The Effects of a Dropout Program on the Dropout Rate at a Rural High School
INTRODUCTION
Institute of Education sciences (US Department of Education) defines dropout as a student who was enrolled at any time during the previous school year who is not enrolled at the beginning of the current school year and who has not completed school. Students who have transferred to another school, died, moved to another country, or who are out of school due to illness are not considered dropouts. School dropout issues have been a concern among educators for over one hundred years.
W.T. Harris initiated a public discussion of why students left school prematurely in an 1872 address to the National Education Association (Rumberger, 1987). Since then, hundreds of studies have been performed to identify causes and improve the national dropout rate (citation). In 1990, six national goals were adopted by the President of the United States and again later by the nations governors for the year 2000 (U.S. Department of Education, 2003). Goal number two of the six goals was to increase the high school graduation rate to 90 by the year 2000. In an effort to help school systems achieve this goal, Congress passed the Educate America Act. This act gave approximately 1.5 billion dollars to participating states to aid schools in developing and implementing programs that would help to achieve the national goal of raising the graduation rate (U.S. Department of Education, 1998). In addition, numerous school districts have developed programs and special initiatives to target students who are at risk of dropping out of school.
Reducing the number of students dropping out of school is not a simple issue, and the solutions are complex. A key to addressing the complexity of this phenomenon is to identify what causes students to drop out. However, identifying what causes students to dropout is difficult to do because there is no single reason why students drop out of school. However, creating supports within the school environment could change the chances of students remaining in school (Bridgeland, DiIulio, Morison, 2006).
Despite the many efforts of national, state, and local initiatives, dropout rates have not improved much since the enactment of the national education goals in 1990. Research performed by the U.S. Department of Education (2003) reveals that in school year 2000-2001 the graduation rate was only 68. Even in recent years, it has been estimated that graduation rate in US lies between 66 to 88 percent, which is further lower in minorities ranging from 50 to 85 percent (James 2008). The fact that the high school completion rate has not drastically risen over the years suggests that not everyone regards the drop out problem as a crisis (Mann, 1987). However, Lehr, Clopper, and Thurlow (2005) suggest that the three main reasons why we should take dropout rates seriously are the cost to society, cost to individuals, and the extensiveness of the issue.
Wises (2006) research suggests that because high school dropouts constitute a serious strain on the U.S. economy in the form of lost wages, lower tax revenue, and social costs related to welfare and prison. Some claim it is the cost to society that drives the need for federal and state programs to raise graduation rates and decrease dropout rates (Kemp, 2006). Dropouts are less likely to find or hold a job that pays enough money to keep them off public assistance (Rumberger, 2001). Rumberger further states that even if they find a job, dropouts earn substantially less than high school graduates. A study conducted by the U.S. Census Bureau based on earnings figures for 2002 found that those who have a high school diploma earn 270,000 more over their lifetime than those who do not. Lehr et al (2005) states that because many dropouts are often times working low wage jobs and depend on welfare, they are not able to give to society what they could have given if they had graduated.
In addition, dropouts cost the nation in other ways. Research reveals that dropouts are more likely to have incidences of health problems, high criminal activity and delinquency rates, and depends on government assistance programs more than high school graduates (U.S. Department of Labor, 2003). Therefore, keeping children in school must be seen as a cost effective method of keeping them out of correction facilities, mental health wards, and welfare programs as adults (Kronick Hargis, 1998).
Additionally, the costs associated with the incidence of dropout for the individual are immense. Dropouts are more likely to experience negative outcomes such as unemployment, underemployment, or incarceration (Preventing Dropout, 2006). Research has demonstrated that students who drop out of school are 72 more likely to be unemployed as compared to high school graduates (U.S. Department of Labor, 2003). Lehr et al (2005) states that many dropouts tend to have jobs that do not use the skills that they possess. Dropouts are found among the population in jails more often than those who have graduated. According to the Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention (1995), nearly 80 of individuals in prison do not have a high school diploma. A recent study, The Silent Epidemic, performed by Bill and Melinda Gates has raised attention about the cost of dropping out of school to the individual. According to Time Magazine (2006), The Silent Epidemic expresses the notion that dropouts will more than likely become a member of the low sector of the economy, where most low-wage jobs have either moved overseas or are increasingly filled by even lower-wage immigrants.
The extensiveness of the dropout problem threatens the nations productivity and represents a terrible waste of young lives (Lehr et al., 2005). Today, nearly all students are expected to graduate from high school with a diploma. Yet, hundreds of thousands of students in the United States leave school early without successfully completing school (National Center for Educational Statistics, 2002). As per one of the fact sheet prepared (updated in 2009) by Alliance for Excellent Education, indicating statistics for high school dropouts in America, dropouts in 2008 alone will contribute to 319 billion wage loss over their lifetime. Also, it has been estimated that if the graduation rates of Hispanic, African American and Native American students would be raised to that of white students, then it will add 310 billion to the US economy due to increase in personnel income. One in five high schools in the United States have weak promoting power, which indicates unacceptably low graduation rates and high dropout rates (Balfanz Letgers, 2004). In the nation, there is currently between 900-1000 high schools in which graduating are a 5050 chance. These schools represent 8 of all regular and vocational high schools with an enrollment of 300 or more students (National Association of Secondary School Principals, 2004).
Research performed by the U.S. Department of Education found that identifying reasons why students drop out of school has been the real issue when addressing the dropout problem in America. Research identified school structure as a reason why some students are prone to dropping out of school (Rumberger, 2001). Most high schools are designed to treat all students in a similar way. Students receive the same number of classes a day and all are required to take the same types of academic programs. Mann (1987) states that forcing everyone into the same academic program might accelerate the dropout problem more then we realize. Schools have also raised standards over the years and consequently, the number of students being retained has also increased (Balfanz Letgers, 2004). Students retained by one grade have a 40-50 increased risk of dropping out of high school (Mann, 1987).
Identifying students who are at risk of dropping out of school has been another issue for many school districts who have tried to develop programs to address the dropout problem. Identifying subgroups is important because subgroups are critical to lowering the dropout rate (Swanson, 2004). For example, special education students make up a high percentage of the dropout rate. According to data collected from the U.S. Department of Education (2000), the percentage of students dropping out of school with emotional and behavioral disabilities was about 50. Research indicates nearly one fourth of students with learning disabilities drop out of school (Lehr, et al., 2005).
A number of outcomes have been associated with dropping out of school. These include unemployment, high incidence of health problems, and high crime and delinquency rates (Kronick Hargis, 1998). Schargels (2004) research reveals low-self esteem, marrying someone at-risk, raising at-risk children, and not being able to thrive in the 21st century due to the negative effects of dropping out of school. Theoretical Framework for the Study There are three underlying assumptions framing this study. The first of these is the notion that school drop out rates can be attributed to curriculum and instructional factors, which are factors found within the institutional structure of school and are not controlled by the student. A second assumption is that a push-out effect attributes to the dropout rate. The third assumption is the assumption that the poverty level of a student adds to the probability of a student dropping out. Each of these assumptions helps to explain why young people drop out of school, an issue of dire importance for our communities. The following paragraphs further elaborate on each of these issues.
Curriculum Causalities The first underlying assumption has to do with the academic curriculum. Curriculum components related to dropout rate reduction are identified in the work of Kronick (1998). One of these components is the lock-step curriculum. Kronick (1998) believes most dropout cases should be viewed as curriculum casualties rather than personal, family, or financial problems. Curriculum casualty is often a product of the attempt to fit a student within a rigid curriculum structure. For example, soon after students start school they find themselves moving along in separate portions of the school curricula path, or engaged in tracking. Higher achieving students follow one side of the path and the lower achieving students follow another. The part of the path traveled by the lower achieving student is often full of barriers that disrupt progress for the student along the way (Wise, 2006). Sometimes the curriculum path is similar for both students, and this presents a problem. Some students find the curricula easy, some difficult, and some the cause of academic failure. When students fail within this lock-step curriculum, the problem is typically viewed as the students problem and not one based on the curriculum. The dropout who is a product of curriculum casualty is the product of an attempt to fit her or him to the rigid curricular structure. This condition must be reversed if we are to make significant headway in eliminating dropouts (Kronick Hargis 1998). Push-Out Effect A second underlying assumption has to do with the idea of schools pushing students out. The push-out (Sinclair, 2005) is a low achiever like the curriculum casualty dropout, but this student is counseled or pushed out of school prior to graduation. Some research suggests that students who present a problem for the school in terms of reaching an academic goal are also pushed out. For example, in some schools where funding is dependent on the academic achievement of students, if the school gets rid of low achieving students, academic performance will go up and funding will increase. Students are also pushed out of school because they may present discipline problems or have become too old (Attendance, 2006).
Push-outs are often times low academic achievers who avoid failure situations by avoiding school (Kemp, 2006, Dynarski and Gleason 2002). They have attendance problems which results in difficulty keeping up with school work requirements. Push-outs oftentimes face the reoccurring cycle of being placed in special educational programs or alternative learning environments. Students who are pushed out seem to be punished for behavior in school and punished if they try to avoid school (Kronick Hargis, 1998).
Another factor pushing students to drop out of school is the high stakes accountability emphasis placed on graduation examinations (Clarke, Haney, Madaus, 2001). In order to meet the rigorous academic standards set nationally, many states have adopted graduation exams as an accountability method for completing high school. If the exam is not passed the student will not graduate from high school. Research reveals that mandatory high school graduation exams increase the probability that low-achieving students will dropout of school (Jacob, 2001). The same research reveals that students in states that use mandatory graduation exams are 25 more likely to drop out of high school than peers in states with non-mandatory graduation exams.
Poverty Factors The largest category of dropout students includes students who are impoverished. Research indicates impoverished students are at greater risk of dropping out of school than students who are not impoverished (Miranda, 1991). The United States Bureau of Census (2003) reveals the poverty rate for children under 18-years-old in the United States was 17.6 and 20.3 for children under the age of 6. The reason impoverished students drop out usually comes from individual factors that have to do with personal issues (Sinclair, 2005). For instance, impoverished students may need to stay home to take care of a sick family member or have a dire need to work to support the family.
Another poverty factor is that of community and peers. Cabanaros (1998) research reveals that students living in poor communities may be more likely to have friends who dropped out, which increases the likelihood of dropping out of school. Some research also demonstrates that communities influence dropout rates by providing favorable employment opportunities during and after school (Goldschmidt Wang, 1999). While many of these studies demonstrate that communities and peers influence dropout rates, they are unable to explain how they do so (Rumberger, 2001).
Understanding why students drop out of school is a difficult task because it is influenced by many within school and individual factors. Rumbergers (1987) research indicates that students drop out for various reasons. A news journal reporter Alison Kepner, states that out of 500 dropouts (age 16 to 25 years) who were interviewed, different reasons were given for dropping out 47 said that the classes are non-interesting, 45 said that they are not able to match the standards due to their poor earlier schooling, 32 had preference for job, 35 developed inferiority complex due to failing in exams, two-thirds were victim of over-expectation from parents.
Therefore, keeping above factors in mind, to decrease the dropout problem program developers need to build various prevention programs that address all of the factors that face at risk students. Background of the Study A mentoring program was designed to decrease the rising drop-out rate among students at Alexandria High School in Alexandria, Alabama. The largest group of students who drop out may be categorized as being in general education in grades 9-12 however, the percentage of special education students who drop out increased over the school years 2002 through 2005. Special education drop out percentages were as follows 2002-03 13 2003-04 23 2004-05 32
During this study Alexandria High School was the largest high school in a rural industrial area in Calhoun County, Alabama. It was a traditional school, which housed both middle and a high school. The student population in school year 2006-2007 was 1062 with a ratio of 86 White, 12 Black, and 2 other. Student grade levels ranged from the 5th12th grade. The majority of students speak English. According to school data for free and reduced lunch, the socio-economic make up of the student body ranges from high to very low().
Many of the residents of Alexandria worked in Alexandria, Oxford, Anniston, Jacksonville, Gadsden or elsewhere in Alabama. All of these small cities, with the exception of Gadsden, are included in Calhoun County, and they are located approximately 1012 miles from Alexandria. The predominant job industries in the area included the Anniston Army Depot, Honda Plant, Solutia Plant, Goodyear Plant, Alagasco, and Alabama Power Company. Smaller employers in the area included the producers and owners of meat farms, fast food restaurants, grocery stores, the school systems, and other small businesses.
Research indicates that parental involvement is important to student engagement, achievement, and attendance (The Parent Institute, 2006). The faculty and staff of Alexandria encouraged parental engagement throughout the school year. Even though parental engagement is encouraged, there is not an organized Parent Teacher Association at Alexandria High School. However, parents were invited to the school during open house, as well as other school functions. Many parents also volunteered to assist with various school activities, such as library assistant or office aide.
The administrative team consisted of one principal, two assistant principals, and three guidance counselors. The counselors were responsible for student guidance and counseling, and coordinating the testing program. The principal and assistant principals are responsible for the administrative duties including student discipline, attendance, student supervision, and teacher observations.
The high school administration team became aware of the rising dropout rate after reviewing the schools dropout report during the 2006-2007 school years, which showed that although there was an increase in the student enrollment, the dropout rate had increased. A committee of teachers and parents were chosen by the principal to address the dropout problem. The leader of this committee, called the School Improvement plan committee, was a Special Education teacher for the high school.
The School Improvement Plan Committee designed a mentoring program that focused on the students who were at risk of dropping out of school before completing the 12th grade. The program included faculty and community partnerships whose members served as mentors for at-risk students. Before identifying students who were at risk of dropping out of school before the 12th grade, the committee first researched indicators for students who were at- risk of dropping out of school. The committee also looked at school records and found that students who had dropped out over the last three years had a variety of indicators contributing to their dropping out before completing the 12th grade. These indicators included behavioral problems, being retained one or more times, failing grades, poor class participation, excessive tardiness and absences, poverty, failure to pass the Alabama Graduation Exam, as well as poor participation in school and non-school activities. All of the aforementioned indicators were used when at risk students where identified at Alexandria High School.
Questionnaires were sent to the faculty, asking them to identify students in their classes who were at risk of dropping out based on the aforementioned factors. The questionnaires revealed that Alexandrias at risk population included approximately 160 students. Of this number 30 were identified as receiving services through the special education program.
Once students were identified, they were assigned to who would mentor them. The mentoring process included monitoring grades to ensure that students maintain passing grades. Each mentors duty included discussing and remediating students for the Alabama High School Graduation Examination, Stanford Achievement Test, and the Alabama Reading and Math Test. During a weekly conference with individual students, mentors discussed discipline problems, attendance, grades, and personal issues. The mentor made phone calls to the parents if students grades fell below 60. Community programs were also available in the Alexandria and Anniston area to provide opportunities for post-high school success. These community programs included Anniston Army Depot High School Industrial Cooperative Academy, AyersGasden State Community College Educational Talent Search, and Career Transitional Counseling (AyersGSCC).
Initiation of the mentoring program began during the 200506 school year with professional development for faculty conducted by the assistant principals. The professional development consisted of three book studies Boys and Girls Learn Differently by Michael Gurian, Patricia Henley, and Terry Trueman What Works in the Classroom by Robert J. Marzano and A Framework for Understanding Poverty by Ruby K. Payne. The Prevention and Support Services of the Alabama State Department of Education presented the Helping Alabama Students Graduate in-service to the faculty.
Benchmarks set for this program included Increasing the number of students who pass the AHSGE by 1 100 of students will receive information about proficiency levels on all standardized test scores. Purpose of Study As the researcher and former assistant principal of this high school, the findings of this study served a three-fold purpose. First, an evaluation of the effectiveness of a newly designed dropout program enabled school personnel to improve the mentoring program. This evaluation also helped determine if the program goals were achieved. Second, data collection instruments were used to measure faculty perceptions of the effectiveness of the program. This information would allow school personnel to gain improvement ideas from both the mentors and the mentees. Third, data collection instruments were also used to gather information on the impact the program has had on the school. Based on these findings, changes were made for a more effective program. Statement of the Research Problem Although literature pertaining to dropouts is voluminous, there is a paucity of research on strategies for evaluating the effectiveness of dropout programs (Kemp 2006). Since dropouts are a problem for society and themselves, it is important to identify effective drop out prevention programs. This study addresses the drop out issue at Alexandria by providing an evaluation of a dropout program designed for a rural high school setting.
Program evaluations are necessary to close the gap between what we know about dropout programs and what we can do to improve them (Losen, 2004). McPartland (1994) states it is critical to conduct evaluations of dropout intervention program effectiveness and make modifications as necessary. This study evaluated the effectiveness of a mentoring program designed to improve the graduation rate at Alexandria. This evaluation not only adds to literature related to dropout intervention programs, but also reveals modifications for a more effective program. Research Rationale Program evaluation is an element of dropout prevention that is seldom presented in literature. Fortune, Bruce, Williams, and Jones (1991) discuss the fact that there is a desperate need to evaluate what we are doing. Hahn (1987) states that there is a need for follow-up statistical information because the programs that are being emulated or propagated must also are evaluated.
