 11.1 % st at ed t hat it is “al ways a parent decisi on. ” “So meti mes”
was t he response from 33. 3% of t he teachers who responded and “occasi onall y” was t he
choi ce by 44. 4 % of t he ki nder gart en t eachers. Of t he ki nder gart en t eachers sur veyed
11. 1 % ans wered “never”.

Fi gure 12. Ki nder gart en t eacher beli ef t hat ret enti on shoul d be a parent decisi on.

Ki nder gart en t eachers who parti ci pat ed i n t he survey were asked if ret ai ning a
ki nder gart en st udent shoul d be a tea m deci si on ( Fi gure 12). 77. 8 %responded t hat it
shoul d “al ways” be a team deci si on. 22. 2 % chose “someti mes” as t heir response when
ans weri ng t he sur vey.

KI NDERGARTEN RETENTI ON

73

Fi gure 13. Ki nder gart en t eacher beli ef t hat ret enti on shoul d be a tea m decisi on.

Fi nall y, teachers were given t hree open-ended response questi ons. Teachers were
abl e t o t ype t heir responses. Feedback fromt he t eachers is i ncl uded wit h each questi on
posed.
What support s are necessary t o reduce t he possi bility of a chil d bei ng ret ained?
Teacher feedback for t his questi on consist ed of several ite ms. Title I / readi ng
support was addressed by t hree of t he t eachers. Parent al i nvol ve ment was not ed by four
of t he t eachers who partici pat ed i n t he sur vey. Pre K/ EI was menti oned by t wo of t he
ki nder gart en t eachers. Starti ng dat e based on birt hdat e, transiti onal ki nder gart en, ti me,
and cl ass si ze were all noted by t eachers who partici pat ed i n t his sur vey.
What support s f or t eachers/st aff can be put i nt o place t o reduce t he possi bility of
a chil d bei ng ret ai ned?
Four st aff me mbers responded t hat mor e Title I time and s mall er cl ass si ze/ more
st aff woul d be a support for teachers/st aff t o reduce t he possi bilit y of a chil d bei ng

KI NDERGARTEN RETENTI ON

74

ret ai ned i n ki nder gart en. Two t eachers st at ed t hat mor e coll aborati on and mor e
pr ofessi onal devel op ment woul d support teachers/st aff and reduce t he possibilit y of a
chil d bei ng ret ai ned i n kinder gart en. Ot her responses by i ndi vi dual teachers i ncl uded
mor e resources, a cl assroo m ai de i n each ki nder garten cl assroo m, Pre K, speci al educati on
support, and counsel or support.
Descri be t he communi cati on t hat shoul d occur with a parent of a st udent who is a
candi dat e f or ret enti on.
The l ast open-ended response where t eachers descri bed how co mmuni cati on
shoul d occur wit h a parent for a st udent who is a candi dat e for ret enti on, four teachers
st at ed t hat notificati on shoul d occur t hroughout t he year. Two t eachers st ated t hat parent
conferences shoul d occur. One t eacher st at ed t hat report cards were a for m of
co mmuni cati on t hat shoul d occur t hroughout t he year wit h parent s.
Several de mogr aphi c factors of t he ret ai ned ki ndergart en st udent s were exami ned
i n t his st udy. Gender, ethni cit y, econo mi call y disadvant aged st at us, age, speci al
educati on st at us, and preschool attendance were exa mi ned for t he st udent s t hat were
ret ai ned i n ki nder gart en. De mogr aphi c dat a was looked at for frequency t o see if t here
wer e common de mogr aphi c fact ors a mong t he st udent s who were ret ai ned i n
ki nder gart en duri ng t he 2018- 19 school year.
When l ooki ng at t he frequency for each fact or, fort y of t he fort y-t wo st udents
ret ai ned i n ki nder gart en identified as econo mi cally disadvant aged. That is 95. 2 % of t he
st udent s who were ret ai ned i n ki nder gart en. Fort y-one of t he fort y-t wo st udent s
i dentified as whit e, whi ch is 97. 6 % of t he sur vey popul ati on. One st udent, or 2. 4 %,

KI NDERGARTEN RETENTI ON

75

i dentified as bl ack. Fourteen (33. 3 %) st udent s i dentified as fe mal e and t went y-ei ght
(66. 7 %) as mal e. Speci al educati on st at us was also exa mi ned i n t his st udy. When
l ooki ng at frequency, t went y-t wo st udent s or 52. 4% of st udent s were not i dentified as
needi ng speci al educati on ser vi ces. Three st udents (7. 1 %) were i dentified as havi ng a
“specifi c learni ng disabilit y”. Four st udent s (9. 5%) were i dentified as “i ntellect uall y
di sabl ed”. Four st udent s (9. 5 %) were i dentified as “ot her healt h i mpair ment”. Ni ne
st udent s (21. 4 %) were i dentified as needi ng “speech” servi ces.
Bi rt hdat e was exa mi ned duri ng t his st udy. Of t he st udent s who were ret ai ned,
t hree (7. 1 %) were bor n on or bef ore Nove mber 30, 2012. Seven (16. 7 %) of t he ret ai ned
st udent s were bor n i n Dece mber, Januar y, or Februar y. Thirt een (31. 0 %) st udent s were
bor n i n Mar ch, April, or Ma y. There were ni net een (45. 2 %) st udent s bor n i n June, Jul y,
and August.
Pr eschool att endance was anot her charact eristic that was anal yzed for t he st udent s
t hat were ret ai ned i n ki nder gart en duri ng t he 2018-19 school year. Thirt y- Fi ve of t he
fort y-t wo st udent s had provi ded what t ype of school experi ence t hey had pri or t o ent eri ng
ki nder gart en. Si xt een (38. 1 %) of st udent s attended a Headst art progra m. One st udent
(2. 4 %) att ended a Pre K Count s pr ogra m. Three st udent s (7. 1 %) att ended anot her t ype of
preschool progra m pri or t o ent eri ng ki nder gart en. The nu mber of ki nder garten st udent s
who were ret ai ned duri ng t he 2018- 19 school year and di d not recei ve any for mal
schooli ng pri or t o ki ndergart en was fifteen (35. 7%).

KI NDERGARTEN RETENTI ON

76

Sevent een of t he fort y-t wo st udent s t ook t he ki ndergart en entrance exa m pri or t o
ent eri ng ki nder gart en. The mi ni mu m score was 17 % and t he maxi mu m score was 63 %.
The mean val ue scored by t he 17 st udent s who t ook t he test was 37. 4 %.
English Language Arts (ELA) report car d grades, ( Tabl e 2) were exa mi ned for
each of t he four ni ne weeks and t he fi nal grades were also exa mi ned. Thirty-ei ght of t he
fort y-t wo st udent s had report card grades i n ELA duri ng t he first ni ne weeks. Fort y had
ELA report cards grads for t he second ni ne weeks. Fort y- one of t he fort y-two st udent s
had t hird, fourt h and fi nal ni ne weeks ni ne- week report car d grades i n ELA for t he 201819 school year. Duri ng the first ni ne weeks, st udent s who were ret ai ned averaged 61. 3 %
for t he ni ne weeks. The st andar d devi ati on for t he first ni ne weeks was 15. 29048. The
mean for t he second ni ne weeks was 57. 5 % wit h a standar d devi ati on of 17.97570. The
mean for t he t hird ni ne weeks was 49. 4 % wit h a standar d devi ati on of 16. 37994. Duri ng
t he fourt h ni ne weeks’ student s ret ai ned i n ki ndergart en duri ng t he 2018- 19 school year
averaged 53. 1 %i n ELA on t heir report card wit h a st andar d devi ati on of 17. 59147. The
fi nal mean on t he report car d i n ELA f or t he ret ained st udent s was 55. 0 %. The st andar d
devi ati on for t he fi nal ELA report card grade was 14. 81882 a mong t he st udent s who were
ret ai ned i n ki nder gart en duri ng t he 2018- 19 school year.

77

KI NDERGARTEN RETENTI ON
Tabl e 2
ELA Descri pti ve St atistics
N
Mi ni mu m
Devi ati on

Ma xi mu m

Me an

St d.

ELA 1st 9 weeks grade

38

26. 00

92. 00

61. 3421

15. 29048

ELA 2nd 9 weeks grade

40

8. 00

90. 00

57. 4500

17. 97570

ELA 3r d 9 weeks grade

41

3. 00

92. 00

49. 4390

16. 37994

ELA 4t h 9 weeks grade

41

. 00

96. 00

53. 1220

17. 59147

ELA Fi nal Gr ace

41

9. 00

93. 00

55. 0488

14. 81882

Vali d N (list wi se)

38

Mat he mati cs report card grades ( Tabl e 3) were exa mi ned for each of t he four ni ne
weeks and t he fi nal grades were also exa mi ned. Fort y- one of t he fort y-t wo st udent s had
report card grades i n mat he mati cs duri ng each of the ni ne week peri ods and fort y- one of
t he fort y-t wo had a fi nal grade i n mat he mati cs for t he fi nal report card. Duri ng t he first
ni ne weeks, st udent s who were ret ai ned averaged 61. 1 %f or t he ni ne weeks. There was a
st andar d devi ati on of 24.32611. The mean for t he second ni ne weeks was a 59. 0 %.
There was a st andar d deviati on for t he second ni ne weeks of 21. 93394. The mean for t he
t hird ni ne weeks was 50. 1 % and t he st andar d deviati on was 24. 74189. Duri ng t he fourt h
ni ne- weeks st udent s ret ained i n ki nder gart en duri ng t he 2018- 19 school year averaged
59. 2 %i n mat he mati cs on t heir report card wit h a standar d devi ati on of 21. 99376. The
fi nal mean on t he report car d i n mat he mati cs for the ret ai ned st udent s was 58. 6 %. The
st andar d devi ati on for t he fi nal mat he mati cs grades was 19. 69629.

78

KI NDERGARTEN RETENTI ON
Tabl e 3
Mat he mati cs Descri pti ve St atistics
N

Mi ni mu m

Ma xi mu m

Me an

St d. Devi ati on

41

. 00

97. 00

61. 1220

24. 32611

Mat h 2nd 9 weeks grade 41

. 00

94. 00

59. 0488

21. 93394

Mat h 3r d 9 weeks grade

41

. 00

95. 00

50. 1951

24. 74189

Mat h 4t h 9 weeks grade

41

16. 00

100. 00

59. 2195

21. 99376

Mat h Fi nal Gr ade

41

10. 00

93. 00

58. 6098

19. 69629

Vali d N (list wi se)

41

Mat h 1st 9 weeks grade

Dyna mi c i ndi cat ors of basi c earl y literacy skills (DI BELS) t esti ng scores (Tabl e
4) were exa mi ned duri ng t his st udy. Twent y-si x st udent s had scores for t he begi nni ng of
t he year ( BOY) and end of t he year ( EOY). Twent y-seven st udent s had scores for t he
mi ddl e of t he year ( MOY). The mean begi nni ng of t he year score was 4. 1, mi ddl e of t he
year 59. 2, and end of t he year 69. 5.
Tabl e 4
Descri pti ve st atistics DI BELS dat a
N

Mi ni mu m

Ma xi mu m

Me an

St d. Devi ati on

BOY DI BELS Score

26

. 00

33. 00

4. 1154

7. 54362

MOY DI BELS Scor e

27

. 00

144. 00

59. 2222

40. 29443

EOY DI BELS Scores

26

. 00

126. 00

69. 4615

35. 83878

Vali d N (list wi se)

25

79

KI NDERGARTEN RETENTI ON
Anot her fact or exa mi ned i n t his st udy was behavior. Behavi or recor ds were
exa mi ned on fort y-t wo student s. Tabl e 5 will show t he nu mber of referrals for t he

st udent s who were ret ai ned i n ki nder gart en duri ng t he 2018- 19 school year. Twent y-si x
st udent s were not referred t o t he offi ce for behavior. One st udent was referred 18 ti mes.
Tabl e 5
Frequency of ref errals f or st udent s ret ai ned i n ki ndergart en
Nu mber of referrals

