Transcript How Will We Do It All? Integrating Prevention Initiatives

Dropout Prevention
Insights Gained from the
Minnesota Department of Education Initiative
Education Commission of the States
Commissioners Meeting
New Orleans
January 6-8, 2010
Dropout Prevention Initiative
Minnesota 2008 Graduation Rate
• AYP
• Four Year
91.6%
72.8%
White
American Indian
Black
Hispanic
LEP
Special Ed
F & R Price Lunch
80.6 %
41.0 %
40.9 %
39.6 %
43.4 %
51.8 %
51.8 %
Sobering Statistics
• Nearly 14,000 students did not graduate from Minnesota’s high
schools in 2009, the lost lifetime earnings in Minnesota for that
class of dropouts alone total more than $3.6 billion [or about
$260,000 per student in lost revenue].
• If Minnesota’s high schools graduated all of their students ready
for college, the state would save almost 89.1 million a year in
community college and remediation costs and lost earnings.
• Minnesota’s economy would see a combination of crime related
savings and additional revenue of about $77.8 million each year if
the male high school graduation rate increased by just 5%.
The Alliance for Excellent Education, 2009
Five Overall Goals for MDE
1.
Develop a comprehensive dropout prevention model
2.
Develop tools to enhance the development of
effective programming
3.
Increase statewide and local coordination to address
dropout prevention
4.
Provide support and technical assistance for local
education agencies
5.
Increase the likelihood of continued implementation
sustainability of grant success
Structure
• Cross Departmental Team
– School choice, special education, Indian Education, Safe &
Healthy Learners, After school, English Language Learners,
Service Learning, High School Improvement
– Staffed by Project Coordinator
– Resource focused
• MDE Liaison to Pilot Districts
– Role integrated into ongoing duties
– Onsite/ongoing technical assistance
– Coordinated through project team
• Checklists, Planning Tools/Processes, Framework
Participants in the Initiative
• Participating high schools and middle schools from the
following seven districts:
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
Brooklyn Center
Duluth
Hibbing
Park Rapids
Red Lake
Richfield
St. Paul
• Wide variation in school enrollment numbers, student
demographics, geographic location, district
finances/structure, school and community contextual
issues
Engaging Students in School and Learning
Ten Strategies (National Dropout Prevention Center)
School-Community Collaboration
Safe Learning Environments
Family Engagement
Literacy Development
Mentoring/Tutoring
Service-Learning
After School Opportunities
Professional Development
Contextualized and Active/Individualized Learning
Alternative Schooling
Schools Use a Series of Checklists and Templates to
Guide the Planning Process
• Checklist 1: Getting Started
Start-up activities, gathering relevant data, needs assessment
• Checklist 2: Data Synthesis and Implementation Focus
Reflection & synthesis of data; articulate implementation focus
• Checklist 3: Implementation Detail and Evaluation Plan
Implementation detail (what, who, timeline, etc.); evaluation plan with
goals, objectives and indicators
We can work to engage students at a variety of levels… a
comprehensive plan
•
Few (5%)
Tertiary Level
(intensive)
•
Some
10 -15% respond
Secondary Level
(targeted)
•
All receive the intervention –
prevention oriented
80% respond
Primary Level
(universal)
Levels of
Intervention
3 Tiered Model
Levels of Intervention
• Universal – primary prevention, includes all youth, low cost per
individual (systemic positive discipline program)
• Secondary – prevention/intervention, includes about 15% who are
identified as being at risk of dropout, moderate cost (programs
that work to build specific skills)
• Tertiary – intervention, includes 5% of youth exhibiting clear signs
of early school leaving, high need, high cost (intensive wraparound services)
What does it look like?
• Graduation Triangles: Comprehensive Systems of Support
e
r
S
c
h
o
o
l
s
Dropout Prevention Initiative Timeline
9/05
Received Grant
Organizing
1/06
Kick-off meeting with participating
districts and stakeholders
Stage 1. MDE Exploration
(Learning, Increased
Awareness, Start-up)
8/06
Districts collected data/determined
needs
2005-2006 Graduation/Dropout Rates
Stage 1. District Exploration
Planning, Needs
Assessment
12/06
School Wide Graduation Plans
Determined
Stage 2. Installation
Implementation Focus
6/07
Implementation Progress Reports
2006-2007 school year
Stage 3. Initial
Implementation
9/07 –
6/08
Full Implementation
2007-2008 school year
Stage 4. Full Implementation
9/086/09
Sustained Implementation
Stage 5. Innovation and
2008-2009 school year (data in process) Stage 6. Sustainability
Data-based Indicators of Effectiveness
Four Year Graduation Rate – a four-year on-time graduation
rate based on a cohort of first time ninth grade students plus
transfers into the cohort within the four year period minus
transfers out of the cohort within the four year period. The rate is
similar to the National Governors Association (NGA) Graduation
rate – but the NGA rate allows more time for special education
students and recent immigrants to graduate.