Dynarski (1998) argues that evaluation findings are useful as guides to further program development and testing. Hahn (1987) further elaborates on the problem by stating,
Most initiatives build in a foundation of accurate viable data. When we attempt to address the problem and needs of potential and actual dropouts much of the essential data are lacking. With this lacking data many program developers are left with designing their own programs with ineffective strategies that could result in the increase of dropouts. (pg. 15)
Through evaluation program developers can look at features of the interventions that contributed to their success. Knowing that some strategies have beneficial effects is a good start. Dynarski (1998) suggests that from a scientific stand point, the logical and careful next step would be to replicate an effective program in a variety of circumstances and possibly with a variety of different modifications. Research Questions The goal of the mentoring program is to change the views about school for students who are at risk of dropping out. In order to find out if the goal has been achieved, three areas were explored in this study. The first area of research explored the changes, if any, of student perceptions of school. Secondly, this research explored each participants likelihood of graduation from school as a result of participating in the program. Lastly, this research explored possible areas for improving the programs effectiveness based on student and teacher perceptions of the mentoring program.
Three questions were posed to explore these areas 1. To what extent, if any, did the views of the students involved in the program change regarding school 2. What aspects of the program, if any, helped to change at risk students perceptions of their potential for graduation 3. What recommendations are offered by students and teachers for improving the programs effectiveness
Research Design and Methods Much literature suggests that there is no one solution to preventing students from dropping out of school that will work for every school (Rumberger, 2001). This is a decade long efforts to retain students. Many campaigns at national, state and district level have been started to improve school completion rate. Some were successful and many were unable to meet their targets or rather to show positive effects. Still, new programs and policies are being undertaken to decline dropout rates (Brian 2002).
Since, varied solutions are available it is difficult to generalize a specific solution for all the cases. Therefore, the program developer conducting this study decided that a comprehensive approach of identifying at-risk students early, seeking strategies that work to lower dropout rates, and involving teachers as mentors would be a low-cost and effective strategy for the school.
Two targeted groups of teachers and students served as the population from which data were collected. Students in the age group of 17-18 years were selected for interview because maximum students in this age are either passed or are admitted to high school. The nature of the research questions were best addressed by a qualitative research method. A focus group was conducted with teachers who discussed the desired program effect and helped to focus the questions for the qualitative research. Other than this, a student counselor was arranged for counseling of students selected for interview this helped us to understand the exact mental status of the student what is going on in the mind of students, why suddenly they loose interest in classes. This made it possible to find out reasons behind their dropout and possible solutions for the same (US Department of Education, 2001). Definition of Terms The following statements are provided as working definitions for terms associated with school dropout for the purpose of increasing the clarity of this research.
Alabama High School Graduation Exam (AHSGE) The Alabama High School Graduation Exam must be passed by every student before completion of high school in the State of Alabama.
At-Risk This term, as defined by the state of Alabama, includes the following Two years behind grade level Older than peers Lack essential skills Have adjustment and behavioral problems Long-term suspension Pregnant In jeopardy of not graduating high school Low socioeconomic Poor attendance Poor academics
Dropout This term has been used to demonstrate a variety of early school leavers (Rumberger, 1987). Many definitions have been written by states to identify dropouts. For the purpose of this study dropout, as defined by the State of Alabama, is a student who has enrolled in school during the previous year but not enrolled at the beginning of the current school year. The student has not graduated or completed a graduation program nor has the student transferred to another program, was not suspended, ill or attending a church function.
High School Graduation Rate Rumberger (1987) defines this term as being the proportion of adults who have completed 12 years of school.
Promotion Power Measure from Common Core Data including all high schools with a 10th grade located in the 50 states or the District of Columbia with 300 or more students in regular and vocation high school graduation rate.
Retained This term refers to those students who have been retained in the current grade because of a failure to obtain the necessary skills to move on to the next grade level. Delimitations and Limitations Some at-risk students decided not to participate in the study.
The mentee-to-mentor ratio was high because of the high number of at-risk students identified throughout the school.
Students in the pre-vocational and multi-handicap units who leave school because of age requirements are counted in the dropout rate. Assumptions Respondents completed the measure truthfully.
Participation in the study within the school was high enough to aggregate data at the school level.
The qualitative analysis of the data yielded sufficient information to increase the effectiveness of the program.
As background information for the researcher, this study, investigated four components believed necessary when addressing the dropout problem. They are Extent of the drop out problem Possible causes for the drop out problem Possible intervention strategies Controversies surrounding the calculation of the graduation rate. Literature reviewed for this study consisted of various books, articles, and other research materials that addressed the above components. In the following pages, each of the four components is briefly discussed, beginning with key points framing the dropout problem.
General Dropout Problem Fifty years after Brown vs. the Board of Education, the image of public high schools providing all youth with equal opportunity to receive high quality education remains inspiring and compelling. Current reality offers a much more troubled picture. Today, nearly all high school students are expected to graduate from high school with a diploma. However, thousands of students across the nation leave school early without successfully completing high school (National Center for Education Statistics, 2002).
Based on research performed by the Child Relief Fund (2001), approximately one in eight children in the United States never graduate from high school. According to the same research, this rate is based on calculations per school day, of 180 days each seven hours in duration, one high school student drops out every nine seconds in the United States. The percentage of eighth grade students who graduate five years later range from a low of 55 in Florida to a high of 87 in New Jersey (Greene, 2002). This research also indicates in 2004 an estimated 6,277,000 eighteen to twenty four years-old had not yet completed high school (NCES, 2005). Greene (2006) suggests that if we count the population over the age 24, the high school non-completion rate would be even higher.
Rumberger (1987) states that reducing the number of high school dropouts has become a national policy concern. One of the National Education Goals adopted in 1990 was to increase the high school graduation rate to 90 by 2000 (U.S. Department of Education, 2003). The federal No Child Left Behind Act of 2001 requires states to incorporate graduation rates in the accountability systems for schools and districts (U.S. Department of Education, 2003). As a result of this act numerous programs at the federal, state, and local levels have been established to help reduce the number of students who drop out of school (Rumberger, 1987).
National statistics based on the graduation rates in America indicate that school dropout issues are a problem in the United States today. Lehr et al. (2005) states the national numbers consistently show that the graduation numbers are not what we expect them to be. For example, the U.S. Department of Education has a Common Core of Data that reveals for the year 2000-2001 the overall graduation rate was 68. In school year 2002-2003, United States public schools awarded 2.7 million diplomas and the National Center for Educational Statistics (2005) calculated the graduation rate to be 73.9. Graduation rates vary greatly by states. Thirty-nine states increased their graduation rate from 2001-2003 while many southern states, in addition to Alaska, the District of Columbia, and New York declined (NCES, 2005). The 2002 graduation rate of 71 has not decreased much from 72 in 1991 (The Dropout Problem in Numbers, 2005).
When looking at dropout rates it is important to consider the subgroups of special education, ethnicity, and socio-economic status to determine how numbers are collected and how programs are planned (Lehr et al., 2005). Members of some demographic groups are at much greater risk of dropping out of school. Research suggests that about two-thirds of all students who enter the 9th grade graduate with regular high school diplomas four years later. For members of certain demographic groups these numbers are lower. The number of females graduating on average in 2001 was 72 compared to the male graduation rate of only 64. A report prepared by the NCES (2002) revealed that, on average, students from low-socio-economic backgrounds are at greater risk of not completing school. The NCES (2002) also reports the low dropout rate for low-income students is 10 compared to 5.2 for middle income students and 1.6 for higher income students. The 23rd Report to Congress revealed that only 57 of youth with disabilities graduated with regular diplomas in 1999-2000 (The U.S. Department of Education, 2001).
There has been considerable attention given to understanding and explaining the differences in dropout rates (Fernanndez, 1989). Rumberger (2001) uses two general factors to explain the differences in the dropout rate among racial and ethnic groups. These factors include differences in resources and social frameworks. Related literature suggests that students attending schools lacking resources to provide needed educational support in the form of low student teacher ratio, technology, and books are more at-risk of dropping out (Rumberger, 1995). For example, the U.S. Department of Education statistics (2000) reveal that child poverty is higher for African Americans and Hispanics. This results in the increase probability that minority students are attending high poverty schools with low resources and poor learning environments (Rumberger, 2001). Research addressing differences in dropout rates suggest that up to half of the observed differences in dropout rates between whites and minorities would be reduced if racial groups attended schools with similar racial and socioeconomic composition (Mayer, 1991). Although there is limited evidence, the aforementioned factors may help explain racial differences in dropout rates by emphasizing different causes (Rumberger, 2001).
Factors Related to Those At Risk of Dropping Out Understanding why students drop out of school is a key to addressing the dropout problem. Literature reveals significant factors that have been associated with leaving school include socio-economic status, attendance at school, involvement in school activities, academic achievement, ability to read, social skills, race, gender, and appropriate age for grade (NCES,2000). Rumberger (1987) states that a good predictor of a child dropping out of school would be a childs parent not graduating from high school. Lack of engagement in school activities is another predictor of students dropping out of school (Kemp, 2006).
Hahn (1987) argues that a students region and size of city are factors that place some students at risk of dropping out of school. Research performed by Balfanz and Letgers (2003) reveal that 80 percent of schools producing the highest number of dropouts can be found in the following fifteen states Arizona, California, Georgia, Florida, Illinois, Louisiana, Michigan, Mississippi, New Mexico, New York, North Carolina, Ohio, Pennsylvania, South Carolina and Texas.
There are often multiple reasons affecting a students decision to drop out of school. Understanding why students drop out of school may be the first step in correcting the dropout problem. When all of the factors about why students drop out in a particular school setting are considered, a strong foundation can be built for a program that focuses on increasing graduation rates.
Intervention Strategies In recent years many studies have identified different variables and predictors that are associated with dropping out of school. These variables and predictors have been categorized by the extent to which they can be influenced to change the trajectory leading to dropout (What Do We Know about Dropout Prevention 2006). Some variables such as socioeconomic status, disability, and family structure are difficult to change. Addressing alterable variables, such as attendance, support services and identification with school when designing intervention programs is more encouraging. This approach may have the potential to increase school completion (Wise, 2006).
Numerous research studies of prevention programs suggest school completion must encompass a broader view than simply preventing dropouts (Christenson, Sinclair, Lehr, Hurley, 2000). Promoting school completion is characterized by A strength-based orientation vs. a deficit orientation, A comprehensive interface of system vs. a narrowly defined system of operation, Implementation over time vs. implementation at a single point and time, Creating a personal environment fit vs. a programmatic One size fits all orientation, Longitudinal focuses, whereby interventions aim to promote good outcomes not simply create a bad outcome for students and society (Christenson et el, 2000).
Christenson (2000) suggests rather than using a surface approach to increase attendance and to temporarily stem the drop out rate, interventions should be designed to enhance school completion and target alienation and student disengagement from school.
A review of research on programs implemented to decrease dropout rates all emphasize the point that focusing on the individual needs of the student is a key component to a successful intervention program. The same review of research on programs used to decrease high school drop out reveals a variety of strategies designed to decrease high school drop out and increase school completion. The programs are explored in Table 1.
Table 1 Summary of Program Strategies ______________________________________________________________________________________ Strategies Researchers ______________________________________________________________________________________ McPartland Hayward and Faschola and Dynarksi Lehr et.al (1994) Tallmadge (1995) Slavin (1998) (2002) (2005) ______________________________________________________________________________________ 1. Academic behavior x x x x x assistance 2. TeacherStudent x x x communication 3. Personal counseling x x x x x 4. Family outreach x 5. Personal environment x x x 6. Structured environment 7. Vocational training x x 8. Connect school to x x students future 9. GED assistance x x 10. Smaller classes x ______________________________________________________________________________________
The evidence that many interventions overlap suggests that there are successful interventions that could help decrease the dropout rate. Knowledge of a variety of interventions that have been tried and have been successful suggests there is not just one intervention. One of the keys to success in an intervention program is linking the intervention directly to the need to be addressed (Lehr et al., 2005). Clear identification of problems will help program developers in designing the programs that are most effective for their schools setting and for individual students.
Allensworth (2004) states that finding out why students stay in school is equally as important as discovering why they dropout. If it is known what keeps students in school, then those areas can be strengthened and expanded.
Early intervention is another strategy that can be used. Several studies that have addressed dropout issues state intervention begins as early as pre-school. Detecting and addressing the needs of students with at-risk factors early on may aid school personnel in decreasing their dropout rate (Christenson, 2004).
The accuracy of graduation rate calculations has been questioned by many researchers (Wise, 2006). The calculation of drop out rates varies according to how the concept is defined. Studies show that a variety of methods to calculate the graduation rate have been used by school districts across the nation (Thurlow, Johnson Sinclair, 2002).
Multiple rates and calculations can result in conflicting information. The parameters and formula used to calculate must be carefully considered and explained. In an effort to add national consistency to the calculation of the graduation rate the NCLB Act requires states to define graduation rates in a rigorous and standardized manner.
NCLB also prevents alternative graduation certificates from being counted as equivalent to graduating from traditional high school. The graduation rate must be reported each year to the U.S. Department of Education and each state is required to show improvement each year, reaching a proficient level by the year 2014. Even though the debate of graduation calculations continues, many researchers agree that one method of calculation will yield a more accurate dropout number (Wise, 2006). Role of Researcher In qualitative research the researcher serves as the instrument for data collection, analysis, and interpretation. So readers may judge for themselves the reliability of this research, it is important for the researcher to situate himself as the researcher in this study.
Researcher has served as the assistant principal at Alexandria High School, the location for this research. Researcher served in this position for approximately two years. Prior to serving as an assistant principal, Researcher has taught for three years at Seneca Magnet School in Louisville, Kentucky two years at South Girard Junior High in Phenix City, Alabama and one year at Anniston High School in Anniston, Alabama. At Alexandria High School one of my responsibilities included overseeing the schools mentoring program for our School Improvement Plan. Researchers interest in this research was embedded in his desire to ensure the success of the mentoring program. In order for Alexandria High School to achieve Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) it was essential that to improve the dropout rate each year. It was highly important for researcher as the researcher to determine what the perceptions of the program as well as what was needed to improve the mentoring program in order to lower the drop out rate and achieve AYP. In order to find the most effective methods for improvement it was important to learn the views of participants in the program. This research gained the perceptions of participants in order to build a more effective dropout mentoring program that would help Alexandria meet its AYP goals and ensure the quality of educational opportunities for at risk youth.
Significance of the Study Schools across the nation still grapple with how best to address the issues related to dropout prevention. Presently, there is increasing pressure being placed upon local schools to enact change in their dropout prevention strategies that will decrease the number of students dropping out of school. However, the literature on the evaluations of programs to help decrease school dropout rates is lacking. Thus, the importance of implementing this study to evaluate the effectiveness of this program may add to the body of literature pertaining to program evaluations for drop out prevention.
This study may also be significant because it may broaden the existing literature on drop out prevention program evaluations. This can aid other program designers who are designing dropout prevention programs for their school district. Summary An overview of issues related to the national dropout problem was provided in this chapter. Balfanz and Letgers (2003) suggest the surrounding the national dropout problem are a reminder that the nation has much further to go in order to truly realize the vision for equal opportunity created with Brown versus the Board of Education. Researchers agree that finding the reasons attributing to students dropping out of school and designing interventions to address those reasons will aid in the prevention of students who drop out (Lehr et al., 2005).
Chapter two provides an in-depth look at the literature framing issues surrounding this study. Chapter two elaborates on the general dropout problem, discusses why students dropout and overviews programs designed to prevent dropout.
Chapter three consists of the research design and methodology used for this study. This provides information regarding the research approach and research processes. Chapter four is the presentation of the research findings. The qualitative data has been grouped together according to the order of responses. Chapter five is the discussion chapter for the study, where researcher has integrated research findings and literature review. This is followed by chapter six which is the final conclusion of the entire study.
LITERATURE REVIEW
In many states across America half or more of the students do not graduate from high school (Balfanz Legters, 2004). According to current national estimate, each year about one third of student in public school fail to graduate from high school (Bridgeland et al., 2006). This estimate reveals that one high school student drops out of school every nine seconds. Reducing the number of high school dropouts has become a national concern (Rumberger, 1987). Educators and policymakers throughout the country, at state and district levels, are concentrating on developing programs to increase the high school completion and graduation rates. Numerous school districts have developed programs and special initiatives to target students who are at risk of dropping out of school. However, schools are not solely to blame for the rising number of dropouts. Remmes (1989) states, everyone is to blame for a childs failure parents, teachers, counselors, and the community (p. 32).
