A More Accurate Picture of Graduation Rates

A new federal requirement is forcing states to use a uniform method to report their graduation rates. The new method was part of an update in 2008 to federal education rules that now requires states to report graduation rates using what is referred to as the ‘cohort method’. The new ‘cohort method’  follows a group of first-time freshman, tracking individual students over a period of 4 years and calculating how many receive standard diplomas at the end of the 4 year period. This year marks the first time that we have true ‘graduation-rate accountability’ since the update was made in 2008. One problem, however, is that the new reporting method is putting  graduation rates, for some states, nearly 20% lower than in the past.

 

States are hesitant with the new data, given the new dramatically lower rates, even though the new ‘cohort-calculation’ is considered to be a more accurate way of tracking graduation rates.  Ryan Reyna, a program director at the National Governors Association’s Washington headquarters, points out that “Cohort rate and calculation has helped in development of early-warning data systems. Reyna also adds that states themselves, pushed for the new rate in hopes that with the precision of the new data would come better interventions and improved outcomes. States have been making an effort to clarify to stakeholders, community members and the press, that the new lower rates are not a result of the state doing worse, but that we now have an accurate picture of what is really happening in terms of individual students and corresponding graduation rates.

 While this new data is eye-opening, researchers warn that the new calculation method still needs improvement. States still have yet to agree on a completely uniform way of dictating who is a ‘drop-out’ and who is not. For example, in Kansas, students who leave school and transfer into particular home-schooling programs are recorded as ‘drop-outs’, whereas in a state such as Indiana, they are not.  Nuances such as these, still have yet to be addressed, making it difficult to accurately compare graduation rates from state to state.

The good news, so far, is that we can now prove that drop-out rates are going down. It turns out that many students are, in fact, not dropping out, but are pursuing some kind of alternative education program.  Researchers and education communities agree that there is still quite a bit of ‘fine-tuning’ that needs to be done to ensure that this data is collected and recorded accurately. Improving graduation rates will continue to be a challenge, no doubt, but with more accurate data and accountability controls, we are slowly but surely taking steps in the right direction.

Inconsistencies in Bullying Data

Bullying, according to state law, is any electronic, written, verbal or physical act directed at another student that is “severe, persistent or pervasive” and interferes with a students’ education, creates a threatening environment or is substantially disruptive to the school setting.  A great deal of attention has been paid to bullying in recent years and it seems as though almost every school district has some kind of ‘anti-bullying’ campaign or policy in place. In PA the state releases a “Safe Schools” report each year which lists the number of documented incidents of bullying (and other disciplinary infractions) within each school district. But what does this data really tell us? ....and is it accurate?

Angie Mason, an Education Reporter for the York Daily Record points out that inconsistencies in reporting ‘bullying incidents’ make it very difficult to know just how much bullying is actually going on within schools.  Mason points out that since there is no exact protocol for ‘reporting’ an incident between two students, schools will often handle these situations differently. Some schools may choose to issue ‘warnings’ or refer students to guidance counselors first, while other schools will immediately issue ‘discipline referrals’ to students who are accused of bullying. If a discipline referral is not issued, a report of the bullying incident is never made, thus the inconsistency in the reported data.

Many school districts in York County have reported ‘zero bullying incidents’ at least once in the past five years. Though we know, and school district officials admit, just because these incidents are not reported, does not mean they are not happening.  Unfortunately, the state looks at the data that is reported each year to determine where assistance and training opportunities should be made available throughout the state. If we do not report incidents when they are occurring, teachers, parents and students could be missing out on some valuable ‘anti-bullying’ programs and resources.

  

One such program that several schools in York County have adopted recently is the Olweus Bullying Prevention program. The program includes regular classroom meetings where discussions happen about topics such as gossiping, ‘snitching’ and the internet or ‘cyber bullying’. Students and teachers alike both agree that the program is an excellent way for kids to talk about problems within the school and make connections with their peers. In addition to regular classroom meetings and chat sessions, schools also welcome guest speakers. John Halligan, whose son committed suicide in 2003 after enduring relentless bullying, was asked to speak to students at Dover Intermediate School.  Though we may never know of each and every incident of bullying that happens in our schools, I cannot think of ANY student that wouldn’t benefit from a program like this.