0

1- 4

# of st udent referred

26

9

5- 8
4

9- 12

13- 18

2

1

There were a t ot al of ei ght y-fi ve a mong t he st udent s ret ai ned i n ki nder garten. Thirt yseven of t he referrals were for bus behavi or, t went y-t wo were cat egori zed as
i nappr opri at e behavi or, ei ght een were for physi cal aggressi on, t wo were i nappr opri at e
language, one was i nsubor di nati on and fi ve were cat egori zed as ot her.
Tri angul ati on of dat a was done i n t his st udy. The reasons t eachers i dentified as
fact ors for ret ai ni ng st udent s were exa mi ned. Demogr aphi c i nf or mati on on st udent s
ret ai ned i n ki nder gart en for t he 2018- 19 school year was also gat hered and exa mi ned.
Acade mi c dat a on st udents was i nvesti gat ed. Report card grades and bench mar ki ng dat a
from DI BELS t esti ng were all revi e wed. Behavi oral referral dat a was also revi e wed for
t he st udent s t hat were retai ned i n ki nder gart en duri ng t he 2018- 19 school year.
Schooli ng pri or t o ki ndergart en was i dentifi ed. Literat ure revi e wi nf or mation was
exa mi ned and consi dered when l ooki ng at t he results of t he sur vey and t he de mogr aphi c
i nfor mati on for t he st udent s t hat had been ret ai ned. Pri or research results and t he current

KI NDERGARTEN RETENTI ON

80

st udy dat a were consi dered t o see if t he st udy had co mmon i dentifiers for ret enti on. The
st udy results and t he t eacher sur veys were also exa mi ned t o see if t he reasons t eachers
i dentified as fact ors i n student s’ ret enti on were consi st ent wit h t he st udent s who were
ret ai ned i n ki nder gart en duri ng t he 2018- 19 school year.
Di scussi on
1. What are t he crit eri a used by t he t eacher t o det ermi ne a st udent who shoul d be
ret ai ned i n ki ndergart en?
Accor di ng t o t he sur vey dat a coll ect ed fromt he t eachers i n t he district who
parti ci pat ed i n t he st udy, readi ng achi eve ment was a criteri on t hat t hey unani mousl y
agreed was “hi ghl y si gnificant ” as a criteri on when consi deri ng a st udent for ki nder gart en
ret enti on. Mat urit y was anot her criteri a t hat teachers who partici pat ed i n t he st udy felt
strongl y about. 88. 9 % of t he teachers chose “hi ghl y si gnifi cant ” when l ooki ng at
mat urit y as a criteri on for ki nder gart en ret enti on. 11. 1 %st at ed it was “so me what
si gnifi cant ”. Mat he mati cs achi eve ment was also looked at by many of t he teachers, but
t he responses were not as strong a criteri on as readi ng achi eve ment. 55. 6 % chose “hi ghl y
si gnifi cant ”, whil e 54. 4 % chose “so me what si gnificant ”.
Teachers also responded rel ati vel y strongl y t o t he sur vey dat a for parent
i nvol ve ment and cl ass size and bei ng a criteri on that contri but es t o a st udent bei ng
consi dered for ki nder garten ret enti on. 66. 7 % of t eachers st at ed cl ass si ze was “hi ghl y
si gnifi cant ” and 33. 3 % of teachers responded with “so me what si gnifi cant ” when l ooki ng
at cl ass si ze as a fact or i n ki nder gart en ret enti on. Teachers responded wit h “hi ghl y

KI NDERGARTEN RETENTI ON

81

si gnifi cant ” 77. 8 % of t he ti me when asked about parent i nvol ve ment bei ng a fact or i n
ki nder gart en ret enti on. 22. 2 %responded wit h “some what si gnifi cant ”.
2. Looki ng at st udent s who have been ret ai ned i n ki ndergart en i n t his setti ng, what
f act ors predi ct t hat t hey were at-risk f or ret enti on?
Accor di ng t o t he ki nder gart en t eachers who partici pat ed i n t he st udy, 100 % of
t he mfelt readi ng achi eveme nt as a criteri a was” highl y si gnifi cant ” when consi deri ng
whet her a st udent shoul d be ret ai ned i n ki nder garten. The mean fi nal grade i n ELA,
whi ch i ncl udes readi ng and all language arts mat erial, for st udent s who were ret ai ned i n
ki nder gart en duri ng t he 2018- 19 school year was 55. 0488. Accor di ng t o Dwyer and Rul e
(1997), a maj or reason student s are hel d i n ki ndergart en is due t o difficult y i n readi ng.
Poor earl y readi ng skills are a si gnifi cant predi ct or of ret enti on, and chil dren who
perfor m poorl y on t he earliest assess ment s avail able are expect ed t o be ret ai ned mor e
frequentl y ( Cannon & Li psco mb, n. d.).
When consi deri ng mat hemati cs achi eve ment, 55. 6% of ki nder gart en t eachers
st at ed t hat mat h achi eveme nt was a “hi ghl y si gnificant ” fact or i n det er mi ni ng
ki nder gart en ret enti on, whil e 44. 4 %felt it was “some what si gnifi cant ”. The mean fi nal
grade i n mat he mati cs for st udent s ret ai ned i n ki nder gart en duri ng t he 2018-19 school
years was 58. 6098 % with a st andar d devi ati on of 19. 69629. Alt hough mat he mati cs
achi eve ment is a consi derati on, readi ng is a maj or reason st udent s are ret ained i n
ki nder gart en ( Dwyer &Rul e, 1997).
88. 9 % of ki nder gart en t eachers who partici pat ed in t he st udy felt mat urit y was
“hi ghl y si gnifi cant ” as a fact or consi dered for ki nder gart en ret enti on. Accor di ng t o t he

KI NDERGARTEN RETENTI ON

82

literat ure, a st udent’s age at ki nder gart en has a measurabl e effect on literacy and l anguage
arts achi eve ment earl y i n t heir schooli ng, but t hese differences disappear by t he ti me t hey
reach t he ei ght h grade ( Perry, 2010). Of t he 42 student s ret ai ned, t hirteen wer e bor n i n
Mar ch, April or May, and ni net een were bor n i n June, Jul y, or August. Theref ore, a t ot al
for t hirt y-t wo of t he fort y-t wo st udent s ret ai ned i n ki nder gart en were bor n Mar ch or lat er.
3. Ho w can t he i nf or mati on fromt his research be used t o reduce ret enti ons and
benefit st udent success i n ki ndergart en?
Accor di ng t o t he literat ure, screeni ng earl y can help det er mi ne whi ch st udent s
ma y be at-risk for ki ndergart en ret enti on. Taki ng i nt o consi derati on t he criteri a teachers
consi der when det er mi ning if a st udent is a candi dat e for ki nder gart en ret enti on, st udent s
can be i dentified based on de mogr aphi c dat a. They also can be i dentifi ed based on
achi eve ment t hroughout the year.
In t his st udy 95. 2 % of t he st udent s i dentified as econo mi call y disadvant aged.
Si nce t he el e ment ar y buildi ngs range from 57 %t o 78 %i dentifyi ng as economi call y
di sadvant aged, t he percent age of 95. 2 % has st atistical si gnifi cance as a charact eristic for
st udent s who will be consi dered for ret enti on i n kinder gart en. Thirt y-t wo of t he fort yt wo st udent s also have a birt hdat e t hat occurs on or aft er March 1, 2013. Thi s also is
st atisticall y si gnifi cant since it 76. 2 % of t he st udent s who were ret ai ned i n ki nder gart en.
Underst andi ng t he criteria t eachers use t o i dentify t he st udent s i n ki nder garten can
al so gi ve directi on on st udent and t eacher supports t hat need t o be put i nt o place t o
support t hose areas. 100% of t he teachers st at ed that readi ng achi eve ment was “hi ghl y
si gnifi cant ” when det er mi ni ng if a st udent is a candi dat e for ret enti on. Teachers also

KI NDERGARTEN RETENTI ON

83

not ed t hat mat urit y was a fact or i n t heir decisi on-ma ki ng pr ocess for deci di ng if a st udent
was a candi dat e for ret enti on. Conti nuousl y i dentifyi ng st udent s who are struggli ng
acade mi call y i n t he area of readi ng and also t hose t hat t he teachers i dentify as i mmat ure
for ki nder gart en will provi de opport unit y t o target support t o t hose st udent s t o i mpr ove i n
t heir areas of need.
4. Ho w can t he i nf or mati on fromt his research be used t o support i nstructi on t o
mi ni mi ze ret enti on?
Ki nder gart en t eachers focused hi ghl y on readi ng achi eve ment as a criteri on t o
det er mi ne if a chil d shoul d be ret ai ned i n ki nder garten. Teachers st at ed t hat mat urit y was
a si gnifi cant fact or i n deter mi ni ng if a chil d was a candi dat e for ki nder gart en ret enti on.
Teachers used mat he matics achi eve ment as a criteri on for ki nder gart en ret enti on,
alt hough it was not det ermi ned t o be as si gnifi cant of a criteri on as readi ng achi eve ment.
The literat ure discusses ho w readi ng achi eve ment is a reason st udent s are ret ai ned
i n ki nder gart en. Thi s was support ed by t he t eacher sur vey responses t hat 100 % of t he
teachers who partici pat ed i n t his st udy felt readi ng achi eve ment was a “hi ghl y
si gnifi cant ” criteri a i n deter mi ni ng if a st udent was a candi dat e for ki nder gart en ret enti on.
Perr y (2010) st at ed t hat the age of a st udent i n ki nder gart en has a measurable effect on
literacy and l anguage arts achi eve ment and t hat t hese differences disappear by t he ti me
t he st udent s reach ei ght h grade. Teachers felt mat urit y was a si gnifi cant criteri on for
ki nder gart en ret enti on. Thi s was support ed by t he ages of t he st udent s t hat wer e ret ai ned
i n ki nder gart en duri ng t he 2018- 19 school year. Screeni ng met hods t o i dentify at-risk
st udent s earl y, hel ps st udent success i n ki nder garten ( Mendez et al., 2015). In t he st udy

KI NDERGARTEN RETENTI ON

84

done by Winsl er et al. (2014), chil d language and soci al skills are key t argets i n
i dentifyi ng t hose wit h t he most li keli hood of ret enti on si nce parent s and t eachers consi der
t hese when fi nal ret enti on decisi ons are made. Theref ore, screeni ng st udents earl y i n
language and soci al skills, can hel p i dentify st udent s who are weak i n t hose areas.
Identifyi ng st udent s wit h earl y birt hdays who may struggl e is an additi onal crit eri on t o be
exa mi ned when l ooki ng at t he st udent s who have been screened. Supporti ng bot h
st udent s and t eachers i n areas i dentified as fact ors for t he st udent s bei ng retai ned i n
ki nder gart en are necessary for reduci ng t he nu mber of ret enti ons i n t he school distri ct.
Su mmary/ Transiti on
Underst andi ng what criteria teachers are usi ng t o identify st udent s for
ki nder gart en ret enti on is i mport ant i n underst anding how t o reduce t he number of
ki nder gart en ret enti on i n t he school district. Identifyi ng specifi c i nfor mati on on t hese
st udent s is also hel pf ul. Appl yi ng pri or research to support t hese st udent s and t eachers
wi ll be necessar y t o reduce t he nu mber of ret enti ons i n t he school district.
St udent s who have poor achi eve ment i n readi ng are targets for ret enti on based on
t he results i n t he st udy i n t he area of English Language Arts and also by t he sur vey
i nfor mati on pr ovi ded by t he teachers who parti ci pat ed i n t he st udy. St udent birt hdat e
was not ed as a fact or i n ki nder gart en ret enti on si nce t hirt y-t wo of t he fort y-two st udent s
had a birt hdat e of Mar ch 1 or lat er i n t he school year. Teachers not ed t hat mat urit y was a
fact or l ooked at by 88. 9% of t eachers as “hi ghl y si gnifi cant ” whil e t he ot her 11. 1 %st at ed
it was “so me what si gnificant ”. Thi s leads t o t he need t o address t he areas of readi ng
achi eve ment and mat urity based on t he fi ndi ngs fro m pri or research.