Rumberger (1987) stated that different kinds of students drop out for different reasons. A review of related literature reveals an understanding of why students drop out of school. This understanding is a key to reducing the dropout rate (Bridgeland, DuIulio, Morison 2006). However, identifying what causes a student to drop out is difficult, because like other forms of achievement, it is influenced by an array of proximal and distal factors related to both the individual student and to the family, school, and community settings in which the student lives (Rumberger, 2001).
This chapter examines the national dropout problem by exploring various factors associated with students leaving school before graduation. The first section explores the extent of the dropout problem, the cost of dropouts, and dropout rate calculation discrepancies. Second, this chapter examines various researchers explanations of the reasons dropouts leave school early. Last, this chapter examines dropout prevention strategies, as well as dropout prevention programs that have been evaluated and deemed effective. General Overview of the Dropout Problem Americans view graduation day as the successful end of 13 years of schooling for many students. However, was estimated 1.3 million students who entered the 9th grade the year 2002 did not reach to their graduation day. The reason according to Wise (2006) was the rising number of students dropping out of school. Many of these students leave school with only two years or less left to graduate (Bridgeland, 2006). The problem of students leaving school before graduation has been a national concern for many decades. Even though education reform has been a high point on the public agenda over the last decade, the dropout rate has steadily increased (Thornburgh, 2006). The severity of this problem received national attention in 1990 when the Nations Governors and the President of the United States adopted a goal to increase the high school graduation rate to 90 by the year 2000 (U.S. Department of Education, 2003). However, in the year 2001-02 the graduation rate was only 68 (U.S. Department of Education, 2003). Additionally, the No Child Left Behind Act (2001) raised expectations by adding more accountability in an effort to improve the graduation rate for at-risk students.
Studies have shown a decrease in high school graduation rates over the last decade for more than 900 schools in the United States (Balfanz Legters, 2004). A study conducted by researchers Balfanz and Legters (2004) comparing the class of 2002 to the class of 1993, 1996, and 1999 revealed the graduation rate significantly decreased during the 1990s. During school year 2002-2003, the National Center for Educational Statistics (2004) calculated the national graduation rate as 73. There were 27,819,000 18-24- year-olds in the United States. In 2004, of this number 21, 542,000 graduated or earned a General Education Diploma, or went on to some form of college (The Dropout Problem in Numbers, 2006).Wyoming graduation rate increased by 2.3 (74.4 to 76.7 ) from 2001-02 to 2004-05 (NCES, September 2008). Cost to Society The students and the youths play a commendable role and contribute a major portion in the GDP of an economy after achieving their careers goals. They use their skills in the various sectors of economy which causes to expand potential GDP. A research conducted in the 50 largest cities of US confirms that fifty- two percent of the high school students are having a graduate degree in four years. This issue is a great threat for the nations economic development. Although, it was aimed to increase the graduation rate by the year 2000 in US (Sinclair, 1994 Thompson-Hoffman Hayward, 1990), but in the present scenario, it is not achieved to an optimum level. Studies have been conducted to know the economic cost of nations dropout rates. A recent report of McKinsey Corporation states that the countrys GDP in 2009 would have been 310 billion or 525 billion higher than actual GDP if minority students dropout rates remained equivalent to white students in 1998 (George, May 12 2009). Different agendas were proposed to eliminate this problem.
It is well known that a firm generally wants to hire a skilled labor so that it can maximize its profit in a short span of time. The labor force should be aware of the market strategies and should have an exact and clear idea about hisher work field. This can be only achieved by a proper understanding of the market and business concepts which requires studies at extensive levels. These very concepts are lacking in the high school dropouts due to irregularity in their education. They do not have the sufficient knowledge to contribute the firm in its profit. Lack of education causes them to work inefficiently in the market and this decreases their wages. If this inefficiency persists, the firm would likely to fire that employee until it gets a skilled one. This creates unemployment. So basically, the education is directly related to the employment which further expands GDP of the nation i.e. the quality and quantity of individuals job productivity is positively related to education. Also education is responsible for significant personal income growth. The unemployment leads the unemployed in a situation where heshe does not contribute much more in terms of tax revenue. Rouse estimates that dropouts pay about 42 percent of what high school graduates pay in federal and state income taxes each year (1,600 and 3,800, respectively). Due to this, the government bears a loss in the tax revenues. Therefore, it is necessary to have education for life-time earnings and social mobility.
The insecurity of good life becomes a fear factor for the high school dropouts. The want of luxurious and well maintained life prompt them to involve in illegal activities such as crimes, theft, etc.
There should be investment in the public education to increase the quality of education. There is an urge need of highly qualified teachers which could devote their quality time to the students. Salaries of the teachers should increase and proper training of teaching methods should be organized for teachers. Higher education should be reflected in the society and workforce training must be included in the education infrastructure. Investing in workforce training for those already in the labor force will help bridge the laborskills gap we already face. The motivation of being educated should be done at early stages of a student. Education loans must be provided by the government for poor students. There should be preventive measures taken for the dropouts.
When young people drop out of school the American society suffers many negative consequences. The cost of high school dropouts to American society is one of the factors that drive the need for federal and state programs to decrease the dropout rate (Rumberger, 2001). The economic consequences for a dropout are severe because, as studies show, many entry level jobs require a diploma (U.S. Department of Education, 1998). Research suggests dropouts are more likely than high school graduates to be unemployed and rely on public assistance, costing the nation an estimated 260 billion (The Dropout Problem in Number, 2006). Research also reveals that for those dropouts who find a job, it rarely pays enough money to keep them off public assistance (Rumberger, 2001). Thornburghs (2006) article in Time Magazine states, If their grandparents generation could find a blue collar job and prosper, the latest group is immediately relegated to the most punishing sector of the economy, where what ever low-wage paying jobs havent moved overseas are increasingly filled by even lower-wage immigrants. (p. 32)
Another study revealed that dropouts were almost half of the heads of households on welfare (U.S. Department of Education, 1998). This study also found that the increased reliance on public assistance was likely due to the fact most young women who drop out of school have children at young ages and are more likely to be a single parent than high school graduates. The U.S. Census Bureau (2002) data reveal those who have a diploma earn 270,000 more over their life time than those who drop out.
Research reveals the consequences of high crime and delinquency among dropouts. Dropouts are 3.5 times more likely to be incarcerated than high school graduates (U.S. Department of Education, 1998). The National Dropout Prevention Center reports that dropouts are a large percentage of those in prison and on death row. Another study revealed that three- quarters of the state prison inmates are dropouts (The Dropout Problem in Numbers, 2006). The National Longitudinal Study of Special Education Students indicated that students with disabilities had a higher rate of incarceration than those who had graduated (Wagner, 1991). Thornburgh (2006) states Dropping out of high school today is to your societal health what smoking is to your physical health, an indicator of a host of poor outcomes to follow, from low lifetime earnings to high incarceration rates to a high likelihood that your child will dropout of high school and start the cycle anew. (p. 32)
These outcomes also include unemployment, high incidence of health problems, and high crime and delinquency rates (Kronick Hargis, 1998). Therefore, addressing the dropout crisis should be viewed as an avenue to keep young adults off public assistance, out of mental health wards, and out of incarceration facilities (Kronick Hargis, 1998).
Dropout Calculation There are two commonly accepted calculation methods used for computing dropout rates (Bulter-Nalin Padilla, 1989 Rumberger, 1997 Sinclair, 1994)
These are Event method - It concerns with the percentage calculation. It measures the proportion of the students who drop out of a school in a single year. In other words, it calculates- What percentage of students dropped out this year Since it undervalues the exact number of dropouts and is liberal, this method is generally preferred by school districts.
Cohort method or longitudinal approach-This method involves only a group of students who are expected to graduate together across the secondary school. It says- What percentage of students entering the X grade in a certain school district drop out after Y years It is the most conservative and, consequently, accurate method (Morrow, 1986 Wolman, Bruininks, Thurlow, 1989).This method is not used by school districts because it leads to an unfavorable dropout rate.
Another method which is not used frequently is Status rate. It measures the proportion of students who have not completed high school and are not enrolled on a specific day (Kemp, 2006).
Key insights Due to left out of school American society suffers through many negative consequences
An estimated is that as high as 1.3 million students entering to the 9th grade do not attend their graduation day due to the rising numbers of student drop out from schools.
The basic problem of students leaving school before graduation is a national concern. . Even though education reform, public agenda over the last decade, the dropout rate has progressively increased.
U.S Department of education reported that in year 2001-02 the graduation rate was just 68. Additionally, the No Child Left Behind Act (2001) raised opportunity by adding more responsibility in an effort to improve the graduation rate for at-risk students.
In America more than 900 schools student didnt turn up for the high school graduation. National Center for Educational Statistics (2004) calculated that the national graduation rate as 73.
It is a drive that requires federal and state programs to diminish the dropout rate. Economic penalty for a dropout are brutal because, as studies show, numerous entry level of jobs require only a diploma student.
More dropouts problem are from high school students and estimate are 260 billion (The Dropout Problem in Number, 2006). It also reveals that all those student who dropout from schools and joint job get sufficient money.
On the other side due to this dropout crime rate and health problem and delinquency are increased.
According to the National Dropout Prevention Center reports that dropouts are a great percentage of those in jail and on death row. Sub-Groups It is an unfortunate fact that some subgroups are at greater risk than others of dropping out. However, when looking at the dropout rate it is important to look at these subgroups to determine how numbers are collected (NCES, 2002). For example, when looking at race and ethnic background, some research has found that the school completion rates for Hispanics and African Americans are lower than for other groups (NCES, 2002). This research reveals that 64 of Hispanic and 78 of African American students versus 82 of White students graduated from high school. Rumberger (2001) explains the differences in the dropout rates across ethnic and racial lines using a method used by the National Research Council Panel on High Risk Youth (1993).
This approach suggests differences in resources and social frameworks are to blame for the differences in the dropout rate among ethnic subgroups. Related research also reveals that much of the differences in the dropout rate among ethnic and racial lines can be attributed to differences in family and community characteristics (Rumberger, 2001). For example, research performed by the U.S. Department of Education (2000) reveals that African American and Hispanic child poverty rates are higher than those for whites. Because of this high child poverty rate, minority students are more likely to live in high poverty communities and attend high poverty schools with lower resources (U.S. Department of Education, 2000).
Other subgroups that raise concerns are students with disabilities, gender, and low socio-economic status. According to some research, only fifty-seven percent of students with disabilities graduated with a regular diploma in school year 1999-2000 (U.S. Department of Education, 2001). Gender is another area where differences can be seen in the dropout rates. Research reveals in 2001 a girl completing high school was seventy-two percent and while a male completion rate was sixty-four percent (U.S. Department of Education, 2002). Research concludes that the top reason given by girls who leave school before graduation is that they became pregnant and increasing pressure to take care of a new baby and keep up with school work became too much to handle (Bridgland, et al., 2006). This research also concludes that the reasons for male students dropping out of school are varied such having to work to support the family to discipline problems at school. Socio-economic level is another area impacting school completion rates are found. Research performed by the Child Defense Fund (2001) demonstrates that the dropout rate for students with low socio-economic status is ten percent compared to five percent for middle socio-economic status and two percent for students with high socio-economic status. The differences in the graduation rate along socio-economic status lines could be attributed to the fact that most low socio-economic students live and attend schools in areas with few resources as compared to middle and high socio-economic students who more than likely live and attend school in areas with medium to high resources (Rumberger, 2001). One thing needs to be considered here is that the target graduation rate did not include the students with disabilities. They were not considered while restructuring the education system. It was taken into account in 1990 when the Office of Special Education Programs (OSEP) required states to report on how many of these students were leaving school prior to graduation (Thompson-Hoffman Hayward, 1990 as cited by Kemp, 2006).
Note that the overall dropout rate for students without disabilities is lower than the students with disabilities. This is contributed by the fact that students with disabilities are not in position to estimate and evaluate their real potentials. So they unintentionally leave their studies which harm them in future and make them difficult to survive. The biggest fault is that the society has allowed this pathetic situation to emerge years of paternalistic government intervention which has finally allowed the crash of the traditional family and subsidized, depraved and reckless personal behavior. The dropouts are primarily youngsters who lose their control to bear the load of the schools, homes, personal lives, jobs, etc. For example, students with emotionalbehavioral disorders have a dropout rate between 50 and 59 while between 32 and 36 of students with learning disabilities drop out of school (Sinclair, 1994 Wagner, 1991).This is an alarming crisis on political basis as well as economic basis. The representatives elected by the people reflect the combined intellect of the electorate. It is a dire need to explore a well-defined education system which fits all sections of the society.
The effect of dropouts is being distributed over the economy as well. Its consequences are not limited to the society only, in fact, the failing to get a degree is transmitted over the whole economy. It reduces economic growth and productivity. These social costs include lower tax revenues, greater public spending on public assistance and health care, and higher crime rates. (Kemp, 2006)
The Bureau of Justice Statistics reports that 68 percent of the nations state prison inmates are dropouts. This can be supported by another fact and that is, the children residing in poor conditions having no proper facilities to live their life get involved in these activities which take them to the prison. They drop schools to in their early ages and make their lives hell. They aim to get success in life in a very short period. Therefore, education is negatively related to the illegal behaviors.
Key insights Sometime subgroups are at greater danger than the dropping out. when we look out the dropout rate it is more significant to look subgroups to decide how numbers are composed (NCES, 2002). As for example, when looking at race and cultural backdrop, according to some research school completion rates for Hispanics and African Americans are lower than for other groups and this reveals 64 of Hispanic and 78 of African American students versus 82 of White students graduated from high school.
Other subgroups make us to think about students with disabilities, gender, and low socio-economic condition. Only 57 of students with disabilities graduated with a regular diploma in school year 1999-2000.
Gender is one more area where differences can be seen by dropout rates, girl completing high school was much higher than male girl percentage was 72 and male was 64 (U.S. Department of Education, 2002).
The main reasons for male students dropping out of school are that they have to work to support their families. Dropout Calculations Even though the dropout rate has reached alarming rates nationally, there are researchers who dispute the dropout numbers. They believe the numbers are inaccurate because of the various methods for calculating graduation rates among school districts. Disputing researchers claim that the various definitions and methods of counting dropouts leads to unreliable aggregated national dropout figures (NCES, 2002). Through two decades of educational reform the issue of dropout calculations has been ignored (Thornburgh, 2006). An effort to agree on one common method of calculating the dropout rate has recently been made by the National Governors Association (Bridgeland et al., 2006). Research suggests an accurate count of the dropout rate may help educators more adequately address the dropout crisis (Orfield, 2004).
The areas that contribute to definitional confusion about the dropout rate are the various methods for counting dropouts. One example is the variation in the grade and age level. Some systems count tenth through twelfth grade, while others count ninth through twelfth grade (NCES, 2002). Bridegeland et al (2006) suggest that many school personnel have no idea what has happened to students who have left school, so they make guesses which also results in inaccurate calculations. Exclusions of certain subgroups may also cause an inaccurate dropout rate. For example, those who receive special educational services may be considered dropouts once they reach the age of twenty-one and are counseled out of school (NCES, 2002). Christenson et al (2002) suggest that failure to keep accurate exit and entrance data for students also results in inaccurate calculation of graduation rates. Three methods are generally used by most school districts nationally to calculate the dropout rate. These methods are called the event, annual, and cohort rates (Christenson et al, 2002). The event rate method of calculation measures the number of students in one year who drop out of high school. This method of calculation yields the smallest rate. The annual method of calculation falls between the event and the cohort rate in terms of percentage of dropouts identified. Annual rate measures the number of students, regardless of when they dropped out, who have not completed school and are not enrolled in a completion program. The cohort rate, which typically yields the largest number of dropouts, measures the outcomes of a group of students over a certain period of time.
The NCLB Act has defined the calculation of the graduation rate as the percentage of students, measured from the beginning of the school year, who graduate from school in a standard number of years with a diploma (Joftus Maddox, 2003). Any state deviating from this definition must provide extensive explanation in their accountability plans. According to NCLB, GED and other completion programs can not be calculated as the equivalent to graduating from high school (NCES, 2002). The act also requires states to report their rates annually with the goal of meeting a proficient level by the year of 2014 (Joftus Maddox, 2003).
The nations recent effort to create a common graduation calculation rate maybe needed in order to paint an accurate picture of the dropout problem according to Bridgeland et al. (2006). Researchers agree that no matter how we count dropouts, the fact remains that far too many students are dropping out of school, and they and the country are the poorer for it (Green, Swanson, Mishel as cited by Wise, 2006)
Key insights Researchers assert that the different definitions and methods of counting dropouts lead to undependable aggregated nationwide dropout information (NCES, 2002). Educational restructuring the issue of dropout calculations has been ignored since two decades.
