This action might not be possible to undo. Are you sure you want to continue?
Sandra Covington Smith Clemson University
1. Increase participants awareness and understanding of dropout and its effect on students with disabilities. 2. Provide participants with an overview of recent research on the causes and risk factors associated with dropout. 3. Identify effective practices that increase student engagement, family engagement, and school completion.
What the Research Tells Us:
I. What Is Dropout?
1. What is dropout? 2. When does dropout occur? 3. What does dropout mean to you? 4. Who does dropout effect?
Dropout: A Process of Disengagement
Not an isolated event Elementary years, process begins
Elevated dropout rates reported among children who were rated as highly aggressive by their 1st grade teachers (Ensminger & Slusarcick, 1992). Dropouts could be distinguished from graduates with 66% accuracy by the third grade using attendance data; and Identification of dropouts can be accomplished with reasonable accuracy based on review of school performance (behavior, attendance, academics) during the elementary years (Barrington & Hendricks, 1989) .
Students who had repeated a grade as early as K – 4th grade were five times more likely to drop out of school (Kaufman & Bradby, 1992).
Predictors of Dropout
(Balfanz & Herzog, 2005; 2006)
1. The four strongest predictors – determined by the end of sixth grade
1. Poor attendance 2. Poor behavior 3. Failing math 4. Failing English
2. Sixth graders who do not attend school regularly, receive poor behavior marks, or fail math or English
10% chance of graduating on time 20% chance of graduating a year late
Predictors of Dropout
3. Students who repeated middle school grades are 11 times more likely to drop out than students who had not repeated 4. A student who is retained two grades increases their risk of dropping out of high school by 90% (Roderick, 1995). 5. Transition between schools
Middle school/junior high school to high school
Predictors of Dropout
(Balfanz & Herzog, 2006)
6. Students who enter ninth grade two or more grade levels behind their peers have only a one in two chance of being promoted to the tenth grade on time 7. Ninth grade retention is the biggest predictor of dropouts 8. The biggest fall off for students is between ninth and tenth grade
What Do We Know? 10 5 . 2006) Poor attendance 14% graduated ontime or with one extra year 16% on-time graduation rate 17% on-time graduation rate 21% on-time graduation rate 9 Failed English Bad behavior records Failed math Understanding Dropout: II.Predictors of Dropout (Balfanz & Herzog.
S. and local problem.Activity 2 “What Do You Know About Dropout?” 1. What motivated you to stay in school and not drop out? – Factors/variables (e. How can you use your experiences to promote school completion? 11 What Do We Know? Early school departure has been a prominent national issue for the last two decades. never graduate from high school. Dropping out of school presents a serious national. School completion has become a high-stakes issue for schools and school districts. goals) 3. 12 6 .g.. How would your life be different if you had not completed high school? 2. people. state. One high school student drops out every nine seconds (180 days of seven hours each). experiences. Approximately 1 in 8 children in the U.
One of the most vulnerable populations for school dropout consists of students with disabilities. On average. students with disabilities are at great risk of dropping out of school.“Something of a National Obsession” (Finn 1989. 117) -Dropout - High costs Society Individuals who drop out Their future families Students who do not complete sch cost taxpayers billions of dollars HOW IS THIS MONEY SPENT? 13 What Do We Know About Dropping Out? Certain groups of students are at greater risk of dropping out of school as compared to their peers. p. Students with disabilities are twice as likely to drop out as compared to their non-disabled peers. 14 7 .
What the Research Tells Us: III. Causes and Risk Factors 15 Causes Reasons for Disengagement 16 8 .
algebra and biology) Particular teachers (negative and demeaning interactions) Loss of personal freedom to make choices (while in class) 18 9 . administrators and educators) bear some responsibility for students who dropout.e. Why or Why not? 17 SWD Report Reasons for Disengagement Particular classes (perceived lack of relevance.. Why do SWD drop out of school? 2. DO YOU AGREE? Schools (i. e. level of difficulty. and failure.g..Activity 3 Discussion 1.