Read more on this topic in an article by the York Daily Record's Angie Mason.
York Daily Record- Bullying Inconsistencies

3rd Grade Reading Levels, Poverty and Graduation Rates

In a study from 2011, researchers found that students who are not reading proficiently by the critical 3^rd grade milestone are 4 times less likely to graduate than students who are better readers. According to this study, if a child is not proficient in reading AND is “poor”, that child is 13 times less likely to graduate than their more affluent and proficient peers.  For the purposes of this study, ”poor”  is defined  by tracts of the U.S. Census  where more than 30 percent of households have incomes below the federal poverty threshold, or $22,314 a year for a family of four in 2010.

 As if that’s not bad enough, as an expansion to this study, researchers have now added a 3^rd component to the equation.  If a child is not a proficient reader by the 3^rd grade, is economically disadvantaged AND comes from a ”poor” neighborhood, they are 17 times less likely to graduate then their peers without these disadvantages.

It may seem obvious, but if we take a closer look we can see why living in a high poverty neighborhood plays such a large role in determining student’s success. We know that children who come from these neighborhoods often lack access to good health care, move frequently in and out of substandard housing units and go without proper nutrition and sleep. In addition to these factors, they must contend with street crime, limited public transportation and substandard schools.

Researchers are in agreement:  if we want kids to break the cycle of poverty and graduate from high school, we MUST be sure that they are reading on grade level by the 3^rd grade.  More than 160 cities are working with the ‘Campaign for Grade –Level  Reading’  with plans to address the problems of poverty and to increase the number of children who are reading on grade level.  As part of the ‘All-America City Grade-Level Reading Network’ cities are creating plans of action that will tackle the 3 most critical problems that keep kids from reading on grade level; school attendance, school readiness and summer learning.

"Neighborhoods matter," said Donald J. Hernandez, a Hunter College sociology professor who conducted the research. "We need to think about effective policies that reduce poverty and increase reading skills for all children, including strategies that align early education with grades K-3rd and workforce development for parents that lead to secure jobs with middle-class incomes for families. Such policies would not only help individual children and families, but also reduce neighborhood poverty rates and, hence, the toxic effects of concentrated poverty."

For more information on the about this research please visit The Annie E. Casey Foundation at www.aecf.org. For more information about the Campaign for Grade-Level Reading and the All-America City Grade-Level Reading Network please visit www.gradelevelreading.net

The Importance of Early Warning Signs

There are some very sobering education statistics out in recent years that simply cannot be ignored.  For example, did you know a sixth-grader who is failing Math has only a 1 in 5 chance of graduating high school? Robert Balfanz, a Johns Hopkins University researcher has created system of evaluating such data and determining the outcome for the youth involved.  Balfanz is just one of many researchers that have painstakingly studied the data surrounding struggling youth in this country.

Through researchers like Balfanz, we now know that a middle-school aged student who is failing English has only a 1 in 8 chance of graduating high school. We know that as that same student progresses, he will begin to ‘tune out’ school, develop discipline problems and become truant.  We also know that a truant high school student with already present academic and disciplinary issues, has only a 1 in 10 chance of graduating. So how do we stop this and where do we start?

The short answer? Early Intervention.  Identifying struggling students and intervening as quickly as possible is such a big part of this equation. Through intensive educational research we are able to now identify potential drop-outs way before high school and often times, well before middle school.  Additionally, we can offer services to these students to help combat the core reasons WHY they are failing, truant or both.