Some areas that give to definitional mystification about the dropout rate for example difference in the grade and age level and 10th and 12th grade level.
NCLB Act has clear the calculation of the graduation rate as the percentage of students, calculated from the beginning of the school, who graduate from school with a diploma.
According to NCLB, GED and other programs can not designed as the corresponding to graduating from high school Why Students Drop Out Research performed by Rumberger (2001) examines the underlying causes of student dropout issues through two conceptual lenses. The first of these lenses is the individual perspective, which focuses on the individual factors that are associated with dropping out of school.
Variables such as values, behaviors, and how the relationship between these contributes to the decision to leave school are examined. This lens is a multi-dimensional framework that consists of several components. One component is that of student engagement. Finns (1993) research of student engagement describes engagement as active participation in school which results in having a feeling of identification with school. Additional research of student engagement performed by Christenson (2002) suggests that engagement is a multi-dimensional construct involving four types of engagement.
Academic engagement Academically engaged time in school assignments Behavioral engagement Participation in class, extra-curricular, and attendance.
Cognitive engagement Ability to process information or becoming a self-regulated learner.
Psychological engagement Sense of belonging and identification. Finns (1993) engagement theory suggests that in order for students to remain in school and graduate they must actively participate as well as have a feeling of identification with the school. This theory also suggests that a students successfully participation in school activities is directly linked to successful school performance, which promotes identification with school. Various researches suggests that addressing student engagement issues is a promising approach to take when addressing the problem of school dropout (Christenson et al., 2002 Finn, 1993 Rumberger, 2001).
Another dimension of Rumbergers (2001) individual perspective framework is that of student mobility. Research reveals that residential and school mobility increases the risk of students dropping out of school (Keeping Kids in School, 2006). For example, one study revealed the majority of high school dropouts changed schools at least once before withdrawing (Rumberger, 1993). The majority of students who change schools often do so because of discipline problems (Brigdeland et al., 2006). For example, when students are expelled or suspended from one school students often withdraw and enroll in another school. This process of changing schools often continues until the student eventually drops out of school (Rumberger, 1993).
A third dimension of the individual perspective is high school employment. A study conducted by Warren and Lee (2003) suggests that students who worked more than 20 hours a week were at greater risk of dropping out of school. The Silent Epidemic (2006) revealed that thirty-two percent of the students surveyed reported they had to get a job. The reason for having to work varied from helping with household finances to becoming a new parent.
A final dimension of Rumbergerss (2001) individual perspective is background characteristics. The characteristic found in this perspective includes ethnicity. The drop out rate for these subgroups is higher than other groups. This may be attributed to the notion that most ethnic and racial minorities neighborhoods, schools, and family circumstances are worse than other students (Rumberger, 2001). Research offers evidence that differences in neighborhoods can contribute to a students decision to leave school (Clark. 1992). For example, poor neighborhoods more than likely do not possess the resources to support after-school programs and positive recreational facilities for students (Halliana Williams, 1990). It is also likely for students living in poor neighborhoods to have friends who have dropped out of school, which could influence their likelihood of dropping out (Cabonaro, 1998). Family background can also affect a students decision to drop out of school. At least one study suggested that students from single parent households are more likely to drop out of school than students from two-parent households (Goldschmidt Wang, 1999).
The second component of Rumbergers (2001) framework of causes related to school dropout is the Institutional perspective. The Institutional perspective examines dropouts according to their institutional settings. For example, a number of factors within a students family, school, and community predict the likelihood of students dropping out.
Low parental involvement is a dimension of the institutional perspective that research has found likely to affect a students decision to drop out of school (Bridgeland et al., 2006). Astnone and McLanahan (1991) found that students whose parents are actively involved in the students education, encourage independent decision making, monitor their students activities, and provide emotional support are more likely to graduate than students without this type of parental support. Low parental income is another family factor adding to the risk of students dropping out of school (Rumberger, 2001).
For example, parents who have the financial resources to support their childs education through access to better schools and after school programs or tutoring are less likely to drop out of school. Research has also found that students whose parents are school dropouts are more likely to be at risk of dropping out (Thornburgh, 2006).
When examining the school factors involved in the institutional perspective, Rumberger (2001) suggests four types of school characteristics that influence student performance. The first of these characteristics is student composition. Gamoran (1992) suggests the social composition of students in a particular school may affect student achievement. For example, a school located in a neighborhood with few resources will more than likely have students with a low socioeconomic status. As mentioned earlier, research suggests that students who are of low socio-economic status are at higher risk of dropping out than those of higher socio-economic status (Child Relief Fund, 2000). It is apparent that schools with a high percentage of low socio-economic students are more likely to produce a higher dropout rate than those in neighborhoods with higher resources. Studies have also found school resources to be an underlying cause of school dropout issues (Rumberger, 2001). Factors like lower pupilstudent ratio, better equipment and academic resources, and higher quality teachers lower the dropout rate (Bridgeland et al., 2006).
A third factor is school structure. The size of a school can contribute to a student becoming a dropout (Rumberger, 2001). In many large schools students become lost among the many students and the risk of disengagement is higher (Finn, 1993). According to Rumberger and Thomas (2000) school size affects the dropout rate mostly in low socio-economic schools.
In an effort to better understand why students drop out of school a study was performed by Bill and Melinda Gates called The Silent Epidemic (2006). This study examined dropout issues from the students perspective. The study consisted of focus groups and a survey was conducted with young people ages 16-25 that identified themselves as high school dropouts in 25 different locations throughout the United States (Brigdeland et al., 2006). Even though some research suggests that high school dropout rates are likely the result of poor academic performance, The Silent Epidemic (2006) revealed that 88 of students surveyed had passing grades, with 62 having Cs or above. The Gates research reveals a variety of reasons for dropping out that were related to academic environment, real life events, and a lack of motivation and external sources of motivation and guidance.
Various researchers (Bridgeland et al., 2006 Rumberger, 2001 Legters et al., 2005) offer evidence that there is no single reason for school dropout problems. However, 47 of students surveyed revealed the reason they dropped out was boring classes. Another 42 stated being around uninteresting people as the reason for leaving school early. Many responses mirrored one another in the fact that respondents repeatedly reported school as being boring and uninteresting (Bridgeland et al., 2006). For example, two respondents stated that teachers stood in front of the class teaching lessons that did not involve the student. They also stated they make you take classes that you are never going to use in real life (p. 8). Sixty- nine percent of respondents cited not feeling motivated or inspired to work hard as another factor that added to their decision to leave school before graduation.
The amount of homework done was a direct correlate to students dropping out of school. The study indicated that 26 of students surveyed did no homework while 80 did one hour or less of homework a day. This result is a direct reflection of Christensons (2002) model of academic engagement. This model suggests that the time spent on school work is associated with a students disengagement from school.
Brideland et al. (2006) believe that the alarming rate of students who did not do homework or did less than one hour of homework a day could be a direct result of low student motivation or low expectations their teachers and other school personnel had for them. Many respondents to the Gates research felt if they had teachers who reached out to assist inspire them they would have sustained high school and graduated. Real life events were another area examined in The Silent Epidemic (2006) study. Many respondents suggested that areas other than school prevented them from graduating. For example, the study revealed that 32 of respondents said they left school to get a job and make money, 26 left schools because they became a parent, and 22 said they had to care for a family member (Bridgeland et el., 2006). Many of the respondents who suggested life-related reasons for leaving school reported doing fairly well in school. However, for a teenage parent the pressures of balancing school and caring for a child became too much. Several respondents stated they left because their personal circumstances caused for them to take care of a sibling or other family member while their parents worked (Brideland et al., 2006).
The Bridgeland et al. (2006) study also examined the area of academic challenges for students. One of the top five reasons for leaving school, offered by 35 of the respondents, was failing in school. Their reasons varied from missing too many days of school and not being able to catch up to the work being too difficult. Related research reveals that many students fall behind academically in the elementary and middle grades and are unable to make up for what has been lost (Rumberger, 2001). Of the students polled, many of them felt as though previous schooling had not prepared them for high school and passing from one grade to the next was simply too hard. They also reported that the difficulty of high school was a combination of testing being difficult, teachers not being available to give extra help, and classes being uninteresting (Bridgeland et al., 2006).
Finns (1993) research suggests dropping out is not a sudden act, but a slow process of disengagement. This slow process is clearly identified by attendance patterns. The Silent Epidemic (2006) reveals absenteeism as another top indicator of students who are at risk of dropping out of school. Fifty-nine to sixty-five percent of students polled in this study missed school often the year they dropped out, and 33 to 45 missed class often the year before they dropped out (Bridgeland et al., 2006). This study revealed a pattern where each absence made the students feel less likely to go back to school. In most cases a truancy officer was involved with bringing the student back to the place were they were previously disengaged (Bridegland et al., 2006). Kronick (1998) states students are penalized for coming to school with uninteresting curriculum, discipline problem, and failing grades, however they are also penalized for not coming to school.
Lastly, The Silent Epidemic (2006) revealed that parental involvement levels were low for those students who dropped out of school. The study polled parents to find out their level of involvement. Fifty-nine percent of parents were involved, with over half of them being involved only because of discipline reasons. The majority of these parents were not aware of their childs grades prior to them dropping out of school (Bridgeland et al., 2006).
Key insights
Reasons for leaving school Individual perspective focuses on the individual factors that are linked with dropping out of school. There are various variables such as principles, behaviors, and the association between these contributes to the choice to leave school.
There are many components for student engagements and these engagements are highly participated in school which results in the feelings of identification with schools and engagements are multi dimensional.
According to Rumbergers student dropout from school due to residential and school mobility and this was the same reason that student change their schools often. Warren and Lee suggested that those students works for more than twenty hours a week the number is high in dropping out from school. The financial perspectives and the reasons that students have to support their family or take up parenting responsibilities are some of the reasons of the same.
Due to racial discrimination and ethical minority also play important role in dropping out of schools. Reasons of Dropping out There is not a single reason of dropping out of the school. At Risk Students Perceptions of their Potential to Graduate Bridgeland et al. (2006) states While there are no simple solutions to the dropout crisis, there are clearly supports that could be provided to improve students chances of staying in school. While most dropouts blame themselves for failing to graduate, there are things they say schools can do to help them finish.(p. 11)
Many of the students surveyed in The Silent Epidemic (2006) felt as though being a dropout was their fault although they did feel as though the school could have done some things to help them finish high school. The most common area that students thought would have helped them stay in school was the area of classroom instruction and curriculum. Students felt that having curriculum that was more relevant to their lives, having teachers present interesting lessons, and having smaller class sizes for more one-on- one help would have affected their perception about school and likely caused them to stay in school. Tintos (1975) research paying attention more on reasons for dropout surrounded by customary face to-face education students. Beans (1985) form related student dropout to the customer student that is classically found in a public college. Longs (1989) model shows variables that shock self-directed and adult education. Powell et al.s empirical model expressed reason influencing dropout in detachment learning. Garlands (1993) research centered on reasons for dropout from distance education courses. Kembers (1995) open learning model mainly paying attention on dropout in distance education. Boyles (2000) model addresses preservation issues at the public colleges. Despite variations among these frameworks, they divide considerable ordinary factors along key dimensions such as
Psychological social Academic and Environmental. Furthermore, these all frameworks have an inter-relationship. For instance, Kembers model is based on Tintos combination concept while Boyles model is based upon Bean and Metzners pathway model. These models are based on assumption that the dropout choice is prejudiced by a collection of factors with multifaceted interactions among these factors. (Liu, Gomez, Khan Yen, 2007)
Kronick (1998) suggests that most dropouts are casualties of a lock-step curriculum. This lock-step curriculum is a one-size-fit-all curriculum that is developed for all students. In order to effectively address the dropout problem the curriculum will need to be tailor- made for the students and not the reverse (Bridgeland et al., 2006). Barton (2005) noted that a curriculum that creates a clear connection between school and getting a job is likely to decrease the dropout rate. For example, 81 of students surveyed in the Silent Epidemic (2006) stated that if they were provided opportunities for real world learning such as internships, service learning projects, and other opportunities, it might have increased their chances of graduating from high school.
Boyles (2000) stated that dropout is subjected by three dimensions Academic variables Environmental variables and Background and defining variables,
Boyles model was developed based mainly upon the Bean and Metzner (1985) pathway model with extra variables such as institutional dimension (Napoli(Liu, Gomez, Khan Yen, 2007). Gates research also reflected a need for smaller classes with more one-on-one instruction time. Even though low studentteacher ratio has been proven to be a positive strategy for addressing the dropout problem, in many low socio-economic areas where the dropout rate is the highest, the teacherstudent ratio is higher (Rumberger, 2001). Eighty- one percent of respondents reported that they needed smaller class sizes and more individualized instruction. Respondents believed smaller classes would have aided teachers in maintaining order and provided individual instruction time. There are several studies supporting the idea that smaller class size may help to decrease the dropout problem (Lehr et al., 2005). There is also research suggesting that small learning communities and interdisciplinary teaming are associated with lower dropout rates (Kerr Legters, 2004). Respondents also believed more needed to be done to help students with problems learning (Bridgeland, 2006, p.12). After school programs and tutoring is another area students felt would strongly affect their chances of staying in school.
School climate is also an essential part of addressing the dropout problem. Several studies have shown that students are more prone to stay in school if they feel safe in the school environment (Rumberger, 2001). Sixty-two percent of respondents surveyed in the Silent Epidemic (2006) felt stricter classroom discipline was needed in their schools. They felt as though their schools did very little to help them feel safe from violence. A safe school environment can help to address the truancy problem many at-risk students experience (Rumberger, 2001).
Rumberger (1995) suggests that parents who are engaged in monitoring student activities, talk about problems, encourage individual decision making and become more involved in school would more likely decrease the students decision to dropout of school. Seventy-one percent of students surveyed in the Silent Epidemic (2006) felt that better communication between parent and school and increased parental involvement are important to address the dropout problem. It is alarming that less than half of the students surveyed reported that the school contacted their parents if they missed school or when they dropped out (Bridgeland, 2006). Respondents also believed that increased parental involvement could ensure that students came to school everyday and attended their classes. Key insights There are no simple solutions to the dropout crisis, student clearly support and blame themselves for failing and dropping out from schools.
Tinto pay more attention on dropout surrounded by normal face to face interaction and Beans related student dropout to the customer student that is classically found in the public college.
Here many researches have given different models and all the factors of these models are inter-linked with each other.
Other researcher named Kronick suggests that most dropouts are casualties of- lock step curriculum and it is one size fit all curriculums that developed for all students. Due to lock step curriculum, the connection between school and getting jobs is likely to decrease the dropout rate among students of schools and colleges.
Boyles pointed out 3 dimensions for dropout -- academic variables, environmental variables and background defining variables.
Rumberger suggests that parents who are busy in monitoring student behavior, talk about troubles, support individual decision making and become more concerned in school would more likely decrease the students decision to dropout of school. 71 of students surveyed in the Silent Epidemic (2006) felt that better communication between parent and school and increased parental participation are keys to addressing the dropout problem. Interventions A review of programs implemented to decrease the dropout rate all emphasize the point that focusing on the individual needs of the student is key (Big IDEAs, 2005). The National Center on Secondary Education and Transition (2006) suggests addressing alterable variables that may work at Alexandria High School, such as increasing attendance, support services, and identification with school. These strategies have proven to be more effective than looking at variables that are difficult to change like socio-economics, disabilities, and family structure (Lehr et al., 2005). Alexandrias interventions focus on addressing alterable factors such as increasing students sense of belonging in school, providing skill building opportunities, improving academic success, addressing personal problems, and fostering the development of a positive studentteacher relationship. National Center for School Engagement has designed a simple framework for increasing graduation rates, called the three As Attendance, Attachment and Achievement. The same strategy is followed by National High School Center (Silverstein et al., 2007)
Attachment of students to school can be promoted by Designing curriculum that has significance in the real world. Forming small learning communities. Giving personal attention to students by teachers. Organizing Service Learning Programs to interest and engage students. Attendance of students can be improved by Starting extra classes for average and weak students who require extended learning time.
Taking serious actions against students if minimum attendance criteria is not fulfilled. Conducting parent-teachers meetings at regular intervals to make the parents aware of attendance issues.
Introducing light periods such as Games and Art Crafts in the time table. This motivates students to come to school.
Achievement of the student can be achieved by Teachers effort to develop the learning skills of students. The teacher should understand how to polish the skills of students.
Providing professional and vocational education to students according to their learning needs and interests.
