Fixing and Preventing the Dropout Rate

The dropout Epidemic:
The dropout epidemic that is overtaking many of our public schools is one of those cases that is more misunderstood than understood. There are many factors that lead a student to dropout of school. In order to prevent students from dropping out, it is important to know first who is dropping out and the reason for this choice.
Who is Dropping Out:
In order to identify who is dropping out of school, it is imperative the we, as educators, understand the factors the lead students to drop out in the first place. Understanding and recognizing these factors is critical in our immediate prevention and fixing of this problem. As identified by (Macmillan, 1991; Rosenthal, 1998; Rumberger, 1995; Wolman, Bruininks, & Thurlow, 1989) there are two types of factors that contribute to the decision of a student to drop out of school.
Status Variables vs. Alterable Variables:
Status Variables are those factors identified as difficult or unlikely to change. These are the variables that educators, students and schools will have great difficulty in changing in order to assist an “at risk” student from staying in school. The status variables mentioned are as follows:
Age. Students who drop out tend to be older compared to their grade-level peers.
Gender. Students who drop out are more likely to be male. Females who drop out often do so due to reasons associated with pregnancy.
Socioeconomic background. Dropouts are more likely to come from low-income families.
Ethnicity. The rate of dropout is higher on average for Black, Hispanic, and Native American youth.
Native language. Students who come from non-English speaking backgrounds are more likely to have higher rates of dropout.
Region. Students are more likely to drop out if they live in urban settings as compared to suburban or nonmetropolitan areas. Dropout rates are higher in the South and West than in the Northeast region of the U.S.
Mobility. High levels of household mobility contribute to increased likelihood of dropping out.
Ability. Lower scores on measures of cognitive ability are associated with higher rates of dropout.
Disability. Students with disabilities (especially those with emotional/behavioral disabilities) are at greater risk of dropout.
Parental employment. Dropouts are more likely to come from families in which the parents are unemployed.
School size and type. School factors that have been linked to dropout include school type and large school size.
Family structure. Students who come from single-parent families are at greater risk of dropout.
The above mentioned items are contributing factors to students dropping out of school. These predictors are very difficult for an educator to change in any student; therefore, the student is very likely to drop out whether attention is given to the variable or not.
Alterable Variables: are those factors that are much easier to change and can usually be influenced by students, educators, parents, and the community (Macmillan, 1991; Rosenthal, 1998; Rumberger, 1995; Wolman, Bruininks, & Thurlow, 1989) The alterable variables are as follows:
Grades. Students with poor grades are at greater risk of dropout.
Disruptive behavior. Students who drop out are more likely to have exhibited behavioral and disciplinary problems in school.
Absenteeism. Rate of attendance is a strong predictor of dropout.
School policies. Alterable school policies associated with dropout include raising academic standards without providing supports, tracking, and frequent use of suspension.
School climate. Positive school climate is associated with lower rates of dropout.
Parenting. Homes characterized by permissive parenting styles have been linked with higher rates of dropout.
Sense of belonging. Alienation and decreased levels of participation in school have been associated with increased likelihood of dropout.
Attitudes toward school. The beliefs and attitudes (e.g., locus of control, motivation to achieve) that students hold toward school are important predictors of dropout.
Educational support in the home. Students whose families provide higher levels of educational support for learning are less likely to drop out.
Retention. Students who drop out are more likely to have been retained than students who graduate. Using National Education Longitudinal Study data, being held back was identified as the single biggest predictor of dropping out.
Stressful life events. Increased levels of stress and the presence of stressors (e.g., financial difficulty, health problems, early parenthood) are associated with increased rates of dropout.
The above variables are influential in a student making the decision to drop out of school; however, the difference between the alterable variables and the status variables is we can change the alterable variables in order to assist a student “at risk” of dropping out of school. If, as educators, we focus our attention to these two very unique variables, we may be able to truly assist students and increase school completion for many of our students.
Understanding the Variables:
The belief that students who are at risk are more likely to dropout is not accurate; in fact, as mentioned by Schargel & Smink, 2001 [t]he majority of dropouts are not those who seem to be most at risk. That is, although the dropout rate for Blacks is 50 percent higher than for Whites, and twice as high for Hispanics, 66 percent of the actual dropouts are White, while just 17 percent are Black and 13 percent are Hispanic. Moreover, most dropouts are not from broken homes, not poor, and not pregnant. Consequently, if our graduation rate is to climb to 90 percent, it will have to be achieved by putting greater emphasis on retaining students whose background and behavior are not generally thought of as the defining characteristics of students who drop out.
If our goal is to truly fix the drop out epidemic, the above statement is suggesting we focus our efforts on those students we are able to help by identifying the alterable variables. For too long we have focused our energy, our efforts and our money on changing variables that are not going to change. The outcome of these efforts: students continue to drop out. Schargel & Smink are suggesting it is time for our way of thinking about drop outs to change. We need to focus our attention on those students we can help. The expectation stated in Goals 2000 was to reach 90% school completion rate by the year 2000. Recent reports identify on 17 states reaching this goal (NCES 2002). Today, a student who does not complete high school is at an even greater risk of not finding employment that pays living wages. According to the Juvenile Justice and Deliquency Prevention 80% of the individuals in prison do not have high school diploma. Therefore, it is now time to change our way of thinking and our focus on not just who is dropping out, but why they are dropping out. We need to fix the things we can in order to increase school completion. Failure to identify these variables in our students is keeping the status quo in check. We need to switch our focus to another group of drop outs; it is time to help those we can. If we show progress with this group, we may be able to give hope to those students who suffer from those status variables, which in turn will assist them in making a change for themselves.