KI NDERGARTEN RETENTI ON

85

Chapt er 5
Concl usi ons and Reco mme ndati ons
Introducti on
Thi s st udy was desi gned t o det er mi ne how t o reduce ki nder gart en ret enti on
t hrough t eacher and st udent supports. It is i mportant t o underst and t he criteri a teachers
use t o det er mi ne if a child is a candi dat e for ki ndergart en ret enti on so supports can be put
i n pl ace t o reduce t he number of ki nder gart en ret enti ons. Identifyi ng specific
i nfor mati on, i ncl udi ng demogr aphi c i nf or mati on, is hel pf ul t o det er mi ne which st udent s
are mor e li kel y t o be a candi dat e for ki nder gart en ret enti on. Appl yi ng pri or research t o
support t hese st udent s, teachers and fa mili es will hel p t o reduce t he nu mber of
ki nder gart en ret enti ons and i ncrease t he success of t hese st udent s t hroughout t heir ti me i n
t he school district.
Thi s chapt er addresses t he concl usi ons fromt he study i ncl udi ng t he effectiveness
of t he results and if t he results support t he concl usions. Appli cati ons of what was l ear ned
fromt he st udy will be discussed and i mpr ove ments t o t he distri ct t o reduce t he nu mber of
ki nder gart en ret enti ons. Fi scal i mpli cati ons will be addressed based on t he results of t he
st udy and how t hose i mplicati ons may i mpact t he di strict over ti me.
Fut ure pl anni ng will be discussed based on t he results of t his st udy. The planni ng
wi ll be based on how t he results of t his st udy can be used t o reduce t he nu mber of
ki nder gart en ret enti ons in t he district. Si nce t his st udy occurred duri ng t he 2020 COVI D19 Pande mi c, additi onal consi derati ons will be i dentified so adapt ati ons for fut ure

KI NDERGARTEN RETENTI ON

86

pl anni ng based on t he results will be consi dered and t he nu mber of ki nder garten
ret enti ons i n t he district wi ll be reduced.
Concl usi on
The pur pose of t he st udy is t o reduce t he nu mber of ki nder gart en ret enti ons by
det er mi ni ng supports t hat can be put i nt o pl ace for st udent s and t eachers. There are
co mmon fact ors a mong st udent s who were ret ai ned i n ki nder gart en i n t he district. In t his
st udy t hese common factors were i dentifi ed and t hey will be used t o t arget st udent s who
are at-risk for ki nder garten ret enti on. Screeni ng these st udent s i n t he i dentified
de mogr aphi c and achi eveme nt areas will reduce t he nu mber of ki nder gart en ret enti ons i n
t he district. Identifi ed demogr aphi c areas were st udent s who i dentifi ed as econo mi call y
di sadvant aged and st udent s who were bor n aft er Mar ch 1st pri or t o st arti ng ki nder gart en.
Teachers st at ed t hat reading was “hi ghl y si gnifi cant ” when det er mi ni ng if a st udent
shoul d be consi dered for ki nder gart en ret enti on. St udent who were ret ai ned had readi ng
achi eve ment bel ow expect ed l evel s.
As a result of t he st udy and support ed by pri or research, one way t o reduce t he
nu mber of ki nder gart en ret enti ons is t hrough t argeted pr ofessi onal devel opme nt for
ki nder gart en t eachers. Ki nder gart en t eachers need t o be made a ware of t he fact ors t hat
t he st udent s have i n co mmon who are ret ai ned i n t he district. Ki nder gart en t eachers need
t o be present ed wit h i nfor mati on from pri or research on ho w t hese fact ors affect t he
learni ng of t he st udent s in t heir cl assroo ms. De mographi cs fact ors need t o be underst ood
i ncl udi ng how ki nder garten st udent s are affect ed by i dentifyi ng as econo mi call y
di sadvant aged. The effect s of st udent age at t he time t hey ent er ki nder garten will be an
area where teachers receive pr ofessi onal devel opme nt so t he teachers can underst and how

KI NDERGARTEN RETENTI ON

87

age affects patt erns i n readi ng devel op ment ( Perry, 2010). Teachers will be pr ovi ded
trai ni ng i n supporti ng earl y readi ng skills and i n underst andi ng readi ng devel op ment of
st udent s. Teachers will also need t o underst and pri or research on t he short-ter m and
l ong-t er m effects of ret enti on.
Ki nder gart en t eachers surveyed st at ed t hat readi ng was a “hi ghl y si gnifi cant ”
fact or when det er mi ni ng if a st udent was a candi dat e for ret enti on. Readi ng grades i n
ki nder gart en are co mposed of all component s of English Language Arts (ELA). The
fi nal ELA grades for st udent s who were ret ai ned in ki nder gart en support t hat readi ng
achi eve ment was a fact or as st at ed by t he ki nder garten t eachers. The mean fi nal grade i n
ELA was 55. 0488. Mean, also known as average, is a measure of central tendency
det er mi ned by addi ng all scores t oget her and di vi di ng by t he t ot al nu mber of scores
avail abl e. St udent s are consi dered havi ng a passing grade when t he mean is a 60.
Theref ore, st udent s who wer e ret ai ned are scori ng on average al most fi ve percent age
poi nt s bel ow what t he district has det er mi ned as a passi ng grade. Begi nni ng of t he year
Dyna mi c Indi cat ors of Basi c Earl y Lit eracy Skills ( DI BELS) scores for t he ret ai ned
st udent s had a mean of 4.1154. For t he end of t he year DI BELS scores for the 2018- 19
school year, t he mean was 69. 4615. In pri or research, Dwyer and Rul e (1997) st at ed a
maj or reason st udent s are hel d i n ki nder gart en is due t o diffi cult y i n readi ng. Poor earl y
readi ng skills are a si gnificant predi ct or of ret enti on, and chil dren who perfor m poorl y on
t he earliest assess ment s avail abl e are expect ed t o be ret ai ned mor e frequently ( Cannon &
Li psco mb, n. d.). Therefore, i dentifyi ng st udent s who are testi ng poorl y at t he begi nni ng
of t he year i n DI BELS and putti ng specifi c supports i n pl ace for t hose who have l ow
ELA grades, will decrease t he nu mber of ki nder garten ret enti ons i n t he district.

KI NDERGARTEN RETENTI ON

88

Tar geti ng st udent s earl y and based on specifi c skill defi cits will be necessary t o support
st udent success and t o reduce t he nu mber of ki ndergart en ret enti ons i n t he di strict.
Consi derati on of st udent prerequi site skills needs to be exa mi ned al ong with t he
skills t hat t hey ent er ki nder gart en wit h t o det er mi ne if t here has been si gnificant growt h
wi t h t he st udent t hroughout t he school year. The mean DI BELS score for ret ai ned
st udent s was 4. 1154 at t he begi nni ng of t he year. The mean DI BELS score at t he end of
t he year was 69. 4615. Thi s shows t hat t here was gr owt h i n t he readi ng skills of some or
all of t he st udent s who were ret ai ned. Thi s st udy det er mi ned t hat baseli ne i nfor mati on on
st udent skill levels when ent eri ng ki nder gart en will provi de areas t o t arget for
re medi ati on. St udent s who are monit ored whil e recei vi ng t he target ed i nstructi on and
sho w gr owt h, are st udents who will have t he ability t o achi eve over ti me. Student s who
st art wit h readi ng skill deficits unli ke t heir peers will need t arget ed i nstruction for
multi pl e years and should conti nue t o gr ow. It may require multi pl e years for t hese
st udent s t o buil d t he skills t hey need t o succeed at grade l evel, but wit h target ed skill
buil di ng, t hey will not need t o be ret ai ned i n ki ndergart en. St udent s who are not growi ng
even wit h t arget ed readi ng i nstructi on will need additi onal assist ance, i nt erventi on and/ or
di agnosis as t o underst and t heir diffi cult y i n gr owi ng t heir skills i n readi ng. Thi s may
i ncl ude speci al educati on supports, behavi or modi ficati ons and physi ci an assist ance.
Theref ore, st udent s who show gr owt h may need multi pl e years t o reach grade l evel and
ret ai ni ng t hese st udent s at t he ki nder gart en l evel will not be benefi ci al t o t hese st udent s.
Based on pri or research, t he effects of ret enti on over ti me will lead t o negati ve out co mes
for t he ret ai ned st udent s.

KI NDERGARTEN RETENTI ON

89

Thi s st udy also consi dered de mogr aphi cs t hat were co mmon a mong t he st udent s
who were consi dered for ki nder gart en ret enti on. Fort y of t he fort y-t wo st udent s who
wer e ret ai ned i n ki nder garten i dentifi ed as econo micall y disadvant aged. That is ni net yfi ve percent of st udent s who were ret ai ned i n ki nder gart en t hat i dentifi ed as econo mi call y
di sadvant aged. Thi s is a si gnifi cant percent age si nce i n t he el e ment ar y buildi ngs t he
a mount of st udent s i dentifyi ng as econo mi call y disadvant aged ranges from fift y-seven
percent t o sevent y-fi ve percent. “Chil dren who begi n life i n povert y already face
struct ural disadvant ages li ke lack of access t o resources or struct ural racis m t hat i ncrease
t heir risk exposure t o vi olence, abuse, and negl ect” ( Hi noj osa, M. S., Hi nojosa, R.,
Bri ght, M., & Nguyen, J., 2019, p. 405). St udent s who recei ve free and reduced- pri ce
l unches were more li kel y t o be rat ed as not soci ally or behavi orall y ready for school
( Bett encourt, Gr oss, Ho, & Perri n, 2017). Theref ore, it will be i mperati ve to i mmedi at el y
det er mi ne st udent s i n t he district who i dentify as econo mi call y disadvant aged t hat are
ent eri ng ki nder gart en.
St udent birt hdat e was noted as a fact or i n ki nder garten ret enti on si nce t hirt y-t wo
of t he fort y-t wo st udent s who were ret ai ned had a birt hdat e of Mar ch 1st or lat er i n t he
school year. St udent s who had a birt hday aft er March 1st and t urned fi ve bet ween Mar ch
1st and t he st art of ki ndergart en were a co mmon fact or a mong t he st udent s who were
ret ai ned i n ki nder gart en duri ng t he 2018- 19 school year. It was not ed by teachers t hat
mat urit y was a fact or by 88. 9 % of teachers st ati ng it as “hi ghl y si gnifi cant ”, whil e t he
ot her 11. 1 %st at ed it was “so me what si gnifi cant ”. Ast udent’s age at ki ndergart en has a
measurabl e effect on literacy and l anguage arts achi eve ment earl y i n t heir schooli ng, but
t hese differences disappear by t he ti me t hey reach t he ei ght h grade ( Perry, 2010).

KI NDERGARTEN RETENTI ON

90

Ki nder gart en st udent s need t o be abl e t o list en, ask questi ons t o get i nfor mati on, and also
use l anguage t o meet t heir needs ( All an, 2008). The research i dentifi es t hat younger
ki nder gart en st udent s are more li kel y t o be ret ai ned ( Peel, 1997). The reading skills of
t hese st udent s and t he grades i n ELA t heref ore may be i mpact ed by st udent mat urit y
si nce t hirt y-t wo of t he fort y-t wo st udent s di d not tur n fi ve until aft er March 1st pri or t o
st arti ng ki nder gart en. Theref ore, st udent s may not have had skills t hat woul d hel p t he m
be successf ul i n readi ng. Accor di ng t o Hong and Yu ( 2007), all owi ng children t o mat ure
t hrough ret enti on di d not i mpr ove readi ng and mat he mati cs scores over t he el e ment ar y
years and t hese chil dren have t he abilit y t o lear n first grade mat eri al if promot ed rat her
t han ret ai ned. Thus, t he ki nder gart en st udent s who are consi dered for ret enti on will
li kel y i mpr ove i n t he skills t hey need t o be successful learners and have t he abilit y t o
gr ow i n t heir readi ng skills as t hey move t hr ough subsequent grade l evel s.
Screeni ng st udent s as t hey ent er ki nder gart en is import ant t o know t he
prerequi site skills t hey have as t hey ent er school. Bench mar ki ng t hese st udent s
t hroughout t he year is i mport ant i n monit ori ng t heir growt h and adj usti ng instructi on as
t hey att ai n skills and can wor k t owar ds ne w skills. It is necessar y t o do additi onal
screeni ng i n multi pl e areas for st udent s who are not gr owi ng i n t heir readi ng skills duri ng
t he school year. Det er mi ni ng why t hey are not achi evi ng is essenti al t o underst and how
we can hel p t he ki nder garten st udent be successful i n ki nder gart en t he first ti me. Initial
screeni ngs need t o i ncl ude acade mi c i nfor mati on, al ong wit h behavi oral data and
i nfor mati on from parent s regar di ng medi cal concerns, soci al/ e moti onal concer ns, and
trauma t hat has occurred pri or t o ent eri ng ki nder gart en. As pri or literat ure has addressed,
acade mi c success can be affect ed by non-cogniti ve fact ors. The school st aff needs t o be