Includes count and percentage of students who
graduate, dropout, continue or are of unknown status
4 Year Graduation and Continuing Rate (2004-2008)
** 4 of 7 high schools showed significant increase in
graduation/continuing rate over the 4 years
** Average percentage change across 6 schools = +2.9%
** Red Lake – significant decrease in graduation/continuing rate
** 2 schools now at or above state average (2008; 88.1%)
Site
Baseline 2004
2008
Change
Brooklyn Center
75.6
82.1
+ 6.5%
Duluth Denfeld
85.9
84.6
- 1.3%
Hibbing
83.3
88.1
+ 4.8%
Park Rapids
86.0
89.8
+ 3.8%
Red Lake
59.2
43.9
- 15.3%
Richfield
82.7
87.3
+ 4.6%
St. Paul Arlington
78.8
77.8
- 1.0%
Outcomes and Significant Results
• Students Dropping Out of School (2004-2008)
– 5 of 7 high schools had fewer dropouts
– 2 of the 7 schools increased number of dropouts
– Number of students dropping out of school decreased by 24%
**Data used from 6 of 7 schools; 179 to 136
**Enrolled 9th grade cohort stayed about the same (decrease of
.2%; 1633 to 1630)
• Persisting in School
– Number of students persisting in school increased by 17% from
2004-2008 (6 of the 7 schools increased the number and
percentage of students continuing in school beyond four years)
4 Year Graduation Rate (percentage)
Disaggregated for Selected Student Groups
Site
Category
Baseline 2004
2008
Brooklyn Center
Free and Reduced
Price Lunch
51.6
62.5
+
Park Rapids
Free and Reduced
Price Lunch
69.1
81.5
+
Richfield
Black
45.0
56.7
+
Richfield
Free and Reduced
Price Lunch
44.3
47.1
+
St. Paul Arlington
Black
52.6
60.8
+
Duluth
Special Education
61.0
63.6
+
Hibbing
Male
71.7
78.4
+
Results by School and for Specific Programs
Indicators Associated with Dropout and School Completion
• Duluth – Average daily attendance increased; number students
receiving failing grades decreased, increased scores on scale of
developmental intercultural sensitivity
• Red Lake Schools – suspensions decreased, attendance rates
increased
• Hibbing – truancy referrals decreased
• Richfield – academic growth in reading and math (MCA scores);
Check & Connect (n=32) – decrease in absences and tardies;
decrease in number of in school suspensions; improved grades;
Advancement Via Individual Determination (AVID) 368 fewer days
missed 2007-2008 (n=124)
• Brooklyn Center – improved school climate as indicated by student
survey findings; decrease suspensions and behavioral referrals (by
over 50% from 2006 – 2008)
• Park Rapids – number of out of school suspensions decreased;
truancy referrals decreased, bullying incidents decreased on
playground and bus
• St. Paul – increase in number of students attending organized
college visits
Changes in Scope or Unexpected Results
•
There were several positive residual outcomes associated with the Dropout
Prevention initiative that could not be measured via quantitative outcome
indicators, to include:
– a more collaborative approach to dropout prevention at all levels of the
Minnesota Department of Education, as well as, the local schools.
– greater awareness on the part of the public about the dropout issue and
the risk factors involved.
– schools and communities are collaborating in ways they never dreamed
of before the Initiative and local resources are being used in at every
site to support the initiative. (External Evaluator, 2009)
•
Host Americorps Promise Fellow through Minnesota Alliance With Youth –
link with 60 other Promise Fellows throughout Minnesota (MN) and
statewide partners including Search Institute, National Youth Leadership
Council, Mentoring Partnership of MN, University of MN Center for Youth
Development, Youth Community Connections
Changes in Scope or Unexpected Results
•
Listening Groups with Youth – Focus groups conducted by steering
committee members (Konopka Institute, University of Minnesota)
•
Minnesota Summit on Youth Development and Graduation (Dec., 2007)
– award through America’s Promise Alliance (national organization
founded by Colin and Alma Powell)
•
Ten Community Mini-Summits focused on positive youth development
and graduation (fall, 2008)
•
Dropout Prevention Graduation Summit (November, 2009) Sharing the
Vision for High School Completion
– Metro Graduation Summit: Strategies for Engaging Youth in School
and Learning
– Statewide Graduation Summit: Policy and Action
Sustainability
•
Districts continue to implement approaches/programming that required
start up money (to build professional development, capacity and
infrastructure) rather than sustained funding
•
Ongoing and new activities – Graduation Summit, Indian Education
Workshop, Alternatives to Suspension, After-School Programming
Initiative (Supporting Youth Success)
•
Web Site – Journey to School Completion Video, Programming Guide,
Voices PowerPoint, Archived Newsletters, Links, Fact Sheets, Ten
Effective Strategies, Process Checklists, Graduation Triangles,
Participant List, and more…
•
“In spite of requirements and efforts to infuse sustainability into the
system after the life of the grant, there is no way around the fact that
many strategies that are research-based cost significant dollars, and
without the grant resources, [several of] the strategies and interventions
cannot be sustained” (External Evaluation, 2009)
Steering Committee Report - Sustainability
•
Legislate raising the legal age of compulsory school attendance and increase
supports for students who are disengaging from school.