What Students Say Students report that HS academic classes are boring and lack relevance in their view Less than 10% can tell you how their academic classes relate to their future Over 75% of youth report thinking about dropping out before 8th grade Less than 5% report talking to someone at school about dropping out 19 What Students Say Most report leaving due to academic problems or difficulties with teachers When asked about their favorite teacher. over 90% of students’ descriptions fall into one of three areas: (1) positive or individual encounters (2) helped me to learn in some way (3) I knew they cared about me 20 10 .
& 15% were either expelled or told they could not return (Schwartz. or put on probation. 38% enrolled in HS but did not finish. NLTS data suggest that 38% of students with disabilities who left school did so by dropping out. 3% “aged out” 21 Why Students Drop Out 55% of youth with ED (Wagner. 17% to 42% of students with LD & 21% to 64% of students with BD (Scanlon & Mellard. 1995).Why Students Drop Out One-third were put on in-school suspension. Tardiness/poor attendance Lack of interest Disability-based difficulties/behavior problems Poor relationships with peers or adults Poor/limited academic skills Movement from school to school 22 2002). 11 . suspended. 1995). 8% dropped out before entering HS.
Sociology.Risk Factors Identified in Previous Research 23 Risk Factors Education. and Economics Demographic characteristics and family background Past school performance Personal/psychological characteristics Adult responsibilities School or neighborhood characteristics 24 12 .
caring for a child Working >20 hr/wk positively associated with dropping out Pregnancy positively associated with dropping out School or neighborhood characteristics Poor neighborhoods vs. parent or sibling dropped out Students from SES families are four times more likely to drop out than their high SES peers Past School Performance Low grades. rural. limited English proficiency. low self-esteem & locus of control. poor test scores. spending little time on homework 25 Risk Factors Personal/psychological characteristics Commitment to schooling and ability to follow through on this commitment. parents’ educational attainment. suburban 26 13 . single parent home. retention & age.Risk Factors Demographic Characteristics African American and Hispanic youth Family Background Family income. wealthier neighborhoods Higher in urban schools. SES. family involvement. disciplinary problems. low educational expectations or plans Adult responsibilities Employment. families who receive welfare. truancy.
Taking a Closer Look Pull and Push Effects 27 Activity 4 Discussion Define the following terms related to dropout: Pull Effects Push Effects 28 14 .
Pull Effects That Lead to Dropout Pull Effects Reported by students Compete with the goal of regular school attendance Compete with successful school completion as a first priority or Have to be performed in conjunction with attending school 29 Push Effects That Lead to Dropout Push Effects Reported by students Located within schools Cause students to feel unwelcome Students resist or altogether reject schooling Manifest disruptive behavior. chronic absenteeism. and completion cessation of academic effort 30 15 .
– – – – – – – – – – crgpnaney ermagair snoisuspen rtteennio emyplotmen eerp ssurerep ylimaf ssneill epxulnios dismentengage aliennatio 31 Pull Effects That Lead to Dropout Pull Effects Had to get a job Had to support family Became pregnant Wanted to have a family Wanted to travel Friends dropped out Got married.Activity 5 Can you identify the pull and push effects that lead to dropout? Unscramble the following words and identify each word as either a pull or push effect. or planned to get married Had to care for family member due to illness 32 16 .
Push Effects That Lead to Dropout Push Effects Did not like school Could not get along with teachers/students Suspended too often Expelled too often Did not feel safe at school Did not belong Could not keep up with school work/failing school 33 Taking a Closer Look Status and Alterable Variables 34 17 .
2002) Status Variables Students. ages 18-24 who completed school 64% Hispanic 84% African American 92% White On average.2% for middle income 1.6% for high income 36 18 .Status Variables – variables associated with dropout that are difficult and unlikely to change Age Gender SES Ethnicity Native language Region Mobility Ability Disability Parental employment School size and type Family structure 35 (National Center for Education Statistics. students from low-income families are at increased risk of not completing school 10% for low income 5.