Teaching students in their native language. This enables them to understand more. At the same time, English learning should be promoted.
Christenson et al. (2000) suggest that developers of at-risk programs should design intervention strategies that enhance school completion and target alienation and student disengagement from school. Much research emphasizes the idea that dropout prevention programs must have a broader view than simply encouraging students not to drop out of school (Thornburgh, 2006). Some research also concludes that prevention programs should focus on individual students and not utilize a one-size-fits-all approach (Lehr et al., 2006).
Related research on intervention strategies also suggests that creating smaller classes, vocational opportunities, behavioral and academic assistance, communication, and a caring and nurturing environment are all effective strategies to use when developing an intervention program (Christenson et al., 2000 Dynarski, 2002 Lehr et al., 2005). Dividing interventions into levels has also proven to be an effective approach when designing programs. Researchers Walker and Sprague (1999) suggest categorizing interventions based on the need of the student. The first suggested level is the Universal level, which incorporates strategies that can be used on a school or classroom level. This level targets students who exemplify characteristics of being at risk of dropping out of school. The Selected Interventions level focuses on providing students with specific assistance in areas such as problem solving, anger control, and interpersonal communication. The last level is the Indicated level, which focuses on specific behavior plans that address each students individual needs.
McPartland (1994) believes implementing proven models, programs, or strategies for dropout prevention are not simple. Orfield (2004) suggests those implementing programs should consider the degree to which the basic tenets of the program are compatible with the underlying philosophy, needs, and resources in the school or district where the program will be implemented. The committee involved with creating this program for Alexandria High School created the program based on the basic tenets including that pairing at- risk students with caring teachers who are willing to serve as a mentor for a student will decrease our dropout rate. This belief is supported in the research of The Silent Epidemic (2006) in which respondents felt that having a teacher who they felt they could go to for academic and personal support would have increased their likelihood of high school completion.
Rumberger (2001) states many dropout prevention programs should contain programmatic strategies that provide at-risk students with additional resources and supports to help them stay in school. Other research suggests addressing dropout prevention is best done through a focus on alterable variables.
Rumberger (2001) states because dropping out are associated with both academic and social problems, effective prevention strategies must focus on both areas. This means that if a prevention program is to be effective it must address all areas of the students life.
There have been few evaluations of dropout intervention programs. The research of Fortune, Bruce, Williams, and Jones (1991) reveals there is a need to evaluate what is being done in dropout prevention. Evaluation findings are useful guides to further program development and testing (Dynarski Gleason, 1998). Through program evaluations programmers can look at features of programs that are successful and redesign less useful elements. Despite a lack of evaluation, in general there are programs that have been evaluated and identified as effective program strategies to use when addressing the dropout problem. For example, the NCES (2006) research of effective dropout prevention programs found four programs that have been evaluated and proven effective. The first of these programs is ALAS or Achievement for Latinos through Academic Success. This program was a collaborative approach that was implemented and evaluated as a pilot program to serve predominantly Latino middle school students in the Los Angeles area from 1990-1995 (Rumberger, 2001).
The program target strategies consisted of a collaborative approach involving the family, school, student and community. Through the student component students were counseled, taught problem solving skills, and recognized for their achievements. The family component consisted of training to help parents become more involved with their childs academic affairs by participating in school activities, making more contact with the school, and supporting the students academic improvement. Through the school component the students received frequent teacher feedback, recognition and bonding activities, as well as intensive attendance monitoring. A community component provided job services, social services, and other services to help bridge school and home needs (Big IDEAs, 2005).
A premise of the ALAS program was that the family, community, school, and the youth must be addressed collectively in order for dropout prevention to be successful (Rumberger, 2001). The ALAS program provided the following interventions Remediation of the students ineffective problem-solving skills regarding social interactions and task performance through 10 weeks of problem solving instruction and two years of follow-up problem solving training.
Personal recognition and bonding activities, such as praise, recognition ceremonies, certificates, and positive phone calls home to parents for meeting goals or improving behavior to increase self esteem, affiliation, and a sense of belonging with the school organization.
Intensive attendance monitoring, including period-by-period attendance monitoring and daily follow-ups with parents to communicate a personal interest in their attendance.
Frequent teacher feedback to parents and students regarding classroom deportment, missed assignments, and missing homework.
Direct instruction and modeling for parents on how to reduce their childs inappropriate or undesirable behavior and how to increase desirable behavior. Integration of school and home needs with community services. (Rumberger,2001, p. 24)
The programs key outcomes were proven to be statistically significant. For instance, at the end of the ninth grade only 3 percent of ALAS students had dropped out compared to 18 percent of the highest risk control group (Big IDEAS, 2005). The outcomes after two years of evaluation were that the dropout rate was decreased, students involved in the program were on track to graduate, and absenteeism had gone down (NCES, 2006). The effects of the program were promising while students received the intervention, but the evaluation also revealed the effects were not sustained long after the programs termination (Rumberger, 2001).
A second program deemed successful is Career Academies, which employs a combination of career and academic aid for students who are considered at-risk. Career Academies was created in Philadelphia in 1969 for at-risk students at Thomas Edison High School (Building a School within a School, 2003). This program operated as a school within a school. Students involved participated in career theme classes. The career focus varied among participants. Students were enrolled into the program their freshman year and stayed in the program until graduation. The elements of the program include smaller classes, academic and technical skills, collaboration among teachers, parental involvement, and the building of relationships with employer and community partnerships (NCES, 2006). During the third year of this program, students were paired with mentors from local employers. This program focused on all students who were considered at risk of dropping out of high school. The key outcomes of this program were proven to be statically significant and the programs effects have been measured at least one year after termination of the program. The outcomes included 1. Higher grade point averages, 2. Better attendance, 3. Low retention rates.
Check and Connect, which is the program that Alexandria High Schools program mirrors, was an intervention program developed to promote student engagement through mentoring. The program was designed to create personal bonds and opportunities by building a trusting relationship with a teacher mentor. A primary responsibility of the mentors is to keep education a salient issue for disengaged students (NCES, 2006). Mentors are also responsible for providing on-going contact with students, teachers, and parents. Students who are referred to this program usually have low attendance, frequent tardiness, or issues with skipping classes.
Check and Connect is divided into two components. The Check component is a monthly assessment made by the mentor. This assessment is made by determining the students level of engagement through attendance, discipline, and involvement in school activities (NCES, 2006). Engagement is monitored through alterable variables which are in the power of parents and educators to change. The Connect component is divided into the Basic and Intensive levels.
The Basic level, which uses limited resources, is the same for all participants. This level focuses on teaching the 5 steps of cognitive behavioral problem solving Stop. Think about the problem What are the choices Choose one Do it, and How did it work (p. 5)
The intensive level is a more individualized level. The individualized needs of each student are determined by the assessment of student engagement. The Intensive strategies include Identification Encourages participation by parents and students in planning and transitional goals for the student.
SocialBehavioral Competence Role-play problem solving steps. School Support for Learning Negotiation with school administrators for discipline alternatives.
Persistence Building Reiterate that education is important to each student future. Students received basic or intensive intervention based on the monitoring risk factors. (NCES, 2006)
This intervention program was conducted at urban and suburban elementary, middle, junior high, and high school settings. The students involved were considered at-risk and students with learning disabilities were also serviced through this program. This programs evaluation found a variety of benefits including Students involved maintained their enrollment status, Students involved were engaged in school, Decreased truancy Improved literacy Students involved had a high report of assignment completion, Students involved were on track to graduate. (NCES, 2006)
Lastly, Coca Cola Valued Youth Program was also evaluated for its effectiveness as a dropout prevention program. The program was recognized in 1992 for its effectiveness and for meeting the national goal of increasing the graduation rate to at least 90 (NDN, 1993). This cross-age tutoring program serviced students who have limited English proficiency and are at risk of leaving school early. The goal of this program is two- fold. First, the programs aim is to build confidence and self- esteem in at-risk youth by allowing them to serve as mentors to younger children. Second, a goal of the program is to teach tutors the value of an education while increasing their bonding with school (NCES, 2002). Strategies included coordination of family involvement through involving teachers, students, and parents in setting goals, making decisions, monitoring progress, and evaluating outcomes (NCES, 2002). This program has three levels of operation. The underlying philosophy is the first level which emphasizes the ideas that all students can learn and commitment to educational excellence includes the students, parents, and educators to making decisions and creating goals. The second level is the Support level. This level includes curriculum training, coordination, staff enrichment, family involvement, and evaluation of activities.
Discomfiture may be one reason. Dropout rates are high in urban districts, and many educators want to admit. Some districts have constructed unclear dropout definitions and measurement techniques cover the fact that great numbers of students fail to graduate on time. According to some districts count GED recipients to pad their graduation rates, some others let students to enroll for a 13th and even a 14th year, which can create it hard to evaluate student outcomes among districts(Fossey, 1996) The Instruction component has five levels. These levels include tutoring classes, tutoring sessions, field trips, role modeling, and student recognition (NCES, 2002). Tutoring classes were designed for the tutors to meet with a secondary teacher to develop necessary tutoring skills. The tutoring session allows the participant to tutor a student who has at least a four year grade difference for four hours a week. The tutors earn minimum wage for their services. Field trips are taken two to three times a year with the focus on economic and cultural events in the community. These trips are also focused on increasing the students awareness of professions by exposing them to different professions (Big IDEAs, 2005). Role modeling consists of five guest speakers throughout the year, with the same ethnic background and who have overcome serious barriers. Student recognition is given to the students throughout the year by awarding certificates and through media attention and recognition luncheons.
The setting for this program included urbansuburban middle, junior high, and high school settings.
The outcomes of this program included 1. Increased reading grades 2. Increased self esteem 3. Better attitude towards school 4. Improved self concept 5. Improved perception of school completion. (NCES, 2006)
Understanding the reasons why students drop out of school is a difficult task to do, because like other forms of educational achievement, it is influenced by an array of individual and institutional factors (Rumberger, 2001). Some research has found that in order to effectively address this problem, effective prevention programs must recognize the value of each student and his or her family and hold the unwavering view that every child can learn (Roble, Montecil, Cortez, Cortez, 2004).
Teacher Mentoring Programs Studies show that students who leave school early often cite a lack of social and academic support as a reason for doing so (Croninger Lee, 2001). The Silent Epidemic (2006) reports that 65 of those surveyed felt there was a teacher who they could go to for school problems, but only 41 felt they had someone to go to for personal problems.
The Silent Epidemic (2006) reports more than 62 of respondents to their survey felt their school needed to do more to provide someone to help with their personal problems. Finns (1986) study revealed that students who dropout felt as if no one cared about them, and are unwilling to help with personal problems, and not interested in their academic success.
Positive teacherstudent relationships have been proven to be an effective strategy for dropout prevention (Orfield, 2004). However, in order for this relationship to be effective for at-risk students, teachers must serve as a caring role model who carefully guides the student in academic, discipline, and personal matters (Barton, 2005). As cited in research by Croninger and Lee (2001) positive social interactions with teachers can serve as incentives for students to come to school (Wehlage, Rutters, Smith, Lesko, Fernandez, 1989). This research also indicates that teacher and student mentor relationships may serve as a safe place for students when they need emotional support, encouragement, or help with personal issues that may be overwhelming for them to deal with. Teacher and student mentor relationships may also strengthen students ability and confidence to acquire a high school diploma (Wehlage et al., 1989). Research indicates that the impact of a well-designed teacher mentoring program is a low cost and effective strategy for keeping at-risk students in school (National Mentoring Partnership, 2001). The Common Wealth Fund Survey of Adults Who Mentor Young People (1998), as cited by Schargel and Smink (2001) found eight out of ten students in a mentoring relationship have one or more problems that put their health, (Placeholder1) development, or success at school at risk. Research shows the benefits of having a teacherstudent mentor relationship are improvement in academic achievement, social behavior, discipline problems school attendance, self esteem, and graduation rates ( NDPC, 2006) In an effort to identify academic and personal crisis earlier, The National Association of Secondary School Principals recommends that every high school student have a mentor to help personalize their education because the two-parent families, close-by grandparents, and community supports are not as prevalent today as in years past. Student and teacher mentor relationships can provide valuable resources that may help students solve problems and become successful in school (Stanton-Salazar, 1997). In addition, this research supports the idea that teachers can provide students with a stable emotional and caring relationship that may not be present in the students home.
Croninger and Lees (2001) research argues that one explanation why some students complete high school rather than others is the notion that some students have more resources to draw on based on their relationship with teachers in the school. This research explores the idea that teachers provide a form of social capital for at-risk students that they do not have at home. Social capital, as defined by Croninger and Lee (2001) refers to the social institutions that young people rely on for interpersonal assistance. These institutions can be found in families, community groups, religious organizations, and educational organizations. Croninger and Lee (2001) note the differences in the likelihood of some students dropping out can be explained by the quality of these social networks comprising the teacher and student interactions. These interactions may be in the form of tutoring sessions, counseling, or simply encouragement.
According to Croninger and Lees (2001) research, students at-risk of dropping out of school have two less forms of social capital than students who completed high school. Their research also indicates that dropouts had less interaction with their teachers outside of class than those who eventually graduated. This research further supports the notion that when at- risk adolescents have trusting mentor relationships with their teachers they are more likely to graduate. Still, further research is needed to assess the effectiveness of these mentoring programs.
Key insights National Center on Secondary Education and Transition (2006) suggests addressing adjustable variables that may work at Alexandria High School, such as growing crowd, carry services, and recognition with school can help in preventing the drop outs.
Christenson et al. (2000) suggest that developers of at-risk programs should plan intervention strategies that can improve school completion and goal disaffection and student disconnection from school Dividing interventions into levels has also established to be an effectual loom when scheming programs.
McPartland (1994) believes that implementing proven models, programs, or strategies for dropout prevention are not just simple.
Orfield (2004) suggests those implementing programs ought to think the amount to which the basic creed of the program are attuned with the original philosophy, wants, and capital in the school or district where the program will be implemented.
A joint approach connecting the family, school, student and community is suggested in this program to prevent the student dropout. The need of student counseling, training in problem solving skills, and familiarity for their achievements can help in intervening and preventing dropouts. The family component consisted of training to help parents become more concerned with their childs academic relationships by participating in school activities, making more contact with the school, and supporting the students academic development.
ALAS program prevent dropout successfully and this program deemed successful in career academies which also combine career and academic aids for students who are considered at risk.
Conclusion This chapter analysis the national dropout problem by exploring different factors linked with students exit school before graduation. Its explores the point of the dropout problem, the cost of dropouts, and dropout rate calculation discrepancies. Secondly it is pointed by various researchers in their explanations of the reasons dropouts depart school untimely. Last, it examines dropout prevention strategies, as well as dropout prevention programs that have been evaluated and deemed effectual.
Due to the drop outs of students out of school the American society suffers in various ways. These dropouts have negative social and economic consequences. The charge of high school dropouts to American society is one of the factors that drive required for central and state programs to reduce the dropout rate. The economic penalty for a dropout is harsh. The dropouts have lesser opportunities available to improve their social and economic levels. Different studies indicated that many entry level jobs need a diploma (U.S. Department of Education, 1998). There were various researches that concluded that dropouts are more likely than high school graduates to be jobless and rely on public help, costing the nation an estimated 260 billion (The Dropout Problem in Number, 2006). Research also reveals that for those students who dropouts to find a job, and earn enough money to survive in society have limited access to better opportunity at the later stages of their lives. Thornburghs (2006) article in Time Magazine states that there are many subgroups problems with students and they face various problem in societies and this also major for them to dropout from schools
Gender, disability and low socio-economic status are some of the main factors leading to dropouts. Some of researches revealed that only 57 of students with disabilities graduated with a normal diploma in school year 1999-2000 (U.S. Department of Education, 2001). Gender differences can be seen in the dropout rates. According to a research in 2001 a girl completing high school was 72 and while a male was only 64 (U.S. Department of Education, 2002).
Different researchers (Bridgeland et al., 2006 Rumberger, 2001 Legters et al., 2005)
present proof that there is no single reason for school dropout problems. However, 47 of students surveyed revealed the reason they dropped schools because it was boring out there in classes. Another 42 stated that they are not interested in studying in schools and colleges that is the reason they leave it before time.
Education is the only tool trough which one can achieve everything. It reduces crimes, and increases employment which results in the increases in the tax revenue. Investments in education provide significant returns. Between 1995-1996 and 1999-2000, there is a decrease shown in the percentage of students with disabilities dropping out of school declined from 34.1 to 29.4. Improvement in school dropout rates took place in almost every disability category, most notably among students with speech-language impairments, specific learning disabilities, orthopedic impairments, hearing impairments, and emotional disturbance (U.S. Department of Education, 2003).
