QUANTITATIVE RESEARCH IN EDUCATION

Quantitative Research In Education

Quantitative Education & Education

Introduction

According to census data, the percentage of elementary and secondary school students retained in grade has risen steadily over the last three decades. A major reason cited for the use of retention is that the targeted student is immature and lagging significantly behind her/his peers academically, emotionally, and/or socially. As surmised by Brooks (2002), a proposed solution is for the child to repeat the same grade level and to be exposed for a second year to the same curriculum, thereby providing the child with an opportunity to mature and to increase their levels of achievement to more grade-appropriate levels (albeit with classmates who are at least one year younger).

Approximately 2.4 million children in the United States are retained each year, costing more than $14 billion dollars and one year of these children's lives (Dawson, 1998; Jimerson, 2001). Unfortunately, a myriad of studies (e.g., Jimerson, 2001) has demonstrated that, for many children, retention represents an ineffective means to improve levels of academic achievement. In particular, in their landmark meta-analytic study, Shepard and Smith (1990) concluded, "Although grade retention is widely practiced, it does not help children to 'catch up.' Retained children do better in the short term, but they are at much greater risk for future failure than their equally achieving, non-retained peers" (p. 84). However, even though evidence against retention was provided as early as in 1990, President Clinton still extolled its virtues by calling for the end of social promotion in his 1998 State of the Union Address (Dawson, 1998). Further, recent educational initiatives aimed at increasing standards and emphasizing accountability, such as No Child Left Behind, are likely to lead to increased retention rates (Jimerson, 2001).

Unfortunately, findings from educational research studies not being used by policymakers are an all too common occurrence. The question to be asked is then "Why educational research studies are largely ignored by policymakers and stakeholders, who are in the best position to use its findings?" We believe that one reason for studies being overlooked stems from the fact that many stakeholders and policymakers find research articles, particularly those representing quantitative investigations, difficult to read. This is ironic, bearing in mind that many applied research articles supposedly are aimed at practitioners. Many quantitative research articles contain statistical jargon that only those who have taken several statistics courses can understand, making them not reader-friendly. In fact, such statistical jargon often induces high levels of anxiety (Onwuegbuzie et al., 1997). Thus, it is likely that stakeholders and policymakers, who may be barely statistically literate, do not read such articles. This, in turn, culminates in many policies being set, such as that relating to school retention, which contradicts the literature base.

Thus, it is clear that measures are needed to make quantitative research articles more reader-friendly. Because the results section tends to be the most difficult part of a research report, we believe that one way of improving the readability of these articles is by reducing the complexity of ...