Students with Disabilities Status Variables Low SES English as a second language Students with E/BD Age Parents who are unemployed Parents who are dropouts 37 Alterable Variables – variables associated with dropout that can be changed Grades Disruptive behavior Absenteeism School policies School climate Parenting Sense of belonging Attitudes toward school Educational support in the home Retention Stressful life events 38 19 .
Positive interactions with adults Relationships 5.Revelry 40 20 . Classwork that they see as connected to their lives or future .Relevance 3.Students with Disabilities Alterable Variables High rates of absenteeism High rates of tardiness Low grades History of course failure Alcohol and drug problems Negative attitudes toward school High levels of school mobility Grade retention 39 Alterable Variables Students want 5 things to help them be successful 1. A certain level of enjoyment during their high school years . Help with identifying what they want to do in life -basis for a productive adulthood Relevance 2.Rigor 4. Engagement in the learning process .
2. Identify and list two alterable variables that are present within your school/district. Sinclair.g. consistently occurs) Community Support Services (e.g.g. 42 21 . urban) Alterable Variables Attendance (e. living in poverty) Geographic Features (e. EBD) Structure (e. Strategies that may be effective in addressing and changing each alterable variable.g.g. One goal that would serve as your target as you work to influence and change the alterable variable. 3.g. single parent family) Intelligence (e. available) Source: Christenson. alienated) Monitoring of Student Progress (e.g.g. LD. sporadic) Supervision of free time (e. 2. low IQ) Socioeconomic Status (e. rarely occurs) Identification with school (e. & Hurley (2000) 41 Activity 6 Discussion: Causes and Risk Factors 1. For each alterable variable identify and list: 1. and The overall desired outcome(s) as a result of the change.Examples of Status and Alterable Variables Class of Variables Student Family Peers School Status Variables Disability (e.g.g.
2006). 1992).What the Research Tells Us: IV. Dept. of Ed. Students with disabilities who dropout are less likely to earn a GED than others (Marder & Dropouts’ earnings lag far behind those of degree holders.. 1999).S. even when they work full time (U. Differential Outcomes for Youth Who Dropout 43 Differential Outcomes The lives of dropouts D’Amico. 44 22 . Dropouts are less likely to be enrolled in postsecondary education (NTLS2.
in the short run. More than one-fourth of dropouts with disabilities are living independently with a spouse or partner. 27 for school completers). 46 23 . Eight percent of dropouts have attended vocational. dropouts with disabilities are 18 percentage points less likely to have enrolled in a 2. Controlling for other differences between dropouts and completers. 45 Differential Outcomes (Data from NLTS2) The rate of holding a paid job since high school among both dropouts and school completers is about 85%. compared with almost seven in eight school completers. business. including their functional cognitive abilities and previous academic achievement. rates of independent living and parenting that are more than four times those of youth with disabilities who completed high school.or 4-year college shortly after high school than are school completers. Because dropouts and school completers earn quite similar hourly wages. or preparation for work shortly after high school than are school completers. and 1% have attended a 2-year college at some time since leaving high school. and one-fifth are parenting. the forms of engagement of dropouts are unlikely to include postsecondary education. Not surprisingly. dropouts with disabilities tend to work more hours per week (an average of 34 vs. Dropouts are more likely to support independent households and children than are school completers. two-thirds of dropouts have been engaged in these activities. However. the longer hours worked by dropouts result.Differential Outcomes (Data from NLTS2) Dropouts are significantly less likely to be engaged in school. work. in their total earnings being higher on average than those of completers. or technical schools.