Following table gives an evidence of the improvement in dropout rates of students from 1980 to 2007 among different races of the US population (between the age group of 16 to 24 years)
YearTotal1RaceethnicityWhiteBlackHispanic198014.111.419.135.2198512.610.415.227.6199012.19.013.232.4199512.08.612.130.0200010.96.913.127.8200110.77.310.927.0200210.56.511.325.720039.96.310.923.5200410.36.811.823.820059.46.010.422.420069.35.810.722.120078.75.38.421.4Table 2 Status dropout rates of 16- through 24-year-olds, by raceethnicity Selected years, 1980-2007 Source U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics. (2009). The Condition of Education 2009 (NCES 2009-081) A labor force well-equipped with education is the centre point for the new business and economic development. The economy of a nation can be at its optimum when job skills training are combined with high levels of initial education.
In an effort to better understand why students drop out of school a study was performed by Bill and Melinda Gates called The Silent Epidemic (2006). This study basically examined dropout issues from the students perspective. The study consisted of focus groups and a review was conducted with young people ages 16-25 that identified themselves as high school dropouts in 25 different locations throughout the United States (Brigdeland et al., 2006). Even though some research suggests that high school dropout rates are likely the result of poor academic performance, The Silent Epidemic (2006) revealed that 88 of students surveyed had passing grades, with 62 having Cs or above. The Gates research reveals a variety of reasons for dropping out that were related to academic environment, real life events, and a lack of motivation and external sources of motivation and guidance. Many students clearly said that they have to support they families that why they willing leave schools and college and start early in such a young age and we all know America is such a big capital state where ever small child can earn money according to level of talent and hard work.
Despite this continuous attempt to make the life of students better and well-behaved, the problem is still floating on the society. RESEARCH METHODOLOGY Research methodology has been developed on the basis of the literature review and research questions. The literature indicates that there is no solution that can prevent student dropping out from the schools. This is the reason of choosing a comprehensive approach for the study.
Qualitative Research According to Creswell (2009), If a concept or phenomenon needs to be understood because little research has been done on it, then it merits a qualitative approach.
Qualitative research is exploratory and is useful when the researcher does not know the important variables to examine.
This justifies the reason of using qualitative research for this study. A set of questions has been asked to the students. These set of questions were open ended and allowed getting opinion of students regarding various aspects of the student dropouts.
Target Group The target group of the qualitative research is the students. The target group has been contacted in person and the questions have been asked to them. Each respondent was allowed as much time as needed for the responses. Researcher did not interfere in the responses and limited her interaction to clarification of question and briefing the respondent regarding the objectives of the study.
The purpose of this qualitative phenomenological study is to explore the perceptions of respondents for their school, their likelihood of graduating and to examine how the effectiveness of programs can be improved on the basis of the students perception regarding various aspects of the teaching and dropouts. This study could be used to assist in developing future intervention strategies for prevention of the drop out rate. A qualitative research method is based on the natural occurrences was of a phenomenon. This methodology originated in late 1800s and gained tremendous popularity till late 1980s. This helped in understanding participants viewpoints. This supported gaining meaning from individuals. This also ensured equity in the research process (Creswell, 2005).
There can be various purposes for the phenomenological study. This helps in developing elicit meanings and the essence of experiences of the participants. This is usually based on in-depth reflective descriptions of experiences on the basis of set of questions (Miller, 2003 Creswell, 2003). This research has examined the phenomenon of students perceptions of dropping out of the schooling and their overall experience of student life. This perception based study allows in understanding perception and comparing it to the goals of the participant. Appropriateness of Research Design The nature of problem has been discussed in chapter one. This is clear from there that this study requires an understanding of student experience in the school. The student drop out is a phenomenon. There is a need to understand this specific phenomenon from specific information. This could allow having a general understanding. Phenomenological study allows collecting this kind of information. The qualitative framework helps to study the experience and attitude of respondents towards their own experiences and intentional behavior and elucidate meaning of performance experiences.
This is a nave form of study through the open ended questions an conversation regarding specific question. This kind of study is known as an empirical phenomenological research. The reflection of the experiences of respondents viewpoints help in addressing the research questions in an appropriate manner. The general meaning is derived from the nave information collected fro different respondents. Phenomenological Study According to Moustakas (1994) five main human science perspectives and models of qualitative research approaches are available for research. These are as follows
SHAPE MERGEFORMAT
Source Developed by self based on Moustakas (1994) All the above-mentioned qualitative research methods help in studying the human experiences in such a manner that can not be done through the quantitative methods. Quantitative methods help in knowing particular phenomenon, with the statistical responses, however these lack in providing the complete picture of the phenomenon.
These phenomenological studies help in getting the meanings and essences of experiences, descriptions of experiences. These can be formal and informal conversation with the respondents. This can also be conducted by a person with experience that further helps in understanding human behavior. This is possible that behavior and experience are not separable for the respondents. The integration of experience to the behavior of the respondents makes it complex process. The involvement and personal commitment required for such studies are high. Researcher has to deal with the complexities to develop research questions as well as in understanding of problems and entire research process.
The Hermeneutical interest of knowledge is based on self-reflecting understanding of a phenomenon and is philosophical form of phenomenological research. This is an integration of the technical aspects of psychology and this helps in understanding the phenomenon. On the other hand, Human science is a qualitative and phenomenological research. It also follows the hermeneutical interest of knowledge. This helps in providing a deeper understanding of a phenomenon. This holds social action and liberation in the core purposes of the study. This is critical and emancipator model of study.
Types of Phenomenology With various research needs, different types of phenomenological research methods developed over a period such as
Transcendental phenomenology Husserls has developed this type of phenomenology. This considers phenomenology as a tool to eliminate the prejudgment and presuppositions that has been identified. This is a challenging task. Researcher needs to describe things, issues and presumptions as soon as he identifies each. This is a continuous process where researcher tries to understand the, meanings and essence in the light of self-reflection, institution, common sense and consciousness. Moustakas (p 27) states that consciousness is an absolute reality. Moustakas regards consciousness as a product of learning. This is what it appears to the world. Intuition is an essential part of a phenomenon to describe self. Husserl has been preferred the use of intuition in the transcendental philosophy over the deduction methods.
Naturalistic Constitutive phenomenology Consciousness is a part of nature. Consciousness connects one with natural attitude of the world of nature. This study is based on the naturalistic phenomenology.
Existential phenomenology This study explores human existence and experience of free choices. This explores the actions that one takes in given situation to survive or exist.
Generative historicist phenomenology This studies the history of human, role in the human society and development of psychology. This is also a study of collective behavior like human culture and religion. This explores various aspects are part of human history. This particular stream analyses the meaning of the collective experience of human through the history.
Genetic phenomenology Genetic phenomenology focuses on the genesis of things based on own experience.
Hermeneutical phenomenology The study of experience of things and people around an individual, own experience and understanding of various aspects is covered in Hermeneutical phenomenology.
Realistic Phenomenology Realistic Phenomenology is the study of conscious and intention of real world. This includes the external and internal factors that affect the consciousness of an individual.
Methodology The methodology of the research analysis is based on descriptive phenomenological method as defined by Giorgi (1989). According to Husserl (1931), Phenomenology is the study of the lived experience of phenomena. In the descriptive phenomenological method Giorgi combines Husserl phenomenological philosophy with the methodical, systematic and critical criteria of science. This produces a methodology that assists the researcher in identifying and understanding the psychological essences, patterns and structure of an experience.
Giorgi (1997) states, Phenomenology schematizes the phenomenon of consciousness, and, in its most comprehensive sense, it refers to the totality of lived experiences that belong to a single person (p. 2).
The experience of altruism and the totality of the same can be unearthed and described through this study. Research Questions Research questions have been developed with respect to the phenomenal properties to be studied. The open ended questions allowed studying the shamanic states of consciousness or alterations in consciousness. (Rock and Krippner, 2007)
The research questions for this particular study are as follows 1. To what extent, if any, did the views of the students involved in the program change regarding school 2. What aspects of the program, if any, helped to change at risk students perceptions of their potential for graduation 3. What recommendations are offered by students and teachers for improving the programs effectiveness Population Creswell (2005) states that data collection in qualitative research should be done with a smaller sample using general questions answered with narratives. The participants should be selected on the basis of their understanding the central phenomenon of interest. The respondents are students. They represent different race, ethnicity, class and parent teacher involvements in their education process. Informed Consent All the respondents were informed regarding the research objectives and purposes. Their informed consent was taken before collecting data. Sampling Creswell (2002) advised the use of long interviews with 10 participants with direct experience of the target phenomenon is necessary for this kind of qualitative study. Small sample size of 5-10 is sufficient for the study (Williams, 2004). The sample needs to be studied in depth. Data Collection Procedure Data is collected with data collection instrument that is structured questionnaire with open ended questions. The information has been collected on one to one basis with the respondents. These were through personal interactions. The responses have been collected and compiled by the researcher in the form of statements.
The data regarding experience or phenomenon can not be achieved through the quantitative measures of studies. The views and expression of thoughts are not possible in quantitative research. The research objectives and research questions require information regarding human experience can not be quantified and validated as quantitative data this is the reason qualitative measures are the best for this particular study. Ethical Issues The data is collected with the informed consent of the respondents. All the respondents are ensured for the confidentiality of their information they provide as well as their identity. Confidentiality of Information All the respondents were ensured that the information provided by them will be confidential and not used for any other purpose without their consent. The identities of the respondents are kept anonymous in the entire research process and project presentation. There is no use of identifiers in the report or presentation that can disclose the identities of the respondents. Instrument The instrument for this research is questionnaire with open ended questions. The questions were based on the objectives of the research to study the phenomenon. The data collected consists of the experiences, views and attitude of students regarding various aspects of the drop out and their experience with their mentors. All the statements had equal values and meaning units. The generalization of the specific knowledge and experience was based on the constructed meaning and essence of the phenomenon studied.
The set of eleven questions was asked to the respondents. Respondents are encouraged to share as much information regarding their experience as mentee, their experiences of schooling and education, possibilities of dropping out and views regarding mentor relation. Validity According to Punch (2005) validity of data refers how well data represent the phenomena for which it stands. Overall validity of a research refers to the extent different parts of the study fit together (Punch, 2005). In this case, similar questions have been asked to all the respondents. The respondents were given equal opportunity to participate. Giorgi (2002) stated
Phenomenological qualitative research is not at all similar to the situation one finds in test construction. Rather, phenomenological qualitative research is closer to experimental situations and so the validity issue is not as pressing as is often supposed.
The validity of phenomenological data depends on the way data has been collected. The data collection should be done in order to gain valid knowledge and avoid the possible errors. The advance of science and meaning of objectivity can not be discriminated in this form of study (Giorgi, 2002). However the chances of error can not be neglected due to the subjectivity of the information. The knowledge and subjectivity is correlated with each other and clarification of the role of subjectivity in the knowledge achieved helps in maintaining validity. In this way, the role of subjectivity has been justified. Data Analysis The data is analyzed on the basis of experience and judgmental abilities of the researcher. Researcher has utilized available information and literary sources to analyze the data. The general aspects of all the collected data have been categorized and summarized in a tabular form. This helped to generalize the responses. Preparation and organization of Data for analysis The data has been collected through recording. This includes organization of sentence forms. The similar responses of all the respondents have been grouped together in the form of tables.
For the data analysis, the process followed by the researcher is as follow
Table Data Analysis Process Step by step Approach
Steps Analysis stepChallenge Strategy to deal with the challenge
Step 1Gathering the acquired knowledge about the phenomenon of drop outExtensive information available on drop out and mentoring Researcher focused on drop out interventions and role of mentor
Step 2 (Gestalt phenomenology)Read response to get an idea of what Get sense of wholeDeveloping an understanding different aspects
Step 3 (Giorgi, 1989 as cited by)Identifying the groups of similar responses. This is a complex process due to variation of lengthApproach should be focused of identifying the sentences and meaning
Step 4 (Giorgi, 1989 as cited by)Identifying transformed meaning of units for phenomenological analysisPsychologically Descriptive and common sense based information without any theoretical explanation Common sense method is used
Step 5 (Giorgi, 1989 as cited by)Review of the transformed meanings of the groups, understanding the patterns and common elements of different responsesLevel of complexity goes down from previous, this is identification and grouping of similar responsesFocused and consistent approach is very crucialSource developed on the basis of Phenomenological Study conducted by Mastain (2006)
RESEARCH FINDINGS
Student Interview Respondents were asked Describe your relationship with your mentor The response of this has been summarized in the table below.
Table 1 Response of Question 1 Question 1ResponseStudent 1She was like my best friend. We talked about everything and she used to help me with my homework. I used to go to her house and she would help me a lot. We were really close.Student 2Ms. X is my mentorteacher and I like her a lot.Student 3Kind of good. Kind of bad. I have a little bit of tension and frustration, because my mentor is a little bit too hard.Student 4Um, shes easy to talk to, she um, teaches me a lot in school and when Im having a bad day she understands the way I feel, if I have a question she always has an answer for me. Student 5I like the one who help me. He takes his time to help you step by step. He will go over it step by step and he will stop where you need help. He mentors.Student 6Well, she was there for me when I was having learning difficulties and every since 10th grade she has been there for me to talk to. When I have a problem I can talk to her.Student 7Uh, its great. I can say anything to her and its the same with here to me because we sit and talk and talk and be honest.Student 8Shes nice. She helps me with my classes. She tells me good things that I should do. She helps me stay out of trouble and help me stay be better. She tells me to cool down if I get real mad, to count backwards from 100 or just come to her room, sit down and cool off and think of something that makes me happy.Student 9We are very close.Student 10Well, I go to him. Talk to him everyday to see how hes doing. If I have a problem that day Ill go to him and he helps me figure out what I should do and what the best approach should be.Student 11Well, she helped me and pushed me a lot and I like that.Student 12She was one of my friends. She helped with homework.Student 13She is a great teacher and I like her.Student 14Kind of good, kind of bad. Ive had a bit of tension and I get frustrated because he a little bit too hard but I believe it is for my own good.The respondents have given following responses to the question How has your mentor helped you with school, as well as personal issues
Table 2 Response of Question 2 Question 2ResponseStudent 1She helped me with both. She has been like me second mother. She knows what Ive been through. Ive known her for 5 years now and we are close. Yes. It made me feel more protected. I had someone to go to. I used to go to her in the afternoon and we would just talk about things. Student 2She has helped me with my work and other personal issues.Student 3Hes made the subject more fun than it has been.Student 4She has made me more comfortable about asking questions in class and made learning easier for me. I feel comfortable with talking to her about personal issues.Student 5I learn a lot in school. He stays after school and I aintS even gone lie, I only passed two parts and I started tutoring with him I passed two more and now I only have one. So he does a lot for me. I feel like if I need anything Mr. Tidwell will help me out.Student 6She asks me what is the problem in a class then she helps me with my work. She helps me with personal problems too.Student 7Yes, she got me set up Mrs. Davis. She helped me when my parents passed away.Student 8Yes, like I got in trouble outside of school with the court. I needed someone to write something for me to say that Im doing well. She wrote if for me and I had to take it to my probation officer.Student 9Yes, well like Im sleeping in class and shes like wake up and take down your notes. She makes sure that I take down notes.Student 10Yes, if Im struggling in a class, whether they teach that class or not, they will help me or find someone who can help. If its like Im upset, I can go talk to him about it and not feel like they will go tell someone else.Student 11No, not with personal issues. I dont feel comfortable yet talking to her about personal issues. Maybe I can trust her next year and then I can form a better relationship.Student 12She helped me with both. She knew what I going through.Student 13Yes, she has. I can talk to her about anything.Student 14Yes, hes made the subject more fun. Sometimes, hes comical and serious about personal issues. This helps me out. I trust him. If a student doesnt trust the mentor it wont be good because as the mentor tries to push the student along, they are going to rebel more.