KI NDERGARTEN RETENTI ON

91

a war e of what ot her concer ns may i nhi bit t he chil d' s learni ng, monit or pr ogress, and wor k
wi t h parent s earl y t o hel p t he m support t heir chil dren so t hat t hey can be successful i n
ki nder gart en and t hr oughout t heir additi onal years i n school.
Appl yi ng pri or research to support at-risk ki nder gart en st udent s and ki ndergart en
teachers will be necessary t o reduce t he nu mber of ret enti ons i n t he school di strict. It is
i mport ant t hat t he district has a hi gh functi oni ng syst e mi n pl ace t hat supports hi gh
perfor mance t eachers and t eachi ng, hi gh qualit y ali gned i nstructi onal syst ems, and hi gh
qualit y or gani zati on and ma nage ment ( About NI SL, 2019). Co mponent s of a hi gh
functi oni ng syst e mi ncl udi ng sust ai ni ng and educati ng t eachers, ali gned curri cul um, and
strong l eadershi p need t o wor k har moni ousl y t o support st udent learni ng. Screeni ng
st udent s t o i dentify risk fact ors is necessar y t o make an i nfor med deci si on on supports
t hat will be put i nt o pl ace for t hese st udent s. These supports need t o be based i n best
practi ce. Maki ng sure syst e ms are functi oni ng t oget her hel ps i ncrease st udent
achi eve ment and creat es hi gh perfor mance school s ( About NI SL, 2019). Identifyi ng
st udent needs as t hey enter ki nder gart en and having opti ons i n pl ace t o address acade mi c,
soci al-e moti onal, and behavi oral concer ns is necessar y t o support acade mi c success and
reduce t he nu mber of ki nder gart en ret enti ons i n t he district.
Thi s st udy supports addressi ng readi ng skill defi cits will reduce t he nu mber of
ki nder gart en ret enti ons in t he district. De mogr aphi c dat a needs t o be l ooked at due t o
most of t he st udent s who were ret ai ned i dentifi ed as econo mi call y disadvant aged and
t urned fi ve Mar ch 1st or lat er pri or t o t he st art of ki nder gart en. Screeni ng st udent s
effecti vel y will target st udent needs and reduce t he nu mber for ki nder gart en ret enti ons i n
t he school district. The st udy is support ed i n t hese areas t hrough pri or research si nce

KI NDERGARTEN RETENTI ON

92

readi ng is oft en a fact or in ki nder gart en ret enti on. A maj or reason st udent s are ret ai ned
i n ki nder gart en is readi ng ( Dwyer and Rul e, 1997). St udent s who i dentify as
econo mi call y disadvant aged are ret ai ned mor e frequentl y i n t his st udy. St udent s from
hi gh i nco me fa mili es are mor e li kel y t o be ready for ki nder gart en accor di ng t o t he pri or
research (Justi ce et al., 2017). Ki nder gart en t eachers oft en st at e mat urit y as a fact or i n
t heir decisi on t o ret ai n student s and t his was also a fact or i n t his st udy. Prior research
st at es t hat a st udent’s age at ki nder gart en has a measurabl e effect on literacy and
language arts achi eve ment earl y i n t heir schooli ng, but t hose disappear by t he ti me t hey
reach t he ei ght h grade. Thi s st udy supports screeni ngs t o be used t o i dentify st udent s
who are at risk. Mendez et al. (2015), stat es screeni ng met hods t o i dentify at-risk
st udent s earl y, hel ps st udent success i n ki nder garten. Theref ore, t he fi ndi ngs rel at ed t o
why st udent s are bei ng retai ned i n ki nder gart en as t hey rel at e t o t his st udy ali gn wit h t he
pri or research as st at ed i n t he literat ure revi e w. Usi ng screeni ngs t o i dentify at-risk
st udent s will result i n t he reducti on of t he nu mber of ki nder gart en ret enti ons i n t he
di strict if supports are put i nt o pl ace for t hese st udent s.
Thi s st udy pr ovi ded i nformati on on t he criteri a t hat teachers i n t he school district
use t o det er mi ne if a st udent will be ret ai ned i n kinder gart en. Teachers noted criteri a
used, specifi call y readi ng achi eve ment and mat urity, i n det er mi ni ng if a st udent shoul d be
consi dered for ret enti on in ki nder gart en. The st udy pi npoi nt ed de mogr aphics t hat were
co mmon a mong st udent s who were ret ai ned i n ki nder gart en. St udent s were oft en
i dentified as econo mi cally disadvant aged. St udents also had birt hdays where t hey t urned
fi ve pri or t o ki nder gart en on Mar ch 1st or lat er. Pri or literat ure st at ed t hat screeni ng
st udent s earl y and pr ovi di ng supports i n defi cit areas will hel p support st udent s t o be

KI NDERGARTEN RETENTI ON

93

successful i n ki nder gart en. Theref ore, t he t eacher criteri a used t o det er mi ne ki nder gart en
st udent s who are consi dered for ki nder gart en ret enti on, al ong wit h co mmon
de mogr aphi cs, can hel p focus t he screeni ng t hat will be most benefi ci al for t he district t o
use t o i dentify st udent s in need of additi onal supports and t o reduce t he number of
ret enti ons t hat t he district has at t he ki nder gart en level.
Thi s st udy was co mpl et ed duri ng t he 2019- 20 school year. Duri ng t he 2019- 20
school year t he COVI D- 19 virus occurred and i nstructi on was deli vered onli ne for t he
re mai nder of t he school year aft er March 13, 2020. The st udy itself was unaffect ed si nce
t he i nfor mati on gat hered was fromt he ki nder gart en st udent s duri ng t he 2018- 19 school
year and t hese st udent s had been ret ai ned at t he end of t he 2018- 19 school year. All
teacher sur veys were compl et ed pri or t o t he i mpact of COVI D- 19 duri ng the 2019- 20
school year. If ret enti on dat a were t o be coll ect ed duri ng t he 2019- 20 school year, it most
li kel y woul d be si gnifi cantl y different i n t he results due t o t he COVI D- 19 pande mi c.
In det er mi ni ng t he criteria t hat teachers are usi ng for consi deri ng a st udent for
ki nder gart en ret enti on, target ed supports will be put i nt o pl ace t o support teachers,
st udent s and parent s. Kno wi ng t eachers focus on readi ng as a si gnifi cant fact or i n
det er mi ni ng a st udent for ki nder gart en ret enti on, it is i mport ant t o ensure t hat all teachers
are gi ven pr ofessi onal devel op ment i n t he best practi ces t hey shoul d be using i n teachi ng
readi ng t o t heir ki nder garten st udent s. Teachers need t o also have pr ofessional
devel op ment i n ways t o support struggli ng readers at t he ki nder gart en l evel and t hose t hat
co me i n wit h fe wer prerequi sit e skills. Teachers need t o have pr ofessi onal devel op ment
and l ear n best practi ces so t hey can differenti at e for t he di verse lear ners t hat ent er
ki nder gart en i n t he school district. Teachers need pr ofessi onal devel op ment i n

KI NDERGARTEN RETENTI ON

94

supporti ng st udent s who are struggli ng readers across t he curri cul um. Appl yi ng best
practi ces acr oss t he curricul umt o support st udent readi ng and differenti ati ng for st udent
skill defi cits i n all subj ects will provi de opport unity for st udent s t o devel op t heir readi ng
skills at a qui cker pace and reach grade l evel expect ati ons mor e rapi dl y.
Ki nder gart en st udent s wi ll be screened when regi steri ng t o det er mi ne skill level s
i n readi ng. Thi s screeni ng will det er mi ne who is behi nd at t he st art of ki ndergart en and
what prerequi site skills they do not have as t hey ent er t he ki nder gart en cl assroo m. The
screeni ng needs t o gi ve specifi c i nfor mati on on vari ous skills t he st udent s have pri or t o
st arti ng ki nder gart en. The results will be t hor oughl y l ooked and a pl an put int o pl ace t o
support t he defi cit areas these st udent s have as t hey ent er ki nder gart en. These supports
wi ll address t he st udent s’ defi cits directl y, and also pr ovi de best practi ces to t eachers so
t hey can t each t he concept s wit h fi delit y. Parent s need t o t hor oughl y underst and t he
results and what skills t heir chil dren need t o develop t o be successful at t he ki nder gart en
level. St udent s will be bench mar ked t hr oughout the year so adj ust ment s can be made t o
t heir i nstructi on. St udents who need i nt ense support will be i dentified. Title I teachers,
or ot her teachers i dentified t o pr ovi de support, wi ll monit or t hese st udent s conti nuousl y
and will adj ust i nstructi on conti nuousl y until st udent s are abl e t o bench mark wit h grade
level appr opri at e skills. Cl assroo mt eachers will differenti at e i n all cont ent t o support
gr owt h i n readi ng for t he st udent s who are i dentified as struggli ng i n readi ng. Honi ng
st udent readi ng skills across t he curri cul um will give st udent s mor e skills t o reach grade
level expect ati ons mor e qui ckl y. Teachers need pr ofessi onal devel op ment t o underst and
skills t hat are cross curri cul ar t hat will provi de an opport unit y for t he st udent s t o
i mpr ove.

KI NDERGARTEN RETENTI ON

95

De mogr aphi cs of i nco mi ng st udent s will be considered i n additi on t o t he
screeni ng t ool. St udent s who score l ower on t he screeni ng t ool and have de mogr aphi c
fact ors t hat are common a mong ret ai ned st udent s, wi ll be i mmedi at el y monit ored mor e
cl osel y si nce multi pl e fact ors put t he m at risk for ki nder gart en ret enti on. Title I teachers,
or teachers i dentified t o provi de support, will target t hese st udent s. These t eachers
pr ovi di ng support will do a di agnosti c t o underst and skills t hat need t o be devel oped.
Teachers pr ovi di ng support will gi ve t his i nfor mati on t o t he cl assroo mt eachers.
Teachers will cont act t he parent s of t he st udent and pr ovi de support t o t he parent s t o
gui de t he mi n hel pi ng t heir chil dren wit h t he skills t hey need t o be successful i n
ki nder gart en. Teachers provi di ng support and ki nder gart en t eachers will wor k wit h t he
parent s on a regul arl y schedul ed basis t o pl an for conti nued t arget ed support for t he
st udent t o be successful in ki nder gart en.
Due t o t he COVI D- 19 pande mi c, alterati ons t o t he pl an may be necessar y.
Ki nder gart en regi strati on for t his year was co mpl eted pri or t o t he cl osures of school s.
Most st udent s ent eri ng kinder gart en regi st ered at that ti me. Initial screeni ngs were done
usi ng t he avail abl e screeni ng t ool for most of t he st udent s who will be ent eri ng
ki nder gart en. There are st udent s who si gned a wai ver t o st art ki nder gart en earl y and
st udent s who regist ered for ki nder gart en aft er t he initi al ki nder gart en registrati on dat e.
Devel op ment of a virt ual screeni ng and one t hat can be done usi ng soci al dist anci ng will
need t o be put i n pl ace due t o t he occurrence of COVI D- 19. Ho w t he screeni ng will be
ad mi ni st ered, will depend on t he sti pul ati ons pr ovi ded by t he Pennsyl vani a Depart ment
of Educati on ( PDE) and the Cent er for Di sease Control ( CDC) on how l earni ng will l ook
as we pr oceed i nt o t he 2020- 21 school year. When pl anni ng for t he fut ure based on t he

KI NDERGARTEN RETENTI ON

96

results of t his st udy and the possi bl e ra mi fi cati ons of COVI D- 19, t he screeni ng will be
si gnifi cant t o have co mpl et ed pri or t o t he begi nni ng of school especi all y if we ret ur n t o
school usi ng a virt ual learni ng or hybri d model.
Al so, when consi deri ng planni ng for a t ool t o bench mar k st udent s wit h t he
pot enti al for onli ne l earning due t o t he pande mi c, the district will need t o be devel op a
way t o monit or progress of target ed st udent s t hroughout t he school year. The t ool will
need t o be ad mi ni st ered based on healt h and safety gui deli nes required by the PDE.
Duri ng t he 2018- 19 school year, fort y-t wo st udents were ret ai ned i n ki ndergart en.
On average i n t he district a regul ar educati on st udent costs appr oxi mat el y $10, 844. 64 t o
educat e each year. Aspeci al educati on st udent i n t he district costs appr oximat el y
$23, 801. 18 t o educat e. Twent y of t he fort y-t wo student s ret ai ned i n ki ndergart en duri ng
t he 2018- 19 school year had been desi gnat ed special educati on. Twent y-two regul ar
educati on st udent s bei ng ret ai ned costs t he district appr oxi mat el y $238, 582. 08 for an
extra year of educati on. Twent y speci al educati on st udent s cost t he district
appr oxi mat el y $476, 023. 60. Thi s is a t ot al cost of appr oxi mat el y $714, 605. 68 t o have
t hese fort y- t wo st udent s ret ai ned i n ki nder gart en and educat ed for an additi onal year. A
large nu mber of ret enti ons occurri ng each year has a si gnifi cant i mpact on the district
fi nanci all y over ti me. Abett er use of t he money woul d be t o put more screeni ng i n pl ace,
additi onal supports for student s and fa mili es, and pr ofessi onal devel op ment for teachers.
Pr ofessi onal devel op ment for t his st udy will need t o focus on t he effects of ret enti on,
econo mi call y disadvant aged st udent s, supporti ng struggli ng readers, and t he devel op ment
of chil dren by age over time.

