retention

(redirected from Retentions)
Also found in: Dictionary, Thesaurus, Legal, Financial, Encyclopedia.

retention

 [re-ten´shun]
1. the process of holding back or keeping in a position.
2. persistence in the body of material normally excreted, such as from the bowel or bladder.
3. the number of staff members in a facility that remain in employment.
urinary retention a nursing diagnosis accepted by the North American Nursing Diagnosis Association, defined as a state in which an individual has incomplete emptying of the bladder.
retention of urine accumulation of urine within the bladder because of inability to urinate.

re·ten·tion

(rē-ten'shŭn),
1. The keeping in the body of what normally belongs there, especially food and drink in the stomach.
See also: memory.
2. The keeping in the body of what normally should be discharged, as urine or feces.
See also: memory.
3. Retaining that which has been learned so that it can be used later as in recall, recognition, or, if retention is partial, relearning.
See also: memory.
4. Resistance to dislodgement.
5. In dentistry, a passive period following treatment when a patient is wearing an appliance or appliances to maintain or stabilize the teeth in the new position into which they have been moved.
[L. retentio, a holding back]

retention

/re·ten·tion/ (re-ten´shun) the process of holding back or keeping in position, as persistence in the body of material normally excreted, or maintenance of a dental prosthesis in proper position in the mouth.

retention

(rĭ-tĕn′shən)
n.
1. The act of retaining or the condition of being retained: the retention of nutrients in the soil; the retention of jobs in the city.
2. The practice of requiring a student to repeat a class or a year of school because of insufficient educational progress to advance.
3. The ability to recall or recognize what has been learned or experienced; memory.
4. The inability of a person or animal to eliminate a bodily waste.

retention

[riten′shən]
1 a resistance to movement or displacement.
2 the ability of the digestive system to hold food and fluid.
3 the inability to urinate or defecate.
4 the ability of the mind to remember information acquired from reading, observation, or other processes.
5 the inherent property of a dental restoration to maintain its position without displacement under axial stress.
6 a characteristic of proper tooth cavity preparation in which provision is made for preventing vertical displacement of the cavity filling.
7 a period of treatment during which an individual wears an appliance to maintain teeth in positions to which they have been moved by orthodontic procedures. retain, v.

retention

Neurology See Memory UrologySee Urinary retention.

re·ten·tion

(rē-ten'shŭn)
1. The keeping in the body of what normally belongs there, especially the retaining of food and drink in the stomach.
2. The keeping in the body of what normally should be discharged, such as urine or feces.
3. Retaining that which has been learned so that it can be used later as in recall, recognition, or, if retention is partial, relearning.
See also: memory
4. Resistance to dislodgement.
5. dentistry A passive period following treatment when a patient is wearing an appliance or appliances to maintain or stabilize the teeth in the new position into which they have been moved.
[L. retentio, a holding back]

re·ten·tion

(rē-ten'shŭn)
1. In dentistry, passive period following treatment when a patient is wearing an appliance or appliances to maintain or stabilize teeth in the new position into which they have been moved.
2. Resistance to dislodgement.
[L. retentio, a holding back]

retention

the process of holding back or keeping in a position, such as persistence in the body of material normally excreted. See also retained.

renal retention cysts
these are acquired and result from scarring and obstruction of tubules in chronic renal disease.
urine retention
accumulation of urine within the bladder because of inability to urinate.
References in periodicals archive ?
The Jacob/Lefgren study, however, did not receive nearly the attention of the one-two punch effect created by the negative CCSR studies and New York's controversial unveiling of its new retention policy.
Retention opponents like Don Moore, executive director of the education reform organization Designs for Change, frequently criticized the policy for being a misuse of standardized test scores that simply overidentified poor and minority children for retention.
Though the Tribune remained a strong supporter of the retention policy, in 2003 the Chicago Sun Times published a two-part series, "The Daley Generation," that criticized it.
When the two critical CCSR studies were released, the timing couldn't have been worse for the proponents of retention.
Though longtime supporters of stronger accountability were quick to express their dismay at what seemed to be the school board's even quicker abandonment of the math component of the retention standard, the Tribune's "surrender" editorial predicted what was likely to happen.
All but unnoticed at the time, however, were the CCSR studies that had found benefits in the retention program, as well as the Jacob/Lefgren research, which seemed to dispute some of the substantive negative findings, at least as they applied to the effect of retention on third graders.
None of the studies, though, attempted to measure fully the impact of the policy on students who might have been motivated to work harder to avoid being held back, or on teachers and schools; nor did they parse the effect of student retention on overall system performance.
As some observers have noted, student retention policies are not really about the students who are retained as much as they are about the way the rest of the school system operates when it knows that there is no social promotion.
Finally, though, a deficiency of the CCSR studies was that they focused on the early years of the retention policy and thus failed to take into account more recent modifications to the program.
The waivers process through which students could pass along to the next grade without meeting test score cutoffs was fleshed out in 2000, formalizing procedures through which classroom grades, attendance, and teachers' recommendations could be factored into retention decisions.
Classroom behavior, grades, and attendance were all given a more prominent role in the retention decision, and an appeals process was, in theory at least, implemented for parents who wanted to dispute a retention decision--in part the result of an agreement with the U.
Did it mean that ending social promotion was working or that the strict retention policies that were the program's hallmark in 1996 had been abandoned?