48 24 . Three to five years after dropping out. Controlling for other differences between them. the cumulative arrest rate for youth with serious emotional disturbance is 73%. three times the rate of youth with disabilities who finished high school.Differential Outcomes (Data from NLTS2) Dropouts are less likely than school completers to have such supports for independence as a driver’s license or a checking account. 1993). 82% of crimes are committed by people who have dropped out of school (APA Commission on Youth Violence. and they are much less likely to be registered to vote. 47 Differential Outcomes (Justice System) The arrest rates of youth with disabilities who drop out are significantly higher than for those who graduate. dropouts are 10 percentage points more likely to have been arrested than youth with disabilities who finished high school. More than one-third of dropouts with disabilities have spent a night in jail.
come from troubled families. 50 25 . not controlling for availability of drugs .1 times more likely to join gangs as compared to better achieving students. 49 Differential Outcomes (Gang Membership) SWD tend to form relationships within their academic track or set of courses. Not feeling attached (twice as likely) or committed to school (1. receive low grades. or low SES are more likely to join gangs (depending on geographical area – may simply form bonds with individuals who display antisocial behavior. criminal behavior).Differential Outcomes (Gang Membership) SWD who have a low commitment to school. Students with low academic achievement were 3. Having a learning disability is one of the highest risk factors for joining a gang.8 times as likely) are strong predictors of joining a gang.
most students forfeit the opportunity for a secure. Due to limited income or employment status. By dropping out. especially SWD.Differential Outcomes (Welfare System) Students who drop out of school tend to have a very difficult time finding jobs and are more likely to need assistance from governmental agencies. 51 Differential Outcomes (Welfare System) The employment rate of persons with disabilities remains under 40% (75% 80% for persons without disabilities). many students decide not to work and will instead will receive governmental assistance at some point. Employment rate drops over half for school dropouts. 52 26 . especially for SWD. well-paying career and productive adulthood.
4. 1993) School Completion = Engagement in School and Learning KEY ELEMENTS 1. Theoretical Models of Prevention 53 Theoretical Conceptualizations for Preventing Dropout and Promoting School Completion (Finn. 2.What the Research Tells Us: V. 3. Student Participation Identification with School Social Bonding Personal Investment in Learning 54 27 .
Incorporating personalization by creating meaningful personal bonds between students and teachers and among students. 2. 3. Connecting students to an attainable future. 3. 55 Theoretical Conceptualizations for Preventing Dropout and Promoting School Completion (Dynarski. 4. 2000) 1. and 5. Providing some form of academic assistance to help students perform well in their coursework.Theoretical Conceptualizations for Preventing Dropout and Promoting School Completion (Fashola & Slavin. and 4. Focus on helping students address personal and family issues through counseling and access to social services.1998) 1. Recognizing the importance of families in the school success of their children’s achievement and school completion. Allowing teachers to know students better (building relationships. Creating small schools with small class sizes. 56 28 . enhanced communication). Orientation toward assisting students in efforts to obtain GED certificates. 2. Provision of individual assistance (academic and behavioral).
and involvement in extracurricular activities Cognitive engagement involves internal indicators including processing academic information or becoming a self-regulated learner Psychological engagement includes identification with school or a sense of belonging 58 3. Academic engagement refers to time on task.Theoretical Conceptualizations for Preventing Dropout and Promoting School Completion (Christenson. academically engage time. Engagement is viewed as a multidimensional construct involving four types of engagement and associated indicators 57 Four Types of Engagement & Associated Factors (Christenson. 4. classroom participation. 2002) 1. or credit accrual Behavioral engagement includes attendance. Help students develop connections with the learning environments across a variety of domains 2. 2002) 1. avoidance of suspension. 2. 29 .
individualized methods of instruction. implementation of school within a school. Family outreach (e.. regularly scheduled classroom-based discussion. reducing school size. Academic (e. retreats designed to enhance self-esteem.Theoretical Conceptualizations for Preventing Dropout and Promoting School Completion (Lehr et al. strategies that include increased feedback to parents or home visits). 2003) 1.g. Work related (vocational training.g. 4.g... provision of special academic course. 59 Theoretical Conceptualizations for Preventing Dropout and Promoting School Completion (Lehr et al.g. participation in an interpersonal relations class). School structure (e. individual counseling. 2.. 2003) 3. tutoring). Personal/affective (e. participation in volunteer or service programs) 60 30 . and 5. re-definition of the role of the homeroom teacher. creation of an alternative school)...