97

KI NDERGARTEN RETENTI ON
Reduci ng ret enti ons by fift y percent woul d save t he district appr oxi mat el y

$357, 302. 84. Over t he course of ten years t hat woul d be $3, 573, 028. 40. Thi s a mount is
based on half t he t ot al amount st at ed above of $714, 605. 68 for t he 2018- 19 st udent
de mogr aphi cs of t hose retai ned and t he costs at t his ti me on average t o ret ain a regul ar
educati on st udent or a speci al educati on st udent. Additi onal costs on average will
i ncrease each year based on t he i ncrease of t he general cost of servi ces. If t he district
i nvests i n reduci ng t he nu mber of ki nder gart en retenti ons based on t his st udy, t he l ongter m savi ngs i mpli cati ons woul d be si gnifi cant.
Reco mme ndati ons
Based on t his st udy and pri or research, t he foll owi ng reco mmendati ons will
reduce t he nu mber of ki nder gart en ret enti ons i n t he school district. First, student s who
i dentify as econo mi call y di sadvant aged need t o be i dentified upon regi stration. St udent s
wi t h birt hdat es Mar ch 1st or lat er also need t o be identified upon regi strati on.

These

gr oups of st udent s need to be monit ored cl osel y.
Screeni ngs i n earl y reading skills need t o be gi ven at t he ti me of regi strati on. Thi s
needs t o i ncl ude l anguage and literacy screeni ng. Al so screeni ng for appr oaches t o
learni ng t hr ough pl ay. Student s need t o be screened not onl y t o underst and wher e t hey
have skill defi cits, but also ways i n whi ch t hey have already devel oped t o appr oach
learni ng ne w t hi ngs. These screeni ngs need t o not onl y be gi ven, but t he results need t o
be exa mi ned wit h fi delity and a pl an for each st udent for mall y written.
Bench mar ki ng i n DI BELS needs t o be done regularl y t hr oughout t he school year.
St udent s who are not maki ng pr ogress need t o be support ed t o i mpr ove i n their readi ng

KI NDERGARTEN RETENTI ON

98

skill defi cits. A di agnostic test can be gi ven t o st udent s who are not scori ng at grade
level on t he bench mar k to hel p i dentify t he skills that need wor k.
Pr ofessi onal devel op ment need t o occur for teachers t o hel p support st udent
success i n ki nder gart en. Teachers need t o be trai ned i n i nt erpreti ng benchmar ki ng dat a
and underst andi ng st udent acade mi c gr owt h. Teachers need t o lear n multi ple ways of
supporti ng st udent s i n readi ng. The met hods need t o be based on t he i nformati on on
what chil dren are bei ng ret ai ned and what defi cits or skills st udent s have when t hey are
ent eri ng ki nder gart en. Teachers need trai ned on underst andi ng t he effects of povert y on
st udent lear ni ng. Teachers need t o be trai ned on the effects of povert y on the abilit y of
t he parent s t o support t he chil dren i n t he ho me. Professi onal devel op ment on t he effects
of ret enti on also needs t o occur.
What Coul d Have Been Done Di fferentl y i n t he St udy
Readi ng skills defi cits t hat were co mmon wit h t he st udent s ret ai ned i n
ki nder gart en coul d have been l ooked at mor e cl osel y. The l engt h of ti me the t eachers
have been t eachi ng and the l engt h of ti me t hey have been t eachi ng at t he kinder gart en
level is also somet hi ng t hat coul d have been researched. Previ ous t opi cs for professi onal
devel op ment for t he ki nder gart en t eachers and whet her t hat professi onal devel op ment
i mpact s ret enti on based on pri or literat ure and i mple ment ed wit h fi delit y coul d have been
exa mi ned. Al so a parent sur vey on parent perspecti ve as t o why t hey agreed t o ret enti on
for t heir chil d i n ki nder gart en coul d have been conduct ed.
Fut ure Di recti ons for Research
A screeni ng t ool will be put i nt o pl ace t hat specificall y focuses on criteri a the
ki nder gart en t eachers use t o det er mi ne if a st udent shoul d be ret ai ned i n ki nder gart en.

KI NDERGARTEN RETENTI ON

99

Specifi call y, readi ng skills and mat urit y were det er mi ned t o be si gnifi cant fact ors t he
teachers i n t he distri ct used t o det er mi ne if a st udent woul d be ret ai ned i n ki nder gart en.
A t hor ough i nvesti gati on needs t o be done t o det ermi ne what prerequi site skills i nco mi ng
st udent s have i n readi ng and how t he st udent s are currentl y support ed when t hey do not
have t he prerequi site skills. A det er mi nati on will be made on how t o support t hese
st udent s consist entl y. Professi onal devel op ment on t eachi ng t hese skills wi t h fi delit y will
al so occur. Bench mar ki ng and frequent monit ori ng of st udent pr ogress will be done and
adj ust ment s made as st udent s attai n t he skills.
St udent de mographi cs wi ll be l ooked at upon regi strati on t o see fact ors t hat wi ll
put t he m at a great er risk for ki nder gart en ret enti on. St udent s who will t urn fi ve Mar ch
1st or lat er pri or t o t he start of ki nder gart en will have an i ncreased li keli hood of bei ng
ret ai ned i n ki nder gart en accor di ng t o t he results of t he st udy. St udent s who i dentify as
econo mi call y disadvant aged will also have an i ncreased li keli hood of bei ng ret ai ned i n
ki nder gart en. Pr ovi di ng t hese st udent s additi onal supports i n t he cl assroo m will be
necessar y t o ensure t hey are successful i n ki nder gart en. Wor ki ng wit h t he parent s of
t hese st udent s will be done t o pr ovi de t he parent s t he skills t o support t heir chil d so t hat
t hey can be successf ul i n ki nder gart en. Gi vi ng t eachers pr ofessi onal devel op ment on
chil d devel op ment and on best practi ces for i nstructi on for young st udent s, wi ll hel p
teachers t o bett er support t he lear ni ng st yl es of t heir st udent s and will reduce t he nu mber
of ki nder gart en ret enti ons i n t he district.
The i mpact of COVI D- 19 has shown t hat it is i mperati ve t o pr ovi de parent s wit h
t he skills t hey need t o support t heir chil dren t o be successful. As st udent s ent er t he
ki nder gart en setti ng, basic t echnol ogy skills, such as navi gati ng a Lear ni ng Ma nage ment

KI NDERGARTEN RETENTI ON

100

Syst e m and usi ng co mputer technol ogy, will be necessar y. It is necessar y to buil d strong
li nes of communi cati on bet ween ho me and school. Parent s need t o be educat ed on
techni ques t o support st udent s wit h t heir ho me work. In case of additi onal need t o
pr ovi de educati on onli ne, parent s will need pr ovi ded avenues t o get support so t heir chil d
can l ear n t he mat eri al as t hey woul d i n a bri ck and mort ar cl assroo m.
There are several t opi cs that need cl oser exa mi nation and may generat e a new
round of research questi ons. The grades for t hese st udent s were based i n ELA. Teachers
felt readi ng achi eve ment was a “hi ghl y si gnifi cant” criteri a used t o det er mi ne if a st udent
shoul d be ret ai ned i n t he ki nder gart en. Si nce t he ELA grade enco mpasses a br oader
cat egor y of i nfor mati on, are t here co mmon skills that t hese st udent s are struggli ng wit h
t hat can be addressed t o hel p support t heir success i n t he ki nder gart en setting and gi ve
t he mt he skills t o be pr omot ed t o grade one? In additi on, mat urit y was a criteri on t hat
teachers used t o deci de if a st udent was a candi date for ki nder gart en ret ention. Many of
t he st udent s had t heir fifth birt hday on or aft er March 1st bef ore t hey st art ed ki nder gart en.
A cl oser exa mi nati on woul d be hel pf ul t o l ook at specifi c skills lacki ng i n mat urit y as
det er mi ned by t he teachers and t he general devel op ment of chil dren at t hat age. What
additi onal professi onal devel op ment can be used to devel op skills for teachers t o support
t hese st udent s? Ho w does age at ki nder gart en correl at e t o t he skills t hat are taught i n
readi ng? Ho w does t he age at ki nder gart en correlat e t o how t he readi ng skills are t aught
by t he teacher? A deeper l ook at readi ng skills and t eacher i nstructi on for st udent s i n
ki nder gart en woul d be hel pful t o underst and if t he i nstructi on is appr opri at e for t he
mat urit y level of t he st udent s.
Su mmary/ Concl udi ng state ment

KI NDERGARTEN RETENTI ON

101

The criteri a teachers use t o det er mi ne if a st udent is a candi dat e for ret enti on is
i mport ant t o underst and. Thi s i nfor mati on can help focus support for st udent s, fa mili es
and st aff i n areas t hat teachers feel are i mport ant when det er mi ni ng if a st udent is a
candi dat e for ret enti on. In t his st udy, readi ng achieve ment and mat urit y were areas
teachers felt were “hi ghly si gnifi cant ” when det ermi ni ng if a st udent was a candi dat e for
ki nder gart en ret enti on. Accor di ng t o Dwyer & Rul e (1997), a maj or reason st udent s are
hel d i n ki nder gart en is diffi cult y i n readi ng. Ast udent’s age i n ki nder gart en has a
measurabl e effect on literacy and l anguage arts achi eve ment earl y i n school, but t hese
differences disappear by t he ti me t hey reach ei ghth grade ( Perry, 2010). Student s i n t he
di strict who were ret ai ned had l ower scores i n readi ng. Al so t hirt y-t wo out of t he fort yt wo had birt hdays where t hey t urned fi ve Mar ch 1st or lat er, pri or t o ent ering
ki nder gart en. Theref ore, it is i mport ant t o understand who t he younger st udent s are i n t he
ki nder gart en. It is necessar y t o screen st udent s for skills needed t o be ready t o read i n
ki nder gart en and t o moni t or t hese st udent s t hroughout t he school year and offer support
for t he skills wit h whi ch t hey are struggli ng. Offeri ng pr ofessi onal devel opme nt for
teachers t o bett er support st udent s i n readi ng is necessar y. Pr ofessi onal devel op ment also
needs t o be offered i n better supporti ng younger student s and how t hey l earn so t hat t hey
can be successful i n ki nder gart en. Teachers need t o underst and t hat mat urit y fact ors
based on birt hdat e will fade as st udent s age and conti nue t hrough school. Theref ore, t he
negati ve effects of ret ention are not necessar y for st udent s t o endure if t hey can cat ch up
as t hey conti nue t hrough school. Teachers need t o underst and t he l ong t er m effects of
ret enti on and also t he devel op ment of st udent s over ti me.

KI NDERGARTEN RETENTI ON

102

Screeni ng st udent s earl y for skill defi cits i n readi ng will hel p t o focus support t o
t hese st udent s i n t heir areas of need. Underst andi ng t he de mogr aphi cs of student s who
have a great er risk for bei ng a candi dat e for ret enti on can also pr ovi de an opport unit y t o
predi ct who may be a candi dat e for ki nder gart en ret enti on and who may need t o be
monit ored t o ensure t hey are maki ng pr ogress t hrough t he ki nder gart en year. Screeni ng
st udent s i n acade mi cs as well as behavi oral and demogr aphi c fact ors will hel p det er mi ne
st udent s who have defi cits. It will gi ve focus t o student s who are l acki ng skills i n t hese
areas. Screeni ng st udents will provi de a baseli ne for t hose t hat may need extra support t o
be successf ul duri ng t heir ki nder gart en year and theref ore reduce t he nu mber of
ki nder gart en ret enti on i n t he school district. Thi s in t ur n will save money for t he district.
It will also reduce t he li keli hood of t he negati ve effects t hat ret enti on can cause for
st udent s bot h now and i n t he l ong t er m.
Ki nder gart en ret enti on has negati ve effects for st udent s. Underst andi ng who is
bei ng ret ai ned i n t he district is necessar y so supports can be put i n pl ace t o hel p t hese
st udent s i n t heir areas of concer n. In t his district, st udent s are hel d oft en due t o readi ng
achi eve ment and mat urity. Pr ofessi onal devel opme nt needs t o be focused for st aff. Thi s
pr ofessi onal devel op ment needs t o pr ovi de st aff t he kno wl edge of t he effects ret enti on
has on st udent s. The pr ofessi onal devel op ment needs t o support st aff underst andi ng of
st udent devel op ment over t he course of t heir ti me i n school. The pr ofessi onal
devel op ment also needs to gi ve t he t eachers skills t o i nstruct st udent s at t heir level of
mat urit y i n ways t hat are age appr opri at e. Screening st udent s earl y on for skill defi cits is
al so i mport ant t o target student s who may need additi onal readi ng support to be
successful i n ki nder gart en. All of t hese t echni ques will hel p reduce t he number of

KI NDERGARTEN RETENTI ON
ret enti ons i n ki nder gart en and pr ovi de bett er overall out co mes for t he st udent s i n t he
di strict.