Respondents were asked How did you feel about school before you had a mentor Why did you feel this way Their responses are summarized below
Table 3 Response of Question 3 Question 3ResponseStudent 1I felt kind of bad because I didnt have many friends and everyone would exclude me. I was left out because I wasnt popular. But I began to think about why I should care what people think.Student 2I felt alright. Okay, I guess.Student 3Sometimes hes comical and sometimes hes serious. I trust him. If I dont trust him it wont do much good.Student 4When Im not feeling to good or Ive had a bad day or night and I dont feel like going to school, I think about and know she will help me through it and feel better and get through it.Student 5First, I didnt think I was going to make it because I wouldnt pass the Algebra test. Then he started going over stuff with me and put a little faith in me that I can do it.Student 6It was normal but when she can, she was like an older sister and I felt like I could talk to her about anything.Student 7Bought the same as I do now. It hasnt changed how I feel. I just have someone to talk to.Student 8I didnt want to come to school, just skip all the time and stuff like that. I just didnt like school.Student 9I dont know. Its alright.Student 10To be honest I didnt like school at all until I found someone to help me. I feel its important for teachers to connect with students because if they dont kids wont like school.Student 11It was rough because I was afraid to ask questions when I knew I needed the help. When they put her in my life, I wasnt scared no more and I would ask her anything.Student 12I felt bad because I didnt have many friends. Everyone excluded me out because of the way I was, the way I looked and because I wasnt popular. She helped me realize that why should I care about what other people thought if I was happy with myself.Student 13I felt alright, fine, okay, I guess.Student 14I didnt like it at all. The other teachers pushed me to the side when I couldnt measure up to the others. It was hard because I didnt have anyone to help. The question four was How do you feel about school now that you have a mentor Responded have different replies for this question which have been tabulated in the table below
Table 4 Response of Question 4 Question 4ResponseStudent 1I think school is great. I think you should finish school. You should get the best education that you can get at school. You can have mentors that help you go through school.Student 2I felt great. It made me feel more comfortable.Student 3I didnt like it at all. My other teachers would push me to the side when I couldnt keep up with the other students. It was hard for me to try to catch up and I didnt have any help. We talk about important an education is and what I can do with an education.Student 4I liked school okay, but I got tired of it at a point and time and I didnt want to go back. But I like school now. Would you say that it is because of your mentor YesStudent 5Now, like I feel better about school. He showed me what I could do and that made it easier and made me want to do it. He has made it a lot easier. He has shown me stuff for Gadsden State. He makes me feel good. It made me want to continue school.Student 6I like it more because I have someone who knows me and can relate to me and give me advice.Student 7Okay. I now have someone to go to when I have a problem.Student 8I like it. Im doing better now.Student 9The same.Student 10I enjoy it not just to see my friends, but I enjoy the classes.Student 11I feel school is good now.Student 12I think school is great and I want to finish. I feel you should get the best education that you can get at school. You should have teachers to help you go along through school.Student 13I felt great. I made me feel more comfortable.Student 14Its getting better. Im starting to enjoy school more and looking forward to it more than when I didnt have a mentor. I didnt want to come to school at all.
The question 5 is Why do you feel your views have or have not changed about school The response of this category is given below
Table 5 Response of Question 5 Question 5ResponseStudent 1I think they changed because I am not as bad as I used to be. At my other school I used to have a bad attitude. Ever since Ive been at this school Ive had more teachers talk to me about things.Student 2Just being around her has made me comfortable. Shes like a friend. We have a great relationship.Student 3Im starting to enjoy school more. Before I had a mentor, I didnt want to come to school at all.Student 4Because I wasnt able to communicate with a lot of other people, family in particular. It was like they wouldnt listen. Once I found someone that would listen and understand my views it was better to come to school and get it out.Student 5Ive learned to like school. I now want to learn all I can so I can be successful when I get out.Student 6Because she was younger and knew more about us.Student 7My mentor wont let me give up. She believes in me so I work harder for her.Student 8Because my mentor has helped me understand how important an education is, and how hard it will be for me if I drop out.Student 9I feel the same about school.Student 10Because my relationship with my teacher they dont treat me like a child. They treat me like an equal.Student 11Because she is more open and Im not scared.Student 12I think they change because Im not as bad. At my other school I had a bad attitude but every since Ive been here, Ive had teachers help me by talking to me about things.Student 13Yes, what she says is like a friend. Student 14Its a friendship. The question 6 is How has the mentoring program helped you to become successful in school The responded shared their view that has been tabulated below
Table 6 Response of Question 6 Question 6ResponseStudent 1It has kept me focused. I havent allowed things o bother me. Ive remained consistent and tried to move on in my life. Having a mentor has helped. Student 2It has helped me find out what Im capable of accomplishing and helped me strengthen my abilities.Student 3Its kind of like a friendship.Student 4Yes because there are a lot of kids that were like me. They didnt like school now and six have someone here that can get along with and learn something from on a personal level and also on a school level that would be good for them.Student 5I now have someone who motivates and pushes me to do my best all the time. And not give up when times get hard.Student 6She helped me not have a bad attitude about stuff and helped to encourage me.Student 7I have someone there giving me the push to keep my stuff in order.Student 8I now have someone to go to when I have tough days. She encourages me to do my best.Student 9Yes, its like she just make sure I do my work and turn it in.Student 10It helps me a lot. Ive grown because Ive learned what to do in situations. Ive learned how to deal with problems in a more rationale way.Student 11Yes, because I know I can make it and I hope she will continue to push me in the long run.Student 12Yes, because I dont let so much bother me. The teachers have helped me and that I trust.Student 13My mentor made me feel good about learning. She makes it fun.Student 14In a way. I know more about the subject he teaches than ever. I just sit down with my mom and she thought she was pretty good at math and she didnt understand so I taught her and before I had a mentor she would have taught it to me. Question 7 is How do you feel about your potential to graduate The response is listed below Table 7 Response of Question 7 Question 7ResponseStudent 1Before the mentoring program I didnt care about graduating. But since Ive met my mentor Ive learned that graduating will give me the opportunity for a better life than if I drop out of school. She told me that I need to get my education, go to college and be the best person I can be.
Student 2I am going to stay in school and graduate. Student 3In a way he has helped me become successful in school. I know more about math now than before I had a mentor. He doesnt have to keep me after class. I like the way no one knows about how he pushes me to be a better student.Student 4I feel pretty good about it. I want to graduate and do something better with my life.Student 5I feel good about graduation. He helped me a lot and I worked hard to pass the exit exam. I still have the last part but I feel good because I feel that I will pass. Im going to come back and pass. Student 6Im excited and nervous because Ill be on my own. I kind of scared.Student 7I feel more prepared to graduate. Im ready.Student 8Im going to graduate.Student 9Yes, of course definitely in math. Like she helps me because I dont know how to do it so she comes and helps me and explains it to me. Student 10Im excited about it.Student 11I feel good because I can graduate. She helped me.Student 12I didnt want to graduate before, but now I know that if I graduate I can have a better life than people who drop out of school. Student 13I feel good. Im going to graduate.Student 14Im not going towards college, but I look forward to graduating and going to the military.
The question 8 is, Has this view changed since your mentor relationship began How The respondents replied in the following manner. Table 8 Response of Question 8 Question 8ResponseStudent 1NO RESPONSEStudent 2Yes. I wasnt considering graduating or staying in school before I met my mentor.Student 3Im looking forward to graduating, but Im not going to college. Im going to the military.Student 4Yes. I really didnt think or care about graduating before I got a mentor.Student 5Yes, because at first I didnt look forward to graduation. It seems more that comes with it makes you feel good to be made feel good about. Its hard to explain what he does.Student 6No. I knew I would graduate although I didnt know how long it would take me.Student 7Yes. I was just going through the motions before I got in the program. Now Im focused on what I have to do to graduateStudent 8Yes. I didnt care before the mentor program. Now I look forward to meeting with my mentor.Student 9Kind of. She pushes me to do my best even when I dont want to.Student 10They helped me with this and helped me to realize that I dont have to settle.Student 11I still feel that I could graduate but I wasnt confident. Now I am because of my mentor.Student 12Yes. She helped me to realize that I didnt need to dropout but to go to college and be the person that I needed to be. Student 13Yes. She has taught me that I can do anything if I put my mind to it.Student 14Yes. Im more focused on school than Ive ever been. The question 9 is Do you think having a mentor will help other students be more successful in school Why or why not The response is given below
Table 9 Response of Question 9 Question 9ResponseStudent 1I believe it will help others. Mentors teach so much that your parents cant teach you. You can talk to them anytime about anything.Student 2I think so. If they care for the students and be the students friend. Student 3Yes. Some students in the lower grades who dont have a mentor may get pushed to the side. It will help them move along and give them a better opinion of school and getting a good education.Student 4Yes, she encourages me to strive to do the best that I can at anything that I do and I shouldnt give up because its hard. I should keep going.Student 5Yes, it would help a lot. Its all on the student if they want to do it and they get a mentor like Mr. Tidwell who is willing to help because the AHSGE is not tough but you got to study. Basically when you get with your mentor and your mentor get with you and go step by step. I think it will help. It would help a lot of students. I dont think I would have come this far had it not have been for Mr. Tidwell.Student 6Yes, because some people have no one at home to listen to, so if you have a mentor you can always go to that person. They can go talk to their mentor and they can help to change their mind.Student 7It will only help the ones that care for it that want the help. If they dont have the drive it wont help.Student 8Yes. It will keep them focused on graduating and help them avoid problems.Student 9Yes, because they are like me and need someone to stand over them to get their work done then Mrs. Ellen is the person.Student 10If they have a connection, it should help a lot because they are talking and helping them solve it. Then those students can help other students and that helps the whole school, not just one student. If no connections they wont like school. If they dont like their teachers, theyre not going to like school then they wont want to be here. Youll have more dropouts. Student 11Yes, because if they think they cant do it they can go to their mentor and ask for help.Student 12Yes, because they teach you so much that your parents dont. They can help them when needed.Student 13Yes, because it will make you find out what they can do in life . . . helps strengthen them.Student 14Yes, how much an education is important and what I can do with one and without one. I got pushed to the side. A mentor will help them and give them a better opinion of school work and academics.The question 10 allowed getting views regarding ideal mentor relationship. This is tabulated below
Table 10 Response of Question 10 Question 10ResponseStudent 1It should be confidential between the teacher and student and not include the parents. Some students get upset when mentors tell parents what they discuss with the students. I should be able to trust my mentor. Student 2The students can talk about anything to the mentor and trust that the mentor wont tell anyone.Student 3Someone youre close to. Like a family member. You have to trust them.Student 4There should be trust in anything that you do together. There should be a comfort level where you are not afraid to open up. There shouldnt be a wall in between. You should meet each other halfway, get along you can learn so much about other people if they just open up. You are able to learn something from an older person and shes able to learn something from you as well.Student 5They are trusting and love helping students who have problems. They will listen to our school and personal problems and not judge us.Student 6I think it should be a friendship but not a real close one so not everyone will know and the teacher wont get into trouble.Student 7If a kid goes into a mentor, if the kid gets in trouble, dont come down on them. Dont lift them up because theyve done something wrong. But dont be so hard on them. Dont judge. Its hard for teachers but they should try not to.Student 8Someone who is like a friend. They are trustworthy and you can tell them anything. They will be honest with you.Student 9I think that a person will be more comfortable if they had a mentor that they felt comfortable to be around like a friend that they could talk to.Student 10You should be able to talk to them about something youre upset about when you cant talk to parents and know they wont go tell. If they cant help, theyll find someone who can.Student 11More open, honest, tell all them whats right and be unselfish.Student 12It should be between them and not with other teachers and parents because some kids get offended if mentor talk to parents about what they talk about and then they dont trust them. Trust is really big.Student 13Start out telling to have a great connection. Yes, because if someone talk to them like a friend, it will help them want it. They will stay in school and have ea better outlook on this.Student 14Close relationship like family so trust can build. If student mess up the mentor shouldnt get onto them hard and make the student nervous. Tell them what they did wrong and let them know the teacher is there to help. The question 11 is What could be done to make the mentoring program a more effective program for students The responses are grouped in the table below
Table 11 Response of Question 11 Question 11ResponseStudent 1I think you should use students whove gone through the mentor program to talk to other students about how the program helped them. And all information should be between the mentor and student. If we cant trust the mentor we wont open up to them.Student 2Just have the mentors talk to the students about staying in school. I show the students that they care.Student 3Make sure the mentor has something in common with the student to allow the student to trust them. The program is pretty good.Student 4I think its okay. Some students are just going to torture a teacher even if the teacher is doing everything they can. I think the teachers here are doing a good job. I think some students got to open up as much as the teachers. What advice Listen and not judge. Have an open mind to whatever the student has to say. Dont be so quick to put your input. Let the student finish with what they have to say and then if he ask, help and dont force yourself. Let them come to you.Student 5I think you could have a class during time when students can get with the mentor to study and learn like a regular class, because the teacher has more time.Student 6Just allow students to go talk to a teacher about stuff and will start off good. Student 7I think I had one of the best mentors here. She has done everything I need or everything I could have asked. I did any and everything she asked of me. Student 8Start the program during the first of school and have mentors for everyone who wants one. Student 9Have more mentors. Student 10Maybe have teachers sign up to be in program like an after school program where students and teachers can come and meet their mentors like an Open House. They could come for a fun day so it starts out fun and fresh. Student 11I dont know. Student 12Some students who have gone through it should talk to other kids. The adults should have a more open approach and talk to kids. The talks should only be between the mentor and student. If theres no trust, the students wont work and they dont have anyone else to talk to. They have got to have someone to talk to. Student 13Have mentors for all students. Student 14Pretty good as of right now.
DISCUSSION
This is evident from the literature review section that numbers of studies have been conducted in the past in order to understand the student dropout issues, factors contributing to the dropout and effectiveness of the preventive programs (Finn, 1993 Fortune et al, 1991 Fossey, 1996 Dynarski and Gleason, 2002 Finnan and Chasin, 2007 Coll and Stewart, 2008). The issue has been one of the serious topics of debates among the educators. Education system and governing bodies in USA have been incorporating preventive programs and adopting various strategies to retain students and encourage them to complete their studies. This is one of the crucial issues for the government. Reasons of dropouts as identified from different literature sources have been different from social to individual factors (Barrington and Hendricks 1989 Christenson et al 2000 Christle, Jolivette and Micheal, 2007). It is identified in different studies that most of the student dropouts take place in education before graduation (Coll and Stewart, 2008).
Cobb et al (2006) studied the relationship of the dropouts and disabilities and indicated that physically challenged students are more likely to drop out than the other students. Roderick (1994) stressed that retention in one grade increased the risk of dropping out of school by 40 to 50 and being retained two grade levels increased the risk to 90.
Disconnectedness from the schools is one of the major reasons for student dropouts. Students who are more likely to dropout display certain initial sighs like they lack interest in studying, school functions or extracurricular activities. Student and teacher ratio and teachers role in education is also a crucial factor for dropout rates. There are problems and issues of the student dropouts across the geographic location from urban to suburban schools (Rumberger and Thomas, 2000). Thompson-Hoffman and Hayward (1990) has studied the pattern of participation of physically challenged students at the school functions at college level. It was evident participation was low or negligible for disable students. Students with disabilities demonstrated irregular attendance in the class. This was also one of the reasons for dropout rates to be higher among disable students (Osher et al, 2003).
Personal reasons, physical condition and disability had a significant role in student dropout rates. Aggressive behavior leads various problems that may lead to dropout in high School. It was identified in the studies that youth students with disability had issues with non graded residential or day treatment facilities. The systemic review of literature indicated that secondary age youth with disabilities, physical or violent verbal aggression, pregnancy and parenting, family responsibilities and financial conditions are some of the crucial factors resulting high dropouts or leading towards it .Whitaker (1993) identified behavioral and contingency management approaches for intervention to be very effective to develop and implement the dropouts prevention plans and recommended that social skills training and self control management techniques to the sensitive students can help reducing chances of dropouts. Cognitive behavioral, parenting training and family treatment models help in reducing aggressive and violent behavior of youth effetely. Multi-systemic therapeutic approaches were suggested for chronically violent youth. Some studies suggested developing and monitoring resiliency in youth with learning disabilities and developing the assistance plan accordingly. There is a chronological strategy for understanding one or two stimuli that can help in identifying anxiety, stress or violent respondent from the group. Etscheident (1991) identified some perfect description of identifying students who are likely to dropout as series of steps. There steps are helpful to self monitoring ie.e Motor Cueimpulse delay, Problem definition, generation of alternatives, consideration of consequences and implementation. Students are trained to engage through many self monitoring processes. Barkley, Laneri and Metevia (2001) described this component of their CBI intervention as positive parental attention to appropriate behavior, use of a home point system, use of grounding or privilege loss to deal with unacceptable behavior, and training parents to anticipate impending problems.
There are different terms used for different stages of the dropout prevention program. These can be grouped as the intervention terms, result terms and setting terms. Intervention terms include supported employment teaching, learning, special education, best practices, educational programs, community services, classroom discipline, school counseling, dropout prevention, job coaching, community-based instruction, behavior management, interagency collaboration, inclusive education, assistive technology, speech therapy, mentoring and vocational rehabilitation used in the students intervention programs.
Intervention terms are linked with the result terms such as academic achievement, academic anxiety, education attainment level, achievement, diploma, school graduation, school expulsion, dropout, resiliency, school suspension, school retention, truancy, persistence, employment, employment status, GED, outcomes of education, treatment outcomes, outcomes of treatment, quality of life, recreation, relationships, school to work, transition, school-to-work transition, school transition, work, jobs, and independent living.
