Transcript Title of Presentation

Solving the Dropout Crisis in
California
Russell W. Rumberger
California Dropout Research Project
UC Santa Barbara
California Symposium on Poverty
Sacramento
October 15, 2009
Urgency
• “And dropping out of high school is no
longer an option. It's not just quitting on
yourself, it's quitting on your country -- and
this country needs and values the talents
of every American.”
--Barack Obama, February 24, 2009
October 15, 2009
California Dropout Research Project
Activities
• New research with a focus on California (15
studies)
• Policy recommendations from policy committee
(policymakers, educators, researchers)
• Dissemination through publications (statistical
briefs, research reports, policy briefs), website,
media
October 15, 2009
Dimensions of the Problem
1.
2.
3.
4.
Magnitude and trends
Consequences
Causes
Solutions
October 15, 2009
1. The problem is severe.
October 15, 2009
California graduation rate
90.0%
85.0%
83.3%
80.2%
California High School
Exit Exam Required
80.0%
75.0%
70.0%
68.5%
65.0%
67.3%
60.0%
1997-98
1998-99
1999-00
2000-01
2001-02
2002-03
CDE official state rate (NCLB)
October 15, 2009
2003-04
2004-05
2005-06
CDE 9th grade cohort rate
2006-07
2007-08
Problem is concentrated
• English learners represent 15% of high
school students, but account for 30% of
the dropouts
• 1% (25) of the schools account for 21% of
dropouts
• 10 districts account for 36% of dropouts
October 15, 2009
2. The economic costs are
staggering.
October 15, 2009
The Consequences of
Dropping Out
• INDIVIDUAL
CONSEQUENCES
– Lower wages
– Higher unemployment
– Increased crime
– Poorer health
– Reduced political
participation
– Reduced
intergenerational mobility
• SOCIAL COSTS
– Reduced national and
state income
– Reduced tax revenues
– Increased social services
– Increased crime
– Poorer health
– Reduced political
participation
– Reduced
intergenerational mobility
October 15, 2009
Economic Costs in California
Dropouts
Costs
California
123,651
$24 Billion
Los Angeles
12,367
$2 Billion
Fresno
3,236
$555 Million
San Diego
3,115
$534 Million
October 15, 2009
3. The causes are complex—
related to students, families,
schools, and communities
October 15, 2009
Understanding Causes
• Causes vs. reasons and predictors
• Individual vs. institutional factors
• Individual and family factors
– Demographic vs. behavioral/attitudinal
(alterable vs. unalterable)
– Proximal (high school) vs. distal (before h.s.)
• School and community factors
– Resources vs. practices
• Dropout vs. achievement
October 15, 2009
Reasons for Dropping Out
ANY SCHOOL REASON
82
Missed too many days of school
44
Thought it would be easier to get GED
41
Failing in school
38
Did not like school
37
Could not keep up with schoolwork
32
ANY FAMILY REASON
34
Pregnant
28
ANY JOB REASON
35
Got a job
28
0
10
20
October 15, 2009
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
8th Grade Predictors
(Percent increase in odds of dropping out between grade 8 and 12)
Retained (1-8)
150
High absenteeism (>25%)
150
75
Low educational expectations (<=12 years)
72
Low test scores
Low grades (6-8)
54
Misbehaved
30
0
20
SOURCE: Rumberger and Larson (1998).
October 15, 2009
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
Student and School Predictors
(Predicted 10th grade graduation rates by student and school SES, 2002)
95
93
91
90
89
Percent
87
85
86
85
83
80
75
80
74
70
Low
Middle
High
Individual SES
School SES Low
School SES Middle
SOURCE: Preliminary analysis of data from Education Longitudinal Study: 2002.
October 15, 2009
School SES High
Implications of Research
Findings for Policy and Practice
• Address both academic and social needs of
students
• Start before high school—more effective and
less costly
• Focus on individual students and institutions that
support them (families, schools, and
communities)
October 15, 2009
4. There are a range of
possible solutions.
October 15, 2009
Interventions
• Programmatic—focus on students
– Support programs
– Alternative programs/schools
• Systemic—focus on system
–
–
–
–
Comprehensive school reform
School/community partnerships
School/district capacity building
State policies
October 15, 2009
Programmatic Solutions
• Advantages
– Easier to design, fund, implement, evaluate
• Disadvantages
– Limited impact--only appropriate where dropout
problem is small
– Adds to programmatic “overload” at local level
– Few proven programs—What Works Clearinghouse
has identified five proven programs
October 15, 2009
What Works Clearinghouse
(US Department of Education)
• Reviewed 84 studies of 22 dropout interventions
• Only 23 studies of 16 interventions had rigorous
evaluations
–
–
–
–
Seven effective in reducing dropout rates
Six effective in improving student progress toward graduation
Four effective in improving completion (inc. GED) rates
Zero effective in improving graduation rates
October 15, 2009
Systemic Solutions
• Advantages
– Potential to impact more students—more appropriate in “dropout
factories”
– Potential to impact multiple educational outcomes (test scores
and dropout rates)
• Disadvantages
– More difficult to alter families, schools, and communities
– Few proven comprehensive school reform models—
Comprehensive School Reform Quality Center identified 3 out of
18 models that significantly improved graduation rates
– Unclear what incentives, resources, and support needed to
improve school and district capacity
October 15, 2009
CDRP Policy Report
(released February 27, 2008)
• Policy strategy—pressure and support
• Pressure—modify accountability system, report more
useful data
• Support—build capacity of schools, districts, state—
rather than implementing programs
• Will improve achievement and other student outcomes
• Improvement requires fiscal, human, and social
resources
October 15, 2009
What the State Should Do
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
Fix the accountability system in order to maintain pressure and to
allow sufficient time to address the problem.
Collect and report more useful data on dropouts and the state’s
progress in improving graduation rates.
Develop high school reform standards and create “lighthouse”
districts to implement them in schools with high dropout rates.
Undertake middle school reform.
Make strategic investments in proven dropout prevention
strategies targeting the most disadvantaged students and schools.
October 15, 2009
Proven Interventions
Benefit-Cost Ratio
Preschool
2.33
Preschool + Early Childhood
3.59
Class size reduction in grades K-3 (15 to 1)
--All students
--Low-income students
1.29
2.11
Raise teacher salaries
2.65
High school reform
4.47
October 15, 2009
What Districts Should Do
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
Marshal the will of the district and community to address the
dropout problem.
Adopt proven strategies to keep students in school and support
their successful graduation.
Develop a structured, participatory, and timed process for
implementing these strategies in all targeted schools.
Develop and use data to monitor the implementation of the
strategies and to modify the implementation plan
Partner with outside support organizations to identify strategies
and to develop and monitor implementation .
October 15, 2009
What Schools Should Do
1.
2.
3.
4.
Create a personalized learning environment for both students and
teachers.
Provide academic and social supports for students.
Provide rigorous and meaningful instruction.
Create connections to the real world.
October 15, 2009
Implementing
Recommendations
• Choosing between strategies, targeted
programs, schoolwide programs
• Selecting strategies and programs that are both
effective and cost effective
• Matching programs and strategies with local
context—populations, resources, capacity
• Evaluating outcomes of locally implemented
programs
October 15, 2009
cdrp.ucsb.edu