103

104

KI NDERGARTEN RETENTI ON

Ref erences
A Nati on At Ri sk. (1983). Retri eved from htt ps://www2. ed. gov/ pubs/ Nat At Ri sk/risk. ht ml

Aa t o Zz. (2019). Ho w t o regist er my chil d for ki nder gart en i n PA. Retri eved from
htt ps:// www. aat ozz. co m/ regist er-chil d-ki nder gart en- pa/

About NI SL. (2019, Januar y 17). NI SL. Retri eved from htt p:// www. ni sl. org/ our-visi on/

Accel erati on Instit ut e. (n.d. ) St at e poli ci es i n Pennsyl vani a. Retri eved from
htt p:// www. accel erati oninstit ut e. or g/ Resources/ Poli cy/ By_St at e/ Show_Policy. asp
x?St at eI D=45
Acker man, D., & Bar nett, S. (2005). Prepared for ki nder gart en: What does "readi ness"
mean? NI EER. Retri eved from htt p:// ni eer. or g/ wpcont ent/ upl oads/ 2017/ 02/report 5. pdf

Act 16 of 2019. (2019). PSBA. Retri eved from https:// www. psba. or g/

Al l an, M. (2008). Qualitati ve st udy of ki ndergarten school readi ness and personal and
soci al devel opment ( Doctoral dissert ati on, Virgi nia Pol yt echni c Instit ut e and St at e
Uni versit y). Retri eved fro m

KI NDERGARTEN RETENTI ON

105

htt ps:// vt echwor ks.li b. vt.edu/ bitstrea m/ handl e/ 10919/ 28985/ MAl l anETD. pdf?sequence=
1
Ansari, A. (2018). The persist ence of preschool effects from earl y chil dhood t hr ough
adol escence. Journal of Educati onal Psychol ogy, 110( 7), 952–973.
htt ps:// doi. org/ 10. 1037/ edu0000255

Anast asi ou, A. I., Papachrist ou, E. M., & Di aki doy, I.- A. N. (2017). Parents’ and
teachers’ vi e ws on t he psychosoci al adj ust ment of st udent s wit h and wit hout a
hi st or y of earl y grade retenti on. Educati onal Psychol ogy i n Practi ce, 33( 3), 294–
307.
htt p:// dx. doi. org/ 10. 1080/ 02667363. 2017. 1306490

Baader, M. S. (2004). Froebel and t he rise of educati onal t heor y i n t he Uni ted St at es.
St udi es i n Phil osophy and Educati on, 23( 5), 427–444.
htt p:// dx. doi. org/ 10. 1007/s11217- 004- 4453- 0

Bar nu m, M. (2019, January 24). Ki nder gart en is getti ng mor e acade mi c - and t he ki ds are
all ri ght. Chal kbeat. Retrieved from
htt ps:// www. chal kbeat. org/ posts/ us/ 2019/ 01/ 24/ advanced-acade mi c-cont entki nder gart en-st udy/

Ber gi n, D. A., Osbur n, V. L., & Cr yan, J. R. (1996). Infl uence of chil d i ndependence,
gender, and birt hdat e on ki nder gart en t eachers’ reco mmendati ons for ret enti on.

KI NDERGARTEN RETENTI ON

106

Journal of Research i n Chil dhood Educati on, 10, 152–159.
htt ps:// doi. org/ 10. 1080/ 02568549609594898

Bett encourt, A. F., Gr oss, D., Ho, G., & Perri n, N. (2018). The costl y consequences of
not bei ng soci all y and behavi orall y ready t o l earn by ki nder gart en i n Baltimor e
cit y. Journal of Urban Healt h: Bull eti n of t he New York Acade my of Medi ci ne,
95( 1), 36–50. htt ps:// doi.or g/ 10. 1007/ s11524- 017-0214- 6

Cannon, J., & Li psco mb, S. (n. d). Earl y grade ret enti on and st udent success. Publi c
Poli cy Instit ut e of Calif orni a. Ppi c. org. Retri eved from
htt ps:// www. ppi c. or g/ content/ pubs/report/ R_311JCR. pdf

Cheng, J. (2013). The effect of ki nder gart en pri ncipal s’ leadershi p behavi ors on t eacher
wor k perfor mance. Soci al Behavi or & Personality: An Int ernati onal Journal,
41( 2), 251–262. htt ps:// doi. or g/ 10. 2224/ sbp. 2013. 41. 2. 251

Cl aessens, A., & Engel, M. ( 2013). Ho w i mport ant is where you st art ? Earl y mat he mati cs
kno wl edge and l at er school success. Teachers College Record. Retri eved fro m
htt ps:// www. t crecor d. or g/ Cont ent. asp? Cont entId=16980

Cos den, M., & Zi mmer, J. (1991). Age of entry, hol di ng out and ki nder garten ret enti on:
differences as a functi on of gender and et hni cit y. Retri eved from
htt ps://eri c. ed. gov/ ?i d=ED338340

KI NDERGARTEN RETENTI ON

107

Cr abtree, Rohr baugh, and Associ at es (2011). Updat ed distri ct wi de f easi bility st udy:
Connellsville Area School Di stri ct. Connellsville, PA.

Denha m, S. A., Bassett, H. H., Zi nsser, K., & Wyatt, T. M. (2014). Ho w preschool ers’
soci al-e moti onal learni ng predi cts t heir earl y school success: Devel opi ng theor ypr o moti ng, compet ency-based assess ment s. Inf ant & Chil d Devel opment, 23( 4),
426–454. htt ps:// doi. org/10. 1002/i cd. 1840

Dong, N. (2009). The effects of head st art on children' s ki nder gart en ret enti on, readi ng
and mat h achi eve ment i n fall ki nder gart en an applicati on of pr opensit y score
met hod and sensiti vit y anal ysis. Retri eved from
htt ps://files. eri c. ed. gov/fullt ext/ ED514946. pdf

Dong, Y. (2010). Kept back t o get ahead? Ki ndergart en ret enti on and acade mi c
perfor mance. European Econo mi c Revi ew, 54( 2), 219–236. doi:
10. 1016/j. eur oecorev. 2009. 06. 004

Dwyer, J. E., & Rul e, D. L. (1997). The effects of a ki nder gart en preventi on pr ogra m on
speci al educati on referrals, cl assifi cati ons and ret enti ons. Retri eved from
htt ps://files. eri c. ed. gov/fullt ext/ ED406806. pdf

KI NDERGARTEN RETENTI ON

108

Fit zgeral d, L. (2015). Consequences of Hi gh- St ake Testi ng ( Mast er’s t hesis, St. John
Fi sher Coll ege). Retri eved
from htt ps://fisher pub. sjfc. edu/ educati on_ETD_ mast ers/ 306/

Gali ni, R., & Penderi, E. (2010, Sept e mber 30). Acoll aborati ve acti on research pr oj ect i n
t he ki nder gart en: Perspecti ves and chall enges for teacher devel op ment t hr ough
i nt ernal eval uati on pr ocesses. Ne w Hori zons, 58( 2), 18- 33. Retri eved from
htt ps://eri c. ed. gov/ ?i d=EJ966648

Gol dst ei n, J., East wood, M. , & Behuni ak, P. (2014). Can t eacher rati ngs of st udent s’
skills at ki nder gart en entry predi ct ki nder gart en retenti on? Journal of Educati onal
Research, 107( 3), 217–229. htt ps:// doi. org/ 10. 1080/ 00220671. 2013. 788986

Hatti e, J. (1999). Infl uences on St udent Learni ng. (Inaugural lect ure: Pr ofessor of
educati on, Uni versit y of Aukl and, Ne w Zeal and). Retri eved from
htt ps://cdn. auckl and. ac. nz/ assets/ educati on/ about/research/ docu ment s/i nfl uenceson-st udent-l ear ni ng. pdf

Hatti e, J. (2009). Visi bl e learni ng: A synt hesis of over 800 met a- anal yses rel ati ng t o
achi eve ment. London, Engl and: Routl edge.

KI NDERGARTEN RETENTI ON

109

Har vey, H., & Ohl e, K. (2018). What’s t he pur pose? Educat ors’ percepti ons and use of a
st at e- mandat ed ki nder garten entry assess ment. Educati on Poli cy Anal ysis
Archi ves, 26( 141/ 142), 1–25. htt ps:// doi. org/ 10. 14507/ epaa. 26. 3877

Hat cher, B., Nuner, J., & Paul sel, J. (2012). Ki ndergart en readi ness and preschool s:
Teachers’ and parent s’ beli efs wit hi n and acr oss progra ms. Earl y Chil dhood and
Research Practi ce, 14( 2). Retri eved fro m htt p://ecrp. ui uc. edu/ v14n2/ hat cher. ht ml

Hel sel, F., & Kr asnoff, B. (2015). Si x ways pri ncipal s can support t he transiti on t o
ki nder gart en. Retri eved from htt ps://educati onnorth west. or g/ nort hwestmatt ers/si x- ways- pri nci pal s-can-support-transiti on- ki nder gart en.

Hi noj osa, M. S., Hi noj osa, R., Bri ht, M., & Ngyuen, J. (2019). Adverse chil d
experi ences and grade retenti on i n a nati onal sa mple of US chil dren. Soci ologi cal
Inqui ry, 89( 3), 401- 426. htt ps:// doi. org/ 10. 1111/ soi n. 12272

Hong, G., & Yu, B. (2007). Earl y- grade ret enti on and chil dren’s readi ng and mat h
learni ng i n el e ment ar y years. Educati onal Eval uation and Poli cy Anal ysis, 29( 4),
239–261. htt ps:// doi. org/10. 3102/ 0162373707309073

Hong, G., & Raudenbush, S. W
. (2005). Effects of ki nder gart en ret enti on poli cy on
chil dren’s cogniti ve gr owt h i n readi ng and mat hemati cs. Educati onal Evaluati on

KI NDERGARTEN RETENTI ON

110

and Poli cy Anal ysis, 27(3), 205–224.
htt ps:// doi. org/ 10. 3102/ 01623737027003205

Hong, G., & Yu, B. (2008). Effects of ki nder gart en ret enti on on chil dren’s soci ale moti onal devel op ment: An appli cati on of propensit y score met hod t o
multi vari at e, multilevel dat a. Devel opment al Psychol ogy, 44( 2), 407–421.
htt ps:// doi. org/ 10. 1037/ 0012- 1649. 44. 2. 407

Hong, G., & Raudenbush, S. W
. (2006). Eval uati ng ki nder gart en ret enti on poli cy: A case
st udy of causal i nference for multilevel obser vati onal dat a. Journal of t he
Ameri can St atistical Associ ati on, 101( 475), 901-910.
htt ps:// doi. org/ 10. 1198/ 016214506000000447

Hughes, J. N., West, S. G. , Ki m, H., & Bauer, S. S. (2018). Effects of early grade
ret enti on on school co mpleti on: A pr ospecti ve st udy. Journal of Psychol ogy,
110( 7), 974- 991. htt ps://doi. or g/ 10. 1037/ edu0000243

Justi ce, L., Jiang, H., Khan, K., & Dyni a, J. (2017). Are rural Appal achi an chil dren from
l ow-i nco me househol ds ready for ki nder gart en? Journal of Appli ed
Devel opment al Psychol ogy, 50, 1- 14.
htt ps:// doi. org/ 10. 1016/j.appdev. 2017. 02. 004

KI NDERGARTEN RETENTI ON

111

Ker n, L., & Manz, P. (2004). Al ook at current vali dit y issues of school- wi de behavi or
support. Behavi oral Di sorders, 30( 1), 47- 59.
htt ps:// doi. org/ 10. 1177/ 0198742904030000102

Mal one, L., West, J., Fl anagan, K. D., & Par k, J. (2006). The earl y readi ng and
mat he mati cs achi eve ment of chil dren who repeat ed ki nder gart en or who began
school a year lat e. NCES. Retri eved from
htt ps://files. eri c. ed. gov/fullt ext/ ED491697. pdf

Me ador, D. (2019, Jul y 3). Controversi al Co mmo n Core, what you shoul d kno w bef ore
taki ng si des. Retri eved fro m htt ps:// www. t hought co. co m/ co mmon- core-st atest andar ds- 3194603

