Issue Brief

May 2004
Volume 1, Issue 2
by
Debbie Blue and Jennifer E. Cook
The University of Texas at Austin
Teenagers dropping out of high school
before completion has been a challenge for
educators, parents, and employers for at
least 30 years (Haycock & Huang, 2001).
As minimum skill expectations have
increased at every educational and
employment entry point, so has the
importance of attaining a high school
diploma. Despite this trend and the
increased severity of the negative
consequences of dropping out (McCaul,
Dropout Statistics
High School Dropouts:
Can We Reverse the Stagnation in School Graduation?
Donaldson, Coladarci, & Davis, 1992), for
many public school studentsparticularly
male students from low-income or ethnic
minority familiesgraduating from high
school has remained problematic, even as
the nations general educational level has
increased (Dillow, 2003). This paper
summarizes the factors associated with
dropping out of high school as well as
potential strategies to reduce the dropout
rate.
The University of Texas
Dept. of Educational
Administration
1 University Station
D5400
Austin TX 78712
512-475-8569
www.edb.utexas.edu/hsns
Inside This Issue
Factors affecting
dropping out:
Family Income
Social and emotional
factors
Socioeconomic status
Race and ethnicity
Grade retention
Institutional influences
Study of High
School
Restructuring
National Data
Data from the 2000 Current Population
Survey (CPS) of the U.S. Census Bureau
are used to compute national high school
dropout and completion rates and rates by
background characteristics, such as sex,
race/ethnicity, and family income. Dropout
rates are typically calculated in one of two
ways: status rates and event rates. Status
dropout rates indicate the number and
percentage of people aged 1524 who are
not enrolled in school and have not
obtained a high school credential. Event
dropout rates, on the other hand, measure
the number and percentage of students
leaving school over a particular time
periodtypically one year.
The national percentage of youth ages
1524 who were status dropouts in 2000
was 10.9%. This translates into more than
3 million students. Disaggregated by race,
the rates were White, 6.9%; Asian, 3.8%;
African American, 13.1%; and Hispanic,
27.8% (National Center for Education
Statistics [NCES], 2001). See Figure 1.
Status Dropout Rates
The most recent national data are the
event dropout rates between October 1998
and October 1999 for students in Grades
1012. As shown below, 5% of all students
dropped out of high school; out of these,
nearly 8% of Hispanic students dropped
out, and more than 6% of African American
students dropped out, as compared to only
4% of White students (NCES, 2001). See
Figure 2.
Event Dropout Rates
High School Dropouts Page 2 of 11
Issue Brief Vol. 1, Issue 2
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
All Hispanic Black White
%

o
f

a
l
l

s
t
u
d
e
n
t
s
Texas Data
In Texas, dropout rates are calculated in
two ways: event dropout rates and
longitudinal dropout rates. As described
above, event dropout rates report the
number and percentage of students
dropping out of school over a particular
time period. Longitudinal dropout rates
examine the number and percentage of
students dropping out of school over a
particular time period. Longitudinal dropout
rates examine the number and percentage
of students from a particular cohort who
dropped out of school. Event dropout rates
tend to be lower than longitudinal rates and
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
All Hispanic Black White Asian
%
Figure 1. National status dropout rates 2002.
Figure 2. National event dropout rates 19981999.
Dropout problems have
persisted for over 30
years.
High School Dropouts Page 3 of 11
Issue Brief Vol. 1, Issue 2
so only provide a snapshot of what
happens during the time a student is
considered to be in high school. Moreover,
there is great debate within Texas about
how the state calculates whether a student
is a dropout or not. Despite a lack of
consensus about how to measure
dropouts, most educators believe the
Texas event dropout rate seriously
underestimates the true magnitude of the
number and percentage of students
dropping out of school.
Dropping out is a long-
term process of
disengaging from
school.
For the school year 20012002, annual
high school dropout rates were as follows:
state, 1.3%; economically disadvantaged,
1.3%; White, 0.6%; Asian, 0.6%; Native
American, 1.1%; African American, 1.8%;
and Hispanic, 1.9% (Texas Education
Agency [TEA], 2003b).
Event Dropout Rates
Texas longitudinal dropout rate is defined
as the percentage of students from the
same cohort of students who drop out
before completing their high school
education. This is more consistent with the
public perception of dropping out; however,
meaningful data must be collected over a
longer time period while maintaining a link
to individual students. Longitudinal dropout
rates, Grades 912, for the Class of 2002
are as follows: statewide, 5.0%;
economically disadvantaged, 7.7%; White,
2.7%; Asian, 2.6%; Native American, 3.5%;
African American, 6.6%; and Hispanic,
7.8%. See Figure 3.
Longitudinal Dropout Rates
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
Econ disadv. Hispanic Black Native Am. White Asian
%
Figure 3. Texas longitudinal dropout rates, class of 2002.
One point of contention in these
longitudinal dropout rates is whether to
count students obtaining a GED and
students enrolled for a 5th year of high
school should be counted as dropouts.
Perhaps a more telling statistic is the
graduation rate for students. The
graduation rate measures the percentage
of students from a particular ninth-grade
cohort who obtain a high school diploma by
