To the editor: Retention ‘guarantee’ at 3rd grade helps reading improve

The Editorial board of The Blade recently urged lawmakers to eliminate in its entirety the retention requirement of Ohio’s Third Grade Reading Guarantee, which once stipulated that elementary schools across the state must make students repeat third grade if they are still struggling to read (“Focus on teaching,” Monday). Despite recent changes to state law that permit parents to request that students be promoted to fourth grade regardless of whether they can read at grade level, The Blade contends that eliminating the measure all together would be a “significant step in rebuilding literacy education.”

There’s no debate that strong reading skills matter. But the editorial missed the mark on retention in several ways.

Consider its quotes from state representative Phillip Robinson, Jr., who claims that Ohio has seen “no meaningful or significant improvements” in fourth grade proficiency levels since the guarantee took effect. Even worse, he claims that scores declined between 2017 and 2019.

Representative Robinson appears to be referencing the National Assessment of Educational Progress, or NAEP, often referred to as the Nation’s Report Card. Although he is correct about Ohio’s recent declines on NAEP, he doesn’t take the time to explore whether retention is the culprit. A quick look at other states — like Mississippi, which ranked first in fourth grade reading gains on NAEP from 2011 to 2022 — would have made clear that mandatory retention is a crucial part of comprehensive early-literacy policies. The same is true in Florida, another state that has made transformative gains in literacy. In fact, there’s a trove of evidence from other states demonstrating that retention, when combined with intensive support, has a positive impact on students.

Attempts to cast blame on retention also fly in the face of recent, Ohio-specific research. A study conducted by professors at the Ohio Education Research Center found that retained students outperformed their closely matched peers in fourth and fifth grade by roughly 20 to 40 scale-score points on state math and reading exams. Those academic gains persisted and remained significant into sixth and seventh grade, proving that Ohio’s retention requirement helped thousands of struggling readers. Despite what the editorial suggests, this report is far from just “one snapshot.”

Nor is it the only evidence of improvement. Prior to the pandemic, state-level data showed that overall proficiency rates for Ohio’s third graders were ticking upward, from 55 percent in 2015–16 to 67 percent in 2018–19. Just 40 percent of economically disadvantaged students scored proficient or above in 2015–16 but that number increased to 54 percent by 2018–19. Most importantly, given that the guarantee targets struggling readers, the number of students scoring at the lowest achievement level on the state test shrank from 27 to 14 percent in four years.

Amidst the talk of test scores and research, it’s important not to lose sight of students. The editorial argued that retaining a child can have a “dramatic, even traumatic, impact.” But the social and emotional impacts that are often cited as reasons to eliminate retention also apply to students who are socially promoted. As a former high school English teacher, I can attest to the impact of poor reading skills and illiteracy. Students who are socially promoted when they continue to struggle with reading can end up the target of bullies.

Struggling readers often experience frustration or boredom in class because they can’t keep up with their peers, which can lead to an increase in disruptive behavior and discipline incidents in school. Students may even internalize their struggle as a marker of their ability, rather than something that can be improved, and drop out as a result.

Pretending that moving struggling students on to the next grade saves them from social and emotional harm is irresponsible. So, too, is ignoring troves of research proving that retention, coupled with rigorous intervention, benefits students. The editorial board is right that Ohio needs to focus on literacy. But eliminating retention is not the way to do so.

Jessica Poiner is the Senior Education Policy Analyst for the Thomas B. Fordham Institute.