TY - JOUR A1 - Kretschmann, Julia A1 - Vock, Miriam A1 - Lüdtke, Oliver A1 - Jansen, Malte A1 - Gronostaj, Anna T1 - Effects of grade retention on students’ motivation: A longitudinal study over 3 years of secondary school JF - The journal of educational psychology N2 - Despite the fact that grade retention is now seen as controversial in many quarters, it remains common practice in numerous countries. Previous research on the effects of grade retention on student development has, however, generated ambiguous results, particularly in terms of motivational outcomes. This ambiguity has been attributed in part to a lack of high-quality studies including a longitudinal design, a suitable comparison group, and adequate statistical control of preretention differences. Based on longitudinal data of N = 3,288 German students over 3 years of secondary school, we examined differences in their academic self-concept, scholarly interests, learning motivation, and achievement motivation between those being retained in the 6th grade (n = 61) and those of the same age being promoted annually. To account for confounding variables, we applied full propensity score matching on baseline measures of the dependent variables, as well as various other covariates that have been found to be associated with the risk of retention (e.g., cognitive ability, academic performance, and family background variables). Results reveal a steep decline in students’ academic self-concept, interests, and learning motivation during the last months spent in the original class, just before retention. For those measures that were available, negative effects were still partly significant after 1 year, but had diminished 2 years after grade retention. Contrary to predictions suggested by the big-fish-little-pond effect, we found no positive effects of retention on students’ academic self-concept. KW - grade retention KW - secondary school KW - academic self-concept KW - motivation KW - propensity score matching Y1 - 2019 U6 - https://doi.org/10.1037/edu0000353 SN - 0022-0663 SN - 1939-2176 VL - 111 IS - 8 SP - 1432 EP - 1446 PB - American Psychological Association CY - Washington ER - TY - JOUR A1 - McKenna, Russell A1 - Pfenninger, Stefan A1 - Heinrichs, Heidi A1 - Schmidt, Johannes A1 - Staffell, Iain A1 - Bauer, Christian A1 - Gruber, Katharina A1 - Hahmann, Andrea N. A1 - Jansen, Malte A1 - Klingler, Michael A1 - Landwehr, Natascha A1 - Larsén, Xiaoli Guo A1 - Lilliestam, Johan A1 - Pickering, Bryn A1 - Robinius, Martin A1 - Tröndle, Tim A1 - Turkovska, Olga A1 - Wehrle, Sebastian A1 - Weinand, Jann Michael A1 - Wohland, Jan T1 - High-resolution large-scale onshore wind energy assessments BT - a review of potential definitions, methodologies and future research needs JF - Renewable energy N2 - The rapid uptake of renewable energy technologies in recent decades has increased the demand of energy researchers, policymakers and energy planners for reliable data on the spatial distribution of their costs and potentials. For onshore wind energy this has resulted in an active research field devoted to analysing these resources for regions, countries or globally. A particular thread of this research attempts to go beyond purely technical or spatial restrictions and determine the realistic, feasible or actual potential for wind energy. Motivated by these developments, this paper reviews methods and assumptions for analysing geographical, technical, economic and, finally, feasible onshore wind potentials. We address each of these potentials in turn, including aspects related to land eligibility criteria, energy meteorology, and technical developments of wind turbine characteristics such as power density, specific rotor power and spacing aspects. Economic aspects of potential assessments are central to future deployment and are discussed on a turbine and system level covering levelized costs depending on locations, and the system integration costs which are often overlooked in such analyses. Non-technical approaches include scenicness assessments of the landscape, constraints due to regulation or public opposition, expert and stakeholder workshops, willingness to pay/accept elicitations and socioeconomic cost-benefit studies. For each of these different potential estimations, the state of the art is critically discussed, with an attempt to derive best practice recommendations and highlight avenues for future research. KW - onshore wind KW - resource assessments KW - social acceptance KW - planning constraints KW - research priorities Y1 - 2022 U6 - https://doi.org/10.1016/j.renene.2021.10.027 SN - 0960-1481 VL - 182 SP - 659 EP - 684 PB - Elsevier CY - Amsterdam ER -