The third group of terms is setting terms. These include schools, residential care facility, accelerated programs, accelerated schools, alternative education, nontraditional education, alternative programs, alternative schools, colleges, community college, correctional institutions, high schools, middle schools, secondary education, higher education, junior high schools, mainstreaming, home school, technical school, vocational school, vocational education, and vocational high school (Wolman et al., 1989). Much has been written about prevention programs for students without disabilities, however needs have students with disabilities have been very limited. In addition, little empirical data on their effectiveness exists.
In the research findings, responses of the respondents revealed that their relationship with their mentor has been friendly. The respondents were free to ask anything from their mentor. Some respondent reported that they can meet their mentor personally for solving their query or problem at mentors home. Contrary to this response, very few students reported neutral or poor relationship with their mentor. However most of the students perceived their mentor neutral to good. None of the student stated that their mentor is bad. Majority of respondents found a good support in their mentor for their education problems to personal issues. They find their mentor to facilitating their decision making problems, by listening to them and helping them to come up with solution by themselves. Some of the respondents are really close to the mentor as they were just like good friends. Respondents were asked about the help which their mentors provide in their educational and personal issues. Many respondents reported that they consider their mentor to be their friends who can listen to them and help them dealing with the situations. Respondents felt that they are free to ask anything to their mentor.
At the same time, some respondents felt that mentors are not good source of help to them. Some of the children even feel their mentors as their second parents. Varied responses have been received for the feelings of respondents regarding the school with and without the mentors. Some respondents displayed indifference in their life due to the presence of mentor whereas others believed that mentors brought a positive change in their life and they would not be able to do anything without the help and support of their mentor. Some students stated that school is a place to make friends, talk and learn new things. Role of mentor was important for some students who perceived that mentor helps them learning new things whereas for other mentors can not do anything.
Respondent were asked their feelings for the school with mentor. Majority of respondents felt that having a mentor is good for them however some respondents did not agree to the same. Respondents felt comfortable in schools as they can get solution to their problem. For some respondents, best education comes from school and mentors help students with providing solution to the problems and helping them continuing their school.
The role of mentor in changing the perception of school has been significant in this study. Many students said that they have changed their habits after joining the schools. Some respondents were not willing to join the school in the past but mentors have helped them to change their views. The friendliness of mentors and their support in different aspects of life, developing knowledge for values and ethics have helped them to grow. Respondents felt that they are more confident about their education in the school through the mentoring program. This helped the respondents in many ways. Mentoring helped respondents to be focused, consistent and accomplishing their goals by strengthening their abilities. Mentors in school motivate respondents to move and achieve their set goals. Respondents also mentioned that the education process in the school has become easier and smooth due to the mentors that they do not have to give much time at their house. They are taught in a way that they understand everything in school only and due to this they feel more confident in knowledge.
The most important aspect of the research findings is that many of respondents developed the feeling that becoming a graduate is good for them. Students understood that they can acquire knowledge and live a better life with the help of that acquired knowledge. Respondents feel good as they get help from the mentors to continue their studies. Many of the respondents are prepared to go for the graduation after this mentorship program. The relationship between mentor and student can provide students an opportunity to deal with their social problems and move ahead in their life and think of future.
Respondents have the different views about graduation. Some respondents felt that this is good to acquire knowledge. Some respondent believed that it would take much time for graduating. Mentors provide guidance for the career help them in evaluating different career options and their own strengths and weaknesses for the same. This helps respondents developing the decision making power. Respondents could share those issues with the mentors which they are not able to share with parents. Some of the respondents felt their mentor helped them in understanding things stepwise. Majority of the respondents felt that their mentor is honest, well wisher and trustworthy. They can not share everything with their parents so it is good to have a mentor (Bridgeland et al 2006). Respondents have their own views about how to reduce the dropout rates. This was a common thought among maximum number of respondents that the students who had been benefitted from these programs should be brought back to interact with other students and they can be a good source of inspiration. Some students suggested that meetings of parents, teachers and students can help students and parents. The basic requirement for any prevention program is to encourage students to participate in school. It is always better to start this from the early age. Students must be informed regarding the career options at early age. It has been noted in different studies that the student retention programs need to have creative mix of academic and extracurricular experiences, providing supportive environment, caring learning environment and providing counseling services (Coll and Stewart, 2008). This is supported by the responses of the students.
CONCLUSION
Literature review section has covered various aspects of student dropouts from school and college which have been addressed in different studies. Rumberger (1987) has studied students dropouts and reasons related to this. It is very important to understand various aspects of the issue before developing any program on that.
Understanding of root causes of dropout rates will help in developing the plan which is effective on these factors and develop effective preventive plan. However, identifying what causes a student to drop out is very challenging. It is prejudiced by an array of proximal and distal factors related individual student, family, school and settings in which the student lives. Dropout rates of students have become growing concern for the government. This is included in public agenda, even than the dropout rate has significantly increased. This is evident from the graduation rate which was 68 in the year 2001-02 (U.S. Department of Education). The No Child Left Behind Act (2001) has been effective to add more responsibility and efforts to improve the graduation rate and decrease the number of students at-risk of dropping out. In other study National Center for Educational Statistics (2004) indicated that the national graduation rate was 73. There are economic implications of the dropouts. More dropouts problem is from high school student segment. The estimated economic loss is 260 billion (The Dropout Problem in Number, 2006). It also reveals that all students who drop out from schools get sufficient money initially. Social implications of the drop outs have come from the level of criminal activities and involvement of school drop outs for the same. Crime rate and health problem and delinquency are directly related to the drop out rates. According to the National Dropout Prevention Center a great percentage of those in jail and on death row are drop outs.
Sometimes subgroups are at greater danger than the dropping out. According to NCES (2002) report that composition of different groups and its relationship with dropouts is important to understand. This indicated that race and cultural backdrop is a relevant aspect in studying dropouts. According to some research school completion rates for Hispanics and African Americans are lower than for other groups. 64 of Hispanic, 78 of African American students and 82 of White students graduated from high school.
Other subgroups to be considered are students disabilities, gender, and low socio-economic condition. Only 57 of students with disabilities graduated with a regular diploma in school year 1999-2000.
Gender based differences can be seen by these dropout rates. Number of males (72) completing high school was much higher than female percentage was 64 ( U.S. Department of Education, 2002).
There are many ways to engage students and enhance their participation in school. Working students who work more than 20 hours in a week have higher chances of dropping out from the school. Students who are supporting family or parenthood give priority to financial gain rather than investing in future by completing their studies.
Racial discrimination and ethical minority is one of the significant reasons of dropouts in schools. There are no simple solutions to the dropout crisis. Student clearly support and blame themselves for failing and dropping out from schools. Many models and solutions developed to prevent school dropouts are interlinked with each other. Most dropouts are casualties of- lock step curriculum. The one size fit all curriculums that developed for all students do not work in this case as each individual is different with unique problem that requires unique solution.
Boyles (2000) identified 3 dimensions for dropout academic variables, environmental variables, background and defining variables. Rumberger (1983, 1995, 2000, 2001) suggests that parents who are busy in monitoring student behavior, talk about troubles, support individual decision making and have more concerned school, the likelihood of their ward dropping out of school is very less. 71 of students surveyed in the Silent Epidemic (2006) felt that better communication between parent and school and increased parental participation is very important in dealing with dropout problem.
National Center on Secondary Education and Transition (2006) suggests addressing adjustable variables that may work at Alexandria High School, such as growing crowd, carry services, and recognition with school can help in reducing dropout rates. Christenson et al. (2000) suggest that developers of at-risk programs should plan intervention strategies that can improve school completion, goal disaffection and student disconnection from school. Dividing interventions into levels has also established to be an effectual loom when scheming programs. Walker and Sprague (1999) suggest that categorizing interventions should be based on requirements of the students. The first suggested level is the Universal level, which incorporates strategies that can be worn on a school or classroom level. This level targets students who demonstrate individuality of being at danger of dropping out of school. McPartland (1994) believes that implementing proven models, programs, or strategies for dropout prevention are not simple. The levels of complexities identified at the implementation stages are usually unique and complex. Orfield (2004) suggests those implementing programs needs to think about the amount to which the basic creed of the program are attuned with the original philosophy, wants, and capital of the setting in which a plan is to be implemented.
The program target strategies consisted of a joint approach connecting the family, school, student and community. Students counseling, trained difficulty solving skills, and familiar for their achievements are some of the important tools of helping students at risk. The family component consisted of training to help parents to be aware of their childs academic relationships. Parental involvement in school activities, making more contact with the school, and supporting the students academic development helps students at his performance level to psychological levels.
ALAS program prevent dropout successfully. This program deemed successful in career academies that have combined career and academic aids for students at risk. The prevention of drop-out from the high schools of the students should be important. To run a society in a better way and economy of the country, it is very necessary to stop this phenomenon. There are hundreds of prevention dropout programs have been listed in its online database however only few of these programs are accessed. Some of these prevention programs for drop-out proved to be achieving the targets by reducing the dropout rate.
It should be the responsibility of the high schools to stop dropping-out. This requires proper awareness of different aspects of education, options and opportunities available and awareness to the students about the importance of the education. Students at risk should be given knowledge of learning education, focus on career, high level of English and college curriculum. Families should be involved to prevent the drop-outs. Due to support of family, dropping-out can be prevented and discouraged among the students. Awareness of education to the family can encourage them to support to their children to get full education. This will help for the better future of the society and the country.
Assessment of prevention of the drop-out reduces the chance of dropping-out of the students. The successful prevention programs of drop-out have five common aspects. The first aspect is to supervise the students closely by the teacher or advisor. The teachers or advisors encouraged the students through benefits of education and the size of the class should be maintained smaller so that they can watch every student in a proper way. This will very helpful to prevent the drop-outs from the schools. The second aspect is management of individual students. The case management is most likely to happen in a restructuring model with a movement to a smaller learning community.
The lasting three aspects are family, curricular developments that focus on career, learning English and math and attention to the problems of students drop-out from the schools that can effects attendance, behavior and performance of the students.
Students who drop-out from their schools need help to get back on their tracks. This is the responsibility of the schools. This can be done by awareness and knowledge about the education to these students. Students should get support to reorganized their lives and live their life happy and respectful in the society. These programs are helpful to reduce the drop-outs and improve the situations of the students and the academy. Due to this, they can achieve the objectives and give better life to the students who dropping-out There is some kind of system in the schools to provide identification number to the students. This number can contain be used for storing various demographic information of the student. In the case any student drops out all the information regarding him will be easily accessible.
First, the overwhelming preponderance of literature in the area of dropout prevention for youth with disabilities consists not of original research studies, but rather of theoretical pieces, descriptions of curricula, instructional strategies, and the like (Cobb, Sample, Alwell, Johns, 2005).
Literature provides explanation of involvement, expected result of the preventive programs that can be useful. Unfortunately, lots of schools expand prevention of drop-out programs on that is proven to be quantity plan to decide the effectiveness of their efforts. Another basic reason of the limited impact of drop-out prevention is non-effective practices of teachers. The many researchers clearly mention that dropping-out of schools to expand low achievement and lots of drop-out programs include academic module, effective teaching practices are absent from the involvement and programs are engaged by schools to tackle drop-out prevention.
Educational plan is for keeping students with disabilities in schools for the prevention of drop-out. These consists of making effective instruction which is more remarkable for drop-out prevention, to provide general idea of drop-out prevention efforts by researchers, educators, schools and representatives, effective teaching practices to graduate the students, and brief impression of 10 effective teaching values and their importance to keep students with disabilities hold in schools. The prevention of drop-out programs is not common in a large number of schools. Many schools administrators assign other essential resources to solve the problem of drop-out of schools. These other resources programs are to develop serious literacy skills, target students who drop-out of schools, provide personal support, improve attendance of schools, increase career and technical education programs. Various studies listed different reasons for the students drop-out of schools (Abt Associates, 2004 Finn, 1993 Martin, Tobin, Sugai, 2002 Thurlow, Sinclair, Johnson, 2002 Wagner, Blackorby, Hebbeler, 1993). This is also to explain why the students with disabilities drop-out of schools. There are many reasons identified by the researchers in previous researches like high level of absents, poor academic performance, non-effective teaching practices, poor marks in the class, course failure and retention, high level of test in the classroom, behavior problems lead too much discipline problems, suspension and sometimes throw-out from the classroom, disinterested teaching behavior, low expectations and socially or mentally loneliness. This research explored possible areas for improving the programs effectiveness based on student and teacher perceptions of the mentoring program. Three questions were raised for this study. The first question aimed at exploring the views of students in getting involved in the program change regarding school. The second question was to evaluate different aspects of the program and understand its role in changing the perceptions of risk students of their potential for graduation. The last question required views of students in order to improve effectiveness of the program.
Students provided positive views regarding their mentor or teachers. Majority of the students considered them as their friends. This supports the views of Christenson (2002) regarding the behavioral and academic engagement of students. Student must feel comfortable in the relationship with his or her teacher in order to be able to facilitate the learning process. From the research it is clear that respondents were free to ask their teachers, meet them personally and get their support in dealing with the educational challenges. Good teachers help their students with psychological and cognitive engagement as well. At the same time responses of some of the students were neutral regarding their relationship with the mentor. Some of the students did not have any view regarding their mentors. They were indifferent to them. The degree of engagement and the relationship with the teacher differ from one student to the other. Some students noted that the state of mind of the teacher is related to the kind of support they can get from their teachers. The example given by the students were of the mood of teacher. Some respondents had developed good relationship with the mentor. The respondents were close to the mentor as they were just like good friends. Now in the second question when the respondent have been asked about the help which their mentors provide in personal issues as well as school issue then the kids have told that they are just like the friends and they are free to ask anything.
Some kids were not happy from the mentors as they have not got the better help from their mentors. Many of the kids have got good mentors who have helped them in school as well as personally. Some of the respondents even feel their mentors as their second parents. In third question, the respondents have been asked for their feelings about school before they had mentor. The responses in this category have been different based on the individual differences and relations. Some respondents felt that they do not have any problem with the presence and absence of the mentor. Some respondents found it difficult to do anything without mentor. School is a place where social, behavioral and educational skills are imparted. Some students feel that role of mentor is important for learning new things and developing relations.
Respondents were asked about their feelings for the school with mentor. Some respondents felt the role of mentor to be good for them and some find it not good. Respondents felt more comfortable in schools. School was seen as a place of getting the problem solved for the respondents. Majority of the respondents felt that school is the best and only place for education. Respondents find school with mentor is the problem solving center. Respondents felt that mentors helped them getting the solution of the problems easily and this supported the decision of continuing with school.
The views of the students have changed with the presence of mentors. Many respondents reported to have changed their habits and views after joining the school. Many of the dropout students who were not willing to go to school have changed their views and joined the school. Mentors helped them with inculcating values, ethics and providing knowledge apart from creating interest for education. Respondents felt friendliness of mentor have helped in developing their interest for education.
Respondents have recognized the mentoring problem to be consistent and accomplishing their goals by strengthening their abilities. Role of mentor is to help and motivate respondents to achieve and set their goals. The education process for the students who are joining the school after dropouts or who are susceptible to dropouts should be in such a way that they do not have to recap things taught in school at their homes. These students usually do not have much time or environment to study at home. The role of mentor should be to understand the problem of each student and help them learn and acquire better life skills. Respondents in the study felt that being a graduate will help them living the life better. Respondents feel good and comfortable with the mentor. Respondents felt that their relation with mentor helped in dealing with their personal issues and thinking clearly about the future.
The views regarding graduation differ from respondent to respondent. Some thought that the time spent on the graduation is a long process whereas others perceived it to be a good process of enhancing knowledge and be prepared for the better life. The mentors role becomes increasingly important to help the student with step by step learning, fill the knowledge gap and help in decision making process by providing right information and guidance. The value of honesty and trustworthiness in the relationship plays important role.
Some respondents felt than the experiences of the students who already have attended such programs will definitely encourage the new students. The meeting with the people from families of such students can be helpful. The views regarding the program in general were positive among most of the respondents but some respondents did not feel good with it. The program helped students changing their views and interest regarding the school. More students were interested in attending schools. Mentors role as a friend and teacher became support system for them. All the participants were interested in giving their own views and suggestions. This can be concluded from the study that these mentoring programs help in reducing the drop pout rates. The friendly attitude of the mentors and ability to guide student and availability of mentor were some of the important factors for the respondents. The proper guidance and support could help students changing their point of regarding giving up the education. Students offered range of improvement suggestions. Drop out rates can be effectively prevented with the mentoring programs. The collaborative environment to prevent the drop out rates involving mentor, parents and students will help in reducing the drop out rates.
Categories:
0 comments:
Post a Comment