York County has incorporated the following list of early warning indicators as part of it’s Attendance Protocol:

-School districts will designate an individual responsible for recording the following Early Warning Indicators in third, sixth and ninth grades:

• Number of students in each respective grade with four or more unlawful absences
• Number of students in each respective grade with three or more office referrals
• Number of students in each respective grade with a 65% or lower in English
• Number of students in each respective grade with a 65% or lower in math

(Any student who has just one of these indicators is at risk of dropping out)

Find more information on the importance of early warning signs, educational research and reform at DROPOUT NATION a blog written by RiShawn Biddle, a former editorialist for the Indianapolis Star.

Creating Social Change? YorIT!

It’s time again for 2012 YorIT Social Venture Challenge.  Never heard of YorIT? Spread the word! YorIT, an initiative of the York County Community Foundation,  is a group of community members  who wish to challenge the residents of York County to get out there an make a difference through social action and philanthropy.  YorIT challenges community  members to think creatively and come up with unique ideas and solutions  that will encourage residents  of York County to BE the difference they wish to see in their community.
This year’s Social Venture Challenge calls on community members to come up with a creative media presentation about a program, initiative or service that they offer that will ‘create innovative solutions that contribute to social good that will be self-sustaining; thereby shaping a vital York County’. The winner of the Social Venture Challenge will receive up to $20k in funding for their initiative. Please watch YCTPI’s entry for the 2012 Social Venture Challenge on Youtube by clicking HERE. If you approve of our message, please ‘Like’ us (located directly under the viewing screen) and feel free to post and share our video on Facebook and Twitter. What a difference $20k in funding could make for our initiave!

The True Cost of a High School Dropout

Did you know only 21 states require students to attend high school until they graduate or turn 18? In his latest State of the Union address President Obama said that making school attendance compulsory in ALL states is a step in the right direction, but may not be enough keep kids in school and off the streets. According to Henry M. Levin and Cecilia E. Rouse, authors of this week's Op-Ed piece in the New York Times, the key to keeping students in school is to engage them at a very early age.

Levin and Rouse argue there is rigorous evidence that proves we need shift our focus from older children and start with the youngest students when they enter preschool. Studies show that 3 and 4-year-olds who are part of a meaningful small group setting, one where children are being taught and fed together by the same caregivers/teachers each day, have a much greater chance of graduating high school down the road. Part of this model includes regular home visits by teachers, group meetings with parents, smaller class sizes in early grades and increasing salaries for K-12 teachers.

While some might argue that these types of early childhood programs are far too expensive to implement, Levin and Rouse claim that the cost of NOT implementing these programs will far exceed them. Studies show that high school graduates will seek higher employment and earn 50-100% income in their lifetimes than their drop-out counter parts. High school graduates are also less likely to draw on public money for health care and welfare, and they are more likely to contribute to tax revenues in general rather than being a tax burden. The authors have calculated a return of $1.45-$3.55 for every dollar that is invested in implementing meaningful early childhood education programs. That's over a $127,000 net benefit to taxpayers over the lifetime of a graduate. The overall benefit to taxpayers is said to be nearly $90 Billion dollars per year and over $1 Trillion dollars over 11 years.

Levin and Rouse call on Liberals and Conservatives to leave behind the ethical debates on how to best educate young people and instead rally together to create meaningful early intervention programs that will raise long term economic growth to the tax payer as much as 3 times the cost of the programs themselves.

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/01/26/opinion/the-true-cost-of-high-school-dropouts.html

Straight from their Own Mouths

Here's what some of York County's youth had to say about the challenges and solutions to attendig school.

Their  biggest challenges to coming to school were:

- No baby sitter (or unreliable child care)

- Illness of self or child

- Family issues/drama

- Just plain tired

The solutions they came up with were:

- Better access to quality daycare

- Go to sleep earlier to help with exhaustion and better health

- Better access to medical and mental health services

- They recognized they needed to stay motivated to attend

The rewards they came up with if they obtain their short and long term goals:

-personal satisfaction with graduation

- personal satisfaction by staying focused

- better stipends

- use of cell phones during lunch (this was a huge hit!)

- choosing better lunch options (they are not happy with the food)