including knowledge of how to learn. Principle 2 – Students need and want to access an adult who will encourage them to stay in school and help them to succeed. 2004) Principle 3 – Students need to have skills necessary for succeeding in today’s high schools. or other groups). They must understand the relevance of graduation to their future. 2004) Increase the Holding Power of Schools for SWD Principle 1 – Students must have a reason to want to complete school. Theoretical Conceptualizations for Preventing Dropout and Promoting School Completion (Principles for Keeping Kids in School: Kortering. 31 . This does not have to be a parent. clubs. Schools must provide strategies that promote success on today’s measures of performance. Principle 4 – Students who stay in school often have found a way to become engaged in the nonacademic side of school (sports.Theoretical Conceptualizations for Preventing Dropout and Promoting School Completion (Principles for Keeping Kids in School: Kortering. and in many cases. students who are at risk of not graduating may not have a parent to fill this role.
Effective Interventions and Models 64 32 .Activity 7 Discussion: Theoretical Models Review: – – – – – – Finn. 2002 Lehr. 1993 Fashola & Slavin.1998 Dynarski. 2004 Reflect: How is each model unique? Record: Which model or combination of models is a “better-fit” for your school or district? Explain why. 2000 Christenson. 63 What the Research Tells Us: VI. 2003 Kortering.
2005). 65 Interventions More experimental research and evaluation studies are needed on the effectiveness of prevention and intervention strategies directly in relation to the impact on dropout and school completion rates (Sinclair. such as reduction in problem behavior through positive behavioral supports (Sinclair. Christenson. & Thurlow. 66 33 . & Thurlow. 2005). Christenson.Interventions Practitioners and policymakers in search of empirically supported intervention strategies need to rely on studies that examine secondary indicators of dropout prevention.
S. Sinclair. DOE OSEP. Christenson. & Thornton. 1995) Interventions Funded by OSEP – – – – – Early 1990’s Three projects Prevent dropout among SWD at greatest risk LD & E/BD Students were tracked Who continued in school Who dropped out – Five intervention strategies used 68 34 .Interventions (U. 2006) Number of states using evidence-based programs increased from 4 in 2004 to 15 in 2005 Number of states developing initiatives using a combination of research-based strategies that address individual risk factors related to dropout prevention increased from 18 in 2004 to 34 in 2005 Reliable data collection will require consistent definitions and calculations for dropout and graduation 67 (Thurlow. Evelo.
Evelo. Evelo. 1995) Interventions 2. Monitoring – the occurrence of risk behaviors (e.these were always provided concurrently to show students that there was someone who was not going to give up on them or allow them to be distracted from school. poor academic performance) was consistently tracked. Sinclair. Sinclair. & Thornton. absenteeism. the summer. Continuity &Consistency . & that there was a common message about the need to stay in school 69 (Thurlow. Christenson. suspensions. behavioral referrals. Christenson. Persistency. & Thornton. as were the effects of interventions in response to risk behaviors 70 35 . and into the next school year.(Thurlow.g. skipped classes.. 1995) Interventions 1. that there was someone who knew the student and was available to them throughout the school year. tardiness.
Sinclair. Christenson. Affiliation – a sense of belonging to school was encouraged through participation in schoolrelated activities 5. Problem-Solving Skills – skills students need for solving a variety of problems were taught and supported so students were able to survive in challenging school. & Thornton. 1995) Interventions 3. Relationships – a caring relationship between an adult connected to the school and the student was established 4. Evelo.(Thurlow. and community environments 71 Interventions Influenced by Educators Focus on factors linked to dropout Attendance Behavior Academic performance Student engagement Adult/peer interactions Safe school environment Evaluate policies and procedures regarding dropouts Implementation of evidence-based strategies/interventions Interventions must be matched to student needs 72 36 . home.
usually months or years Interventions involve a family or parent component Interventions should be strength based and involve a variety of contexts 74 37 .Interventions Approaches with limited effectiveness Short-lived approaches Punishment-oriented approaches Approaches not focused on engaging students in school Effective approaches to increase school completion Approaches focused on engaging students Strength-based approaches Approaches matched to student needs Long-term approaches Approaches involving various contexts 73 Interventions Strategies are focused on student engagement Interventions occur over time.