Me ndez, L. M. R., Ki m, E. S., Ferron, J., & Woods, B. (2015). Alt eri ng school
pr ogressi on t hr ough del ayed entry or ki nder gart en ret enti on: Pr opensit y score
anal ysis of l ong-t er m outco mes. The Journal of Educati onal Research, 108( 3),
186–203. htt ps:// doi. org/10. 1080/ 00220671. 2013. 867474

Mo ngeau, L. (2016, June 5). Co mmon Core st andar ds bri ng dra mati c changes t o
el e ment ar y school mat h. Retri eved from htt ps://edsource. or g/ 2014/ co mmon-corest andar ds- bri ng- dra mati c-changes-t o-el e ment ar y-school- mat h- 2/ 63665

KI NDERGARTEN RETENTI ON

112

Morris, L. R. (1997, May 1). A st udy of chil dren i n ki ndergart en, first, second, and t hird
grades at Roncevert e El ement ary and t he ext ent preschool has on ret enti on and
compensat ory educati on ( Mast er’s t hesis, Sal e m- Tei kyo Uni versit y). Retrieved
from htt ps://files. eri c. ed.gov/fulltext/ ED412019. pdf

Mo dest e, J. M. (2016). Effects of earl y chil dhood educati on on ki nder gart en readi ness
scores. Retri eved from htt ps://schol ar wor ks. wal denu. edu/ dissert ati ons/ 2414/

Mos er, S. E., West, S. G. , & Hughes, J. N. (2012). Traj ect ori es of mat h and readi ng
achi eve ment i n l ow- achievi ng chil dren i n el e ment ar y school: Effects of earl y and
lat er ret enti on i n grade. Journal of Educati onal Psychol ogy, 104( 3), 603–621.
htt ps:// doi. org/ 10. 1037/ a0027571

NAEYC. (n. d.). What does hi gh qualit y ki nder garten l ook li ke? Retri eved from
htt ps:// www. naeyc. or g/ our- wor k/fa mili es/ what-does- hi gh- qualit y-pr ogram- f orki nder gart en-l ook-li ke

Neuhart h- Pritchett, S. (2001). Reco mmendati ons for ki nder gart en ret enti on: Assessi ng
cl assroo m practi ces and their rel ati onshi p t o non- promoti on decisi ons. Retrieved
from htt ps://files. eri c. ed.gov/fulltext/ ED453909. pdf

KI NDERGARTEN RETENTI ON

113

NI SL. (2018). What hi gh-perfor mi ng districts l ook li ke. Retri eved
from htt p:// www. ni sl. org/creati ng- hi gh- perfor mance- di stricts/ what-a-hi ghperfor mi ng- di strict-l ooks-li ke/

Owens, J. S., St orer, J., Hol da way, A. S., Serrano, V. J., Wat abe, Y., Hi ma wan, L. K., …
Andr e ws, N. (2015). Screeni ng for soci al, e moti onal, and behavi oral proble ms at
ki nder gart en entry: Utility and i ncre ment al vali dity of parent report. School
Psychol ogy Revi ew, 44( 1), 21–40. doi: 10. 17105/ spr 44- 1. 21- 40

Par k, S., St ei ner, P. M., & Kapl an, D. (2018). Identificati on and sensiti vit y anal ysis for
average causal medi ati on effects wit h ti me- var yi ng treat ment s and medi at ors:
Investi gati ng t he underl yi ng mechani s ms of ki ndergart en ret enti on poli cy.
Psychomet ri ka, 83( 2), 298–320. doi: 10. 1007/ s11336- 018- 9606- 0

Peel, B. B. (1997). Research vs. practi ce: Ki nder gart en ret enti on and st udent readi ness
for first grade. Readi ng Impr ove ment, 34, 146–153. Retri eved fro m
htt ps:// www. pr oj ecti nnovati on. co m/ readi ng-i mprove ment. ht ml

Penna, A. A., & Tall eri co, M. (2005). Grade ret enti on and school compl eti on: Thr ough
st udent s' eyes. Journal of At- Ri sk Issues, 11( 1), 13-17. Retri eved from
htt ps://files. eri c. ed. gov/fullt ext/ EJ853377. pdf

KI NDERGARTEN RETENTI ON

114

Pennsyl vani a Depart ment of Educati on. (n. d.). Earl y Lear ni ng. Retri eved fro m
htt ps:// www. educati on. pa. gov/ Earl y %20Lear ni ng/ Pages/ default. aspx

Pennsyl vani a Depart ment of Healt h pr ogra ms, servi ces and healt h i nfor mat i on. (n. d.).
Retri eved fro m htt ps:// www. healt h. pa. gov/

Pennsyl vani a lear ni ng st andar ds for earl y chil dhood: Ki nder gart en. (2016). Pakeys. org
Retri eved fro m
htt ps://secureser vercdn. net/198. 71. 233. 197/ 69d. 231. myft pupl oad. co m/ wpcont ent/ upl oads/ 2018/ 03/ Ki nder gart enLear ni ng- St andar ds. pdf

Perr y, J. E. (2010). Age of ki ndergart en entrance and its rel ati onshi p t o early acade mi c
achi eve ment ( Doct oral dissert ati on, Phil adel phi a Coll ege of Ost eopat hi c
Me di ci ne). Retri eved from
htt ps:// di git al co mmons. pco m. edu/ cgi/ vi e wcont ent.cgi ?articl e=1114 &cont ext =psy
chol ogy_di ssert ati ons
Pr ochner, L. (2011). “Their little wooden bri cks”: A hi st or y of t he mat eri al cult ure of
ki nder gart en i n t he Unit ed St at es. Paedagogi ca Hi st ori ca 47( 3), 355- 375.
htt ps:// doi. org/ 10. 1080/ 00309230. 2010. 513688

PSEA. (2016). The Every St udent Succeeds Act: “ Hi ghl y qualifi ed t eacher”
require ment s. Retri eved from htt ps:// www. psea. org/ gl obal assets/forme mbers/ psea-advi sori es/advi sor y-essa- hi ghl yqualifiedt eacherreqs. pdf

KI NDERGARTEN RETENTI ON

115

Range, B. G., Holt, C. R. , Pij anows ki, J., & Young, S. (2012). The percepti ons of
pri mar y grade t eachers and el e ment ar y pri nci pals about t he effecti veness of grade
level ret enti on. Prof essi onal Educat or, 36( 1), 16. Retri eved from
htt ps://files. eri c. ed. gov/fullt ext/ EJ989520. pdf

Ray, K., & Smit h, M. C. (2010). The ki nder gart en chil d: What teachers and
ad mi ni strat ors need t o kno w t o pr omot e acade mi c success i n all chil dren. Earl y
Chil dhood Educati on Journal, 38( 1), 5–18. htt ps:// doi. or g/ 10. 1007/ s10643-0100383- 3

Ri char d, J. (2007). Ho w effecti ve pri nci pals encourage t heir teachers. Pri nci pal, 48- 50.
Retri eved fro m
htt ps:// www. naesp. or g/sites/ default/files/resources/ 2/ Pri nci pal/ 2007/ J- Fp48. pdf

Ri vera, P. (2019). Testi mony - Co mpul sor y school attendance age. Retri eved from
htt ps:// www. educati on. pa. gov/ about/ Pages/ Testimony6419. aspx

Robertson, D. L., & Reynol ds, A. J. (2010). Fa mi l y pr ofiles and educati onal att ai n ment.
Chil dren and Yout h Services Revi ew, 32( 8), 1077–1085.
htt ps:// doi. org/ 10. 1016/j.chil dyout h. 2009. 10. 021

KI NDERGARTEN RETENTI ON

116

Roos, D. (2019, August 13). Ho w t he col d war space race l ed t o U. S. st udent s doi ng t ons
of ho me wor k. Hi st ory. Retri eved from htt ps:// www. hi st or y. co m/ ne ws/ ho me wor kcol d- war-sput ni k

Scott, T. M., Gagnon, J. C. , & Nel son, C. M. (2008). School- wi de syst e ms of positi ve
behavi or support: Afra me wor k for reduci ng school cri me and vi ol ence. The
Journal of Behavi or Anal ysis of Off ender and Vi ctim Treat ment and
Preventi on, 1(3), 259–272. doi: 10. 1037/ h0100448

Shi n, I.-S., & Chung, J. Y. (2009). Cl ass si ze and st udent achi eve ment i n the Unit ed
St at es: A met a-anal ysis. KEDI Journal of Educational Poli cy, 6(2), 3–19.
Retri eved from htt p://eng. kedi.re. kr/

Wal l, C. A., Raffert y, L. A. , Ca mi zzi, M. A., Max, C. A., & Bl ar gan, D. M. (2016).
Acti on research of a col or-coded, onset-ri me decodi ng i nt erventi on: Exa mi ni ng
t he effects wit h first grade st udent s i dentified as at risk. Preventi ng School
Fail ure: Alt ernati ve Educati on f or Chil dren and Yout h, 60( 1), 1-9.
doi: 10. 1080/ 1045988x. 2014. 954513

Wer nke, J. (2017). Ki ndergart en t eachers’ perceptions of st udent readi ness for school
( Doct oral dissert ati on, East Tennessee St at e Uni versit y). Retri eved from
htt ps:// dc. etsu. edu/ cgi/ vie wcont ent. cgi ?articl e=4640 &cont ext =et d

KI NDERGARTEN RETENTI ON

117

We st, J. (1993). Readi ness f or ki ndergart en: Parent and t eacher beli efs. (pp. 2–10).
Wa s hi ngt on, DC: Nati onal Cent er for Educati on Statistics.
htt ps:// nces. ed. gov/ pubs93/web/ 93257. asp

Wi nsl er, A., Hut chi son, L. A., De Feyt er, J. J., Manfra, L., Bl ei ker, C., Hart man, S. C., &
Levitt, J. (2012). Chil d, fa mil y, and chil dcare predict ors of del ayed school entry
and ki nder gart en ret enti on a mong li ngui sticall y and et hni call y di verse chil dren.
Devel opment al Psychol ogy, 48( 5), 1299–1314. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1037/ a0026985

Woff or d, H. (2016). Ret enti on i n ki nder gart en: A case st udy of teacher percepti ons and
practi ces. The Journal f or Undergraduat e Et hnography, 6( 2), 56- 68.
htt ps:// doi. org/ 10. 15273/jue. v6i 2. 7067

118

KI NDERGARTEN RETENTI ON

Appendi x A
Dear Parti ci pant:
My na me i s Traci Kuhns and I a m a doct oral student at Calif orni a Uni versity of PA. For my fi nal
pr oj ect, I am det er mi ni ng how t o reduce ki ndergarten retenti on thr ough teacher and st udent
supports. Thi s pr oj ect has Calif orni a Uni versity of Pennsyl vani a I nstituti onal Revi e w Boar d
appr oval from 8/13/19 through 8/12/20. Because you are a ki ndergarten teacher i n the di stri ct,
I ami nvi ti ng you to parti ci pat e i n thi s research study by co mpl eti ng the attached survey. There
is mini mal to no ri sk i n partici pati ng. The f oll owi ng questi onnai re will requi re appr oxi mat el y 20
mi nut es to co mpl et e. There i s no co mpensati on f or respondi ng nor i s there any known ri sk. I n
or der to ensur e that all i nfor mati on will remai n confidenti al, pl ease do not i ncl ude your na me.
Copi es of the pr oj ect will be pr ovi ded to my Calif orni a Uni versity of PA i nstruct or and to the
Connell svill e Area School Distri ct central admi ni strati on. If you choose to parti ci pat e i n thi s
pr oj ect, pl ease ans wer all questi ons as honestl y as possi bl e and ret ur n the compl et ed
questi onnai res pr o mptl y . Parti ci pati on i s stri ctl y vol unt ary and you may ref use to parti ci pat e at
any ti me. Survey parti ci pation will be anony mous and resul ts will be kept confi denti al. Resul ts
wi ll be housed i n a secure locati on at West Crawf or d El ement ary. Thank you f or taki ng the ti me
to assi st me i n my educati onal endeavors. The data col l ected will provi de usef ul i nf or mati on
regar di ng ki ndergarten retenti on. If you woul d li ke a su mmar y copy of thi s study pl ease
co mpl et e the Request f or Inf or mati on For m and ret urn it to me i n a separat e envel ope.
Co mpl eti on and ret ur n of the questi onnai re will i ndi cate your willi ngness to partici pat e i n thi s

KI NDERGARTEN RETENTI ON

119

st udy. If you requi re addi tional i nf or mati on or have questi ons, pl ease cont act me at the nu mber
listed bel ow.
Si ncerel y,
Traci Kuhns
KUH8759 @cal u. edu
(I nstruct or’ s Na me and e mail - Dr. Kevi n Lor don, l ordoncal u. edu)

120

KI NDERGARTEN RETENTI ON

Appendi x B

August 14 2019 VOTI NG MEETI NG
hi de det ail s

Vi ew Mode

8/ 14/ 2019 [ 7: 00PM- 8: 00PM] @ Seni or Hi gh School Audi t ori um 201 Fal con Dri ve

•

Agenda:
August 14, 2019

Thi s Agenda bel ongs t o me mbers of t he Boar d Me mber s Gr oup and i s vi si bl e t o t he publi c.

