The idea that holding students back when they haven’t met grade-level standards does more harm than good is a widely held belief in education circles. This phrase is often repeated as if it were an unquestionable scientific fact. But few anti-retention advocates seem to understand how the foundational studies were conducted, what the data could actually prove and what it fundamentally cannot prove.

All of these studies on retention harm rely on quasi-experimental designs — a method well known for built-in bias because it attempts to infer causation without isolating variables. It’s a messy approach to data collection that doesn’t come close to the rigor of the scientific method we teach to middle school students.

Yet despite these limitations, the research is often presented as if it off

See Full Page