•
Identify, emphasize and promote research based programs that can be sustained
with minimum cost.
•
Intentionally educate, build networks and work collaboratively with local and state
agencies, community organizations, educational entities and businesses for
funding to support dropout prevention programming.
•
Maintain a statewide focus on best practices in dropout prevention through
creation and maintenance of a managing entity.
•
Publicize grant opportunities for addressing dropout prevention (e.g., service
learning, after-school programming, etc.) and assist Local Education Agency staff
•
Be proactive with legislators and engage policymakers in discussions of dropout
prevention to intentionally increase funds that support innovative, evidence-based
and promising programs in schools that want change.
Lessons Learned
• Implementation process is key
• Systemic change is required – rather than a band-aid approach
• Collaboration is critical (school, family, community, departmental)
• Provide a framework and allow schools/districts to tailor
programming to meet needs
• Work at a district level (rather than school) to effect sustainability
What would be most useful to other districts that are
addressing dropout prevention? (information gathered from leadership
team members aggregated across participating districts)
PROCESS
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Assessing School Climate
Gathering Data to Guide Programming
Disaggregating Data by Student Groups
Establishing a Local Leadership Team
Identifying/Mapping Current Prevention Efforts
Use of Planning Templates
Developing a Communication Plan
Use of Planning Checklists to Guide the Process
Meetings with Other Participating Districts
97%
93%
80%
80%
74%
73%
73%
70%
70%
FRAMEWORK
•
•
•
•
Focusing on Promoting Successful Transition
Collaboration Between Middle & High Schools
Providing Supports at 3 Levels of Intervention
Using NDPC’s 10 Dropout Prevention Strategies
93%
90%
87%
83%
PRODUCT
• Summary Listing of NDPC’s 10 Effective Strategies
74%
TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE
•
•
•
•
MDE Coordinator*
MDE Consultation via Site Visits
Contact with MDE Liaisons
Salaries/Wages for Added Positions
86%
80%
73%
87%
FUNDING
• Professional Development
• Supplies, Curriculum & Materials for
Programming
83%
76%
Suggested Best Practices
Steering Committee Recommendations
Orientation/Approach
1.1 Foster a sense of belonging and connectedness for all students by creating positive
relationships with caring adults.
1.2 Create school environments or school climates that are positive, safe and
welcoming.
1.3 Promote ongoing staff development to examine, identify and understand unique
contextual issues of all students being served.
1.4 Invest in programming and instructional strategies for learning that can be applied
universally, disseminated and replicated. Maintain the integrity of key elements…
1.5 Promote staff retention by building on consistency, expertise, capacity and the power
of initiatives to increase student engagement and prevent dropout across years.
1.6 Establish consistency in measurement and definitions for key qualitative and
quantitative indicators associated with school completion (these should include
graduation rates, dropout rates, attendance, student engagement and school climate).
Suggested Best Practices
Steering Committee Recommendations
Supporting Students Placed At-Risk
2.1 Ensure the discussion of and movement towards cultural competence
for all educators, support staff, administrators and others working with
youth in school. Cultural competence is embodied by commitment to openmindedness, confrontation of stereotypical thinking and the creation of an
atmosphere of care and concern for all students.
2.2 Establish and maintain an ongoing exchange of information between
parents, families and school staff.
2.3 Emphasize the important role that parent support can play in student
learning (inside and outside of school) and encourage a focus on family
engagement in student learning.
2.4 Utilize research based dropout prevention strategies designed to
increase student engagement in school and learning such as after-school
activities, mentoring, tutoring, service learning, alternative learning
programs, and safe learning environments…
Suggested Best Practices
Steering Committee Recommendations
Supporting Students Placed At-Risk
2.4 Provide student centered planning individualized to meet student
needs. Closely monitor students’ progress to support students who are
disengaging from school.
2.5 Provide supports to students during key transition periods such as
between middle and high school; transition during the year for students
new to the school; return to school for students who were suspended;
expelled or in care and treatment; and students new to America.
2.6 Encourage school-community collaboration to support programs
and activities that will sustain caring environments inside of and outside
of school where youth can develop, learn and thrive.
Summary Thought…
“Promoting school completion implies much
more than the reduction of dropout rates.
Preparation of youth for productive and
meaningful participation in a community
begins, for educators, with the promotion of
students’ engagement in school and learning.”
(Sinclair, Christenson, Lehr, & Anderson, 2003)
For more information, see Dropout Prevention, Retention and
Graduation Initiative
http://www.education.state.mn.us/mde/index.html