Resear ch Sur vey Request
Request appr oval f or Ms. Tr aci Kuhns, pri nci pal , request s per mi ssi on t o compl et e a
r esear ch sur vey of school di stri ct st aff and access t he per sonall y i dentifi abl e i nf or mati on
of st udent s i n gr ades K- 1 i n t he Connell svill e Ar ea School Di stri ct as a r equirement of
t he Doct or al Capst one Pr oj ect f or t he Educati onal Ad mi ni str ati on and Leader shi p
Pr ogr a mt hr ough Calif orni a Uni ver sit y of Pennsyl vani a per Poli cy 235. 1. The st aff sur vey
i s vol unt ar y, anony mous, and does not eli cit per sonal i nf or mati on. The sur vey and dat a
co mpil ati on will compl y wi t h I nstit uti onal Revi ew Boar d (I RB) r egul ati ons and appr oval .

121

KI NDERGARTEN RETENTI ON

Appendi x C

August 7, 2019
Mr. Bradl ey
Superi nt endent
732 Rockri dge Road, Connell svill e, PA 15425
RE: Per missi on t o Conduct Research St udy
Dear Mr. Bradl ey,
I am wri ti ng t o request per missi on t o conduct a research st udy i n t he
Connell svill e Area School Di stri ct. I am currentl y enr oll ed i n the Educati on
Ad mi ni strati on and Leadershi p pr ogra m at Calif or ni a Uni versity of PA, and a mi n
t he pr ocess of compl eti ng my Doct oral
Capst one Pr oj ect. My st udy will be l ooki ng at the causes f or the nu mber of
ki ndergart en ret enti ons i n the di stri ct. The Capst one Pr oj ect will requi re I RB
Appr oval and all I RB requi re ments will be f ollowed t hr oughout the pr ocess.
Your appr oval to conduct thi s st udy will be greatl y appr eci at ed. I woul d be happy
t o ans wer any questi ons or concer ns t hat you may have.
If you agr ee, ki ndl y si gn bel ow and ret ur n t he si gned f or m.
Si ncer el y,

Traci
Kuhns

KI NDERGARTEN RETENTI ON

122

123

KI NDERGARTEN RETENTI ON

Appendi x D

August 7, 2019
Mr s. Kuhns

Pri nci pal
215 Fall s Ave., Connellsvill e PA 15425
RE: Per missi on t o Conduct Research St udy
Dear Mrs. Kuhns
I am wri ti ng to request per mi ssi on t o conduct a research st udy i n the Connell svill e
Ar ea School Di stri ct. I a m currentl y enr oll ed in t he Educati on Ad mi nistrati on and
Leadershi p pr ogra m at Calif or ni a Uni versity of PA, and a m i n t he pr ocess of
co mpl eti ng my Doct oral
Capst one Pr oj ect, My st udy will be l ooki ng at the causes f or the nu mber of
ki ndergart en ret enti ons i n the di stri ct. The Capst one Pr oj ect will requi re I RB
Appr oval and all I RB requi re ments will be f ollowed t hr oughout the pr ocess.
Your appr oval to conduct thi s st udy will be greatl y appr eci at ed. I woul d be happy
t o ans wer any questi ons or concer ns t hat you may have.
If you agr ee, ki ndl y si gn bel ow and ret ur n t he si gned f or m.
Si ncer el y,

Traci Kuhns

124

KI NDERGARTEN RETENTI ON

Appr oved by:
pri nt

Si gn

Dat e

August 7, 2019

Ms. Port er
Pri nci pal
125 Pl easant Vall ey Road, Connell svill e, PA 15425

RE: Per missi on t o Conduct Research St udy
Dear Ms. Port er
I am wri ti ng t o request per mi ssi on t o conduct a research st udy i n the Connell svill e
Ar ea School Di stri ct. I a m currentl y enr oll ed in t he Educati on Ad mi nistrati on and
Leadershi p pr ogra m at Calif or ni a Uni versity of PA, and a m i n t he pr ocess of
co mpl eti ng my Doct oral
Capst one Pr oj ect. My st udy will be l ooki ng at the causes f or the nu mber of
ki ndergart en ret enti ons i n the di stri ct. The Capst one Pr oj ect will requi re I RB
Appr oval and all I RB requi re ments will be f ollowed t hr oughout the pr ocess.

Your appr oval to conduct thi s st udy will be greatl y appr eci at ed. I woul d be
happy t o ans wer any questi ons or concer ns that you may have.
If you agree, ki ndl y sign bel ow and ret ur n the si gned f or m.
Si ncer el y,
Traci Kuhns

125

KI NDERGARTEN RETENTI ON

Pri nt

Si gn

Dat e

August 7, 2019
Mr s. Ro mani shan

Pri nci pal
14 School House Road, Nor mal vill e PA 15469
RE: Per missi on t o Conduct Research St udy
Dear Mrs. Ro mani shan
I am wri ti ng t o request per mi ssi on t o conduct a research st udy i n the Connell svill e
Ar ea School Di stri ct. I a m currentl y enr oll ed in t he Educati on Ad mi nistrati on and
Leadershi p pr ogra m at Calif or ni a Uni versity of PA, and a m i n the pr ocess of
co mpl eti ng my Doct oral
Capst one Pr oj ect, My st udy will be l ooki ng at the causes f or the nu mber of
ki ndergart en ret enti ons i n the di stri ct. The Capst one Pr oj ect will requi re I RB
Appr oval and all I RB requi re ments will be f ollowed t hr oughout the pr ocess.
Your appr oval to conduct thi s st udy will be greatl y appr eci at ed. I woul d be happy
t oans wer any questi ons or concer ns t hat you may have.

If you agree, ki ndl y sign bel ow and ret ur n the si gned f or m.
Si ncer el y, Traci Kuhns

Dat e

KI NDERGARTEN RETENTI ON

126

August 7, 2019

Mr. Snyder

Pri nci pal
711 Ri dge Bl vd., Connellsvill e, PA 15425
RE: Per missi on t o Conduct Research St udy
Dear Mr. Snyder
I a m wri ti ng t o request per mi ssi on t o conduct a research st udy i n the Connell svill e
Ar ea School Di stri ct. I a m currentl y enr oll ed in t he Educati on Ad mi nistrati on and
Leadershi p pr ogra m at Calif or ni a Uni versity of PA, and a m i n t he pr ocess of
co mpl eti ng my Doct oral
Capst one Pr oj ect. My st udy will be l ooki ng at the causes f or the nu mber of
ki ndergart en ret enti ons i n the di stri ct. The Capst one Pr oj ect will requi re I RB
Appr oval and all I RB requi re ments will be f ollowed t hr oughout the pr ocess.
Your appr oval to conduct thi s st udy will be greatl y appr eci at ed. I woul d be happy
t o ans wer any questi ons or concer ns t hat you may have.
If you agr ee, ki ndl y si gn bel ow and ret ur n t he si gned f or m.
Si ncer el
y, Traci
Kuhns

Appr ov
ed by:

KI NDERGARTEN RETENTI ON

127

128

KI NDERGARTEN RETENTI ON

Appendi x E

Capst one Survey Questions
(Thi s survey i s f or ki ndergarten teachers onl y)

To what ext ent do t he f oll owi ng ite ms det er mi ne st udent ret enti on:

1.

Par ent i nvol ve ment
Mar k onl y one oval.
Hi ghl y si gnifi cant
So me what si gnifi cant
Sli ghtl y si gnifi cant
Not si gnifi cant

2.

Cl ass si ze
Mar k onl y one oval.
Hi ghl y si gnifi cant
So me what si gnifi cant
Sli ghtl y
si gnifi cant
Not si gnifi cant

KI NDERGARTEN RETENTI ON
3.

Readi ng achi eve ment
Mar k onl y one oval.
Hi ghl y si gnifi cant
So me what si gnifi cant
Sli ghtl y si gnifi cant
Not si gnifi cant

4.

Mat h achi eve ment
Mar k onl y one oval.
Hi ghl y si gnifi cant
So me what si gnifi cant
Sli ghtl y si gnifi cant
Not si gnifi cant

5.

Mat uri ty
Mar k onl y one oval.
Hi ghl y si gnifi cant
So me what si gnifi cant
Sli ghtl y si gnifi cant
Not si gnifi cant

129

KI NDERGARTEN RETENTI ON
6.

Behavi or
Mar k onl y one oval.
Hi ghl y si gnifi cant
So me what si gnifi cant
Sli ghtl y si gnifi cant
Not si gnifi cant

7.

Pr eschool attendance
Mar k onl y one oval.
Hi ghl y si gnifi cant
So me what si gnifi cant
Sli ghtl y si gnifi cant
Not si gnifi cant

8.

Fa mil y confi gurati on
Mar k onl y one oval.
Hi ghl y si gnifi cant
So me what si gnifi cant
Sli ghtl y si gnifi cant
Not si gnifi cant

9.

Soci al /E moti onal Concerns
Mar k onl y one oval.

130

KI NDERGARTEN RETENTI ON
Hi ghl y si gnifi cant
So me what si gnifi cant
Sli ghtl y si gnifi cant
Not si gnifi cant

10.

I nstructi onal Practi ces
Mar k onl y one oval.

11.

Ret ai ni ng a st udent shoul d be a teacher deci si on
Mar k onl y one oval.
Al ways
So meti mes
Occasi onall y
Never

12.

Ret ai ni ng a st udent shoul d be a par ent deci si on
Mar k onl y one oval.

131

KI NDERGARTEN RETENTI ON

132

Al ways
So meti mes
Occasi onall y
Never

13.

Ret ai ni ng a st udent shoul d be a tea m deci si on
Mar k onl y one oval.
Al ways
So meti mes
Occasi onall y
Never

14.

What supports are necessary to reduce t he possi bility of a chil d bei ng retained?

15.

What supports f or teachers/staff can be put i nt o pl ace to reduce the possibility of
a chil d bei ng retai ned?

133

KI NDERGARTEN RETENTI ON

16.

Descri be the communi cati on that shoul d occur with a par ent of a student who i s a
candi dat e f or ret enti on.

Thi s cont ent i s nei ther creat ed nor endorsed by Googl e.

For ms

134

KI NDERGARTEN RETENTI ON

Appendi x F

I nstit uti onal Revi ew Boar d
Calif or ni a Uni ver sity of Pennsyl vani a
Mor gan Hall, 310
250 Uni ver sit y Avenue
Calif or ni a, PA 15419
i nstrevi ewboar d @c al u. edu
Mel i ssa Sovak, Ph. D.

Dear Tr aci,
Pl ease consi der t hi s e mail as offi ci al notifi cati on t hat your pr oposal
titl ed “Det er mi ni ng how t o reduce ki nder gart en ret enti on thr ough
t eacher and st udent support s. ” ( Pr oposal #18- 081) has been
appr oved by t he Calif or ni a Uni ver sit y of Pennsyl vani a I nstit uti onal
Revi ew Boar d as ame nded.
The eff ecti ve dat e of appr oval i s 8/ 13/ 19 and t he expi rati on dat e i s
8/ 12/ 20. These dat es must appear on the consent f or m.
Pl ease not e t hat Feder al Poli cy requi r es t hat you notif y t he I RB
pr o mptl y regar di ng any of t he f oll owi ng:

KI NDERGARTEN RETENTI ON

135

( 1) Any addi ti ons or changes i n pr ocedur es you mi ght wi sh f or your
st udy ( addi ti ons or changes must be appr oved by t he I RB bef or e t hey
ar e i mpl e ment ed)
( 2) Any event s t hat aff ect t he saf et y or well- bei ng of subj ect s
( 3) Any modi fi cati ons of your st udy or ot her responses t hat ar e
necessi t at ed by any event s report ed in ( 2).
( 4) To conti nue your resear ch beyond t he appr oval expi rati on dat e of
8/ 12/ 20 you must file addi ti onal i nf or mati on t o be consi dered f or
conti nui ng revi ew. Pl ease cont act i nstrevi ewboar d @cal u. edu
Pl ease notif y t he Boar d when dat a collecti on i s compl et e.
Regar ds,
Mel i ssa Sovak, PhD.
Chai r, I nstit uti onal Revi ew Boar d