outcomes of in-grade retention warranted the OECD findings.
During the 1964-65 school year, administrators of schools with inner-city populations moved quickly to implement no-retention programs. Resistance ran high among lower grade teachers who watched retained students’ growth the second time through a grade. Those schools where principals who were bold enough to empower teaching staffs to develop continuous growth programs fared well within that dynamic. "Let's Produce Tax Payers, Not Tax Users!" made for a fine theme. This writer did just that from 1964 until retiring from the principal end of education in 1992.
Many school districts adopted the "Holistic Management" model of OECD. This called for continuous progress planning for students
During the 1964-65 school year, administrators of schools with inner-city populations moved quickly to implement no-retention programs. Resistance ran high among lower grade teachers who watched retained students’ growth the second time through a grade. Those schools where principals who were bold enough to empower teaching staffs to develop continuous growth programs fared well within that dynamic. "Let's Produce Tax Payers, Not Tax Users!" made for a fine theme. This writer did just that from 1964 until retiring from the principal end of education in 1992.
Many school districts adopted the "Holistic Management" model of OECD. This called for continuous progress planning for students