2005) Synthesis of the evidence-based research associated with instructional interventions that reduce dropout for youth with disabilities Systematic review of the literature published between 1984 – 2003 related to discovering “what works” in transition from school to post-school environments for youth with disabilities 75 Effective Models (Cobb. in part. residential treatment centers or day treatment centers 76 38 .Effective Models (Cobb. 2005) Approximately 560 studies were reviewed and subjected to rigorous screening This process reduced the number of studies included in the review to 30 16 Cognitive Behavioral Interventions 7 Applied Behavioral Analytic Interventions 7 Counseling Interventions Samples were exclusively youth with disabilities or were. youth with disabilities Ages 12-22 enrolled in public or private schools.
Effective Models Original Study Outcomes (Cobb. 1998 – Presely & Hughes. 2005) Cognitive Behavioral Interventions (CBI) – Curriculum training in problem solving. Edwards. & Hurley. Fletcher. Christenson. 2005) Staying in school. selfinstruction. including mentoring. retention in support programs designed to keep students in school Attendance Engagement with school Physical or verbal aggression Self-concept. & Metevia. Laneri. teacher and peer modeling Key studies – Sinclair. 2000 – Barkley. Evelo. 2001 Equally effective with younger and older adolescents and in schools as well as in residential and day treatment centers 78 39 . and situation self-awareness. self-esteem 77 Effective Models (Cobb.
Rosenberg. 1991 – Myaard. family. & Alessi. & Levy. especially for students with emotional disorders 80 40 . 2005) Applied Behavioral Analytic Interventions (ABA) – Designed to help students learn. and psycho-educational counseling along with vocational education. 1999 Counseling programs embedded within the school that generalized to all of the students’ environments. Jackson. 1990 – Sinha & Kapur. frequency and intensity of interventions are increased in order to reach optimum learning. group. 2000 Programs focused on behaviors that lead to adolescents exiting school early (voluntary and involuntary) 79 Effective Models (Cobb. response cost interventions Key studies – Licht. 2005) Counseling/Therapeutic Interventions Key studies – Individual. Gard. Crawford. social skills training. and wrap-around services – Hess. individual psychotherapy.Effective Models (Cobb. & Guardino. behavioral contracts.
like Check and Connect. 2005) FINDINGS Cognitive-behavioral Interventions – (YES) – Appears best for high incidence disabilities Applied Behavior Analytic Interventions – (Cautious Yes) – Appears useful to reduce verbally and physically aggressive behavior and both high and low incidence disabilities Counseling Interventions – (No Judgment Can Be Made) – Appears useful specifically for students with emotional disorders 81 Conclusions (Cobb. 2005) RECCOMMENDATIONS Cognitive-behavioral interventions.Conclusions (Cobb. can be relied upon to work well under a variety of contexts provided they are implemented with fidelity and over extended periods of time Compared to the transition and academic literature. the dropout prevention literature is extremely limited in special education – more focus on this outcome area In particular – most of the commonly perceived effective interventions in the general literature have not been tested in special education 82 41 .
Intended to help students during the transition period from one school to another. and community. Employs a combination of career and academic training for students considered at-risk. Addresses the academic.Dropout Intervention Models Intervention Program/Strategy Achievement for Latinos through Academic Success (ALAS) Intervention Description A collaborative approach involving the student. social. Incorporates a significant community component. coaching. Created for first-time mothers to decrease dropout and discourage repeat teen pregnancies. health. increased feedback to parents. parent training in school participation. modifies the role of the homeroom teacher. Alters the environment of the school.g. 83 Dropout Intervention Models Intervention Program/Strategy Project COFFEE School Transitional Environment Project (STEP) Support Center for Adolescent Mothers (Family Growth Center) Teen Outreach Program (TOP) Intervention Description Offers individualized instruction through an alternative occupational education program. The focus of career academies varies (e. and occupational needs of students at risk for dropout. emotional. • • • • • suspension dropout pregnancy problem behaviors course failure 84 42 . attendance monitoring. Students receive basic or intensive interventions based on monitoring risk factors. and works to enhance communication between home and school. family.. family. Strategies include problem-solving training. • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • Outcome Variables dropout absenteeism on tract to graduate credit accumulation achievement grade point average attendance credits retention courses passed student engagement credit load enrollment status assignment completion on tract to graduate reading grades self-esteem attitude/school self-concept dropout Career Academics Check & Connect Promotes student engagement via a monitor/mentor who maintains regular contact with the student. school. Coca Cola Valued Youth Program Helps to build the self-esteem and selfconcept of at-risk youth by giving them the responsibility of being tutors to younger children. and teachers. and increased awareness and use of community resources. Outcome Variables • attendance • grade point average • dropout • • • • dropout grade point average absenteeism academic environment • dropout • pregnancy Designed to prevent dropout and teen pregnancy through volunteer and educational experiences and discussion of life-skills topics using the Teen Outreach Curriculum. technology).
The action plan will initially assist and guide personnel with identifying tasks. identifying resources. 86 43 . considering the information provided in Module 2.ed. delegating responsibilities.Effectiveness Ratings for Dropout Prevention Programs in Three Domains Intervention ALAS (Achievement for Latinos through Academic Success) Career Academies Check & Connect Financial Incentives for Teen Parents to Stay in School High School Redirection Middle College High School Project GRAD Quantum Opportunity Program Talent Development High Schools Talent Search Twelve Together Key Staying in school Progressing in school Completing school +? +? + +? ± ? +? +? +? ? +? ? ? +? +? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? +? +? ? - ? Potentially positive effects: evidence of a positive effect with no overriding contrary evidence No discernible effects: no affirmative evidence of effects Negative effects: strong evidence of a negative effect with no overriding contrary evidence + ± -? Positive effects: strong evidence of a positive effect with no overriding contrary evidence Mixed effects: evidence of inconsistent effects Potentially negative effects: evidence of a negative effect with no overriding contrary evidence Source: What Works Clearinghouse (2007) http://ies. developing a timeline.gov/ncee/wwc/reports/dropout 85 Activity 8 Homework Action Plan Groups will work together to develop an action plan tailored to meet the individual needs and concerns of their school. and identifying process indicators for the “first steps” to address school completion.
Activity 8 Homework Action Plan Groups are encouraged to begin with tasks that will allow them to effectively identify and examine: An example is provided as a guide. strategies. – Present risk factors and alterable variables that increase SWD risks for dropping out (-) – Present policies or procedures (push effects) that may impede school completion for SWD (-) – Interventions. or programs in place to support SWD at risk for dropping out of school (+) – Current strategies or practices implemented to promote parent engagement (+) 87 Major Lessons Learned Dropout is COMPLEX – there is no one solution – the costs are substantial Dropout does not occur overnight SWD are at considerable risk We must identify and address risk factors Educators can influence risk factors Evidence-based practices are essential 88 44 .
” .CONSIDER GRADUATION AS THE ONLY ACCEPTABLE OUTCOME!! 89 “It is easier to build strong children than to repair broken men.Frederick Douglas 90 45 .
ndpc-sd. PhD sandras@clemson.Thank You! www.org 91 Contact Information: Sandra Covington Smith.edu NDPC-SD 209 Martin Street Clemson. SC 29640 864-656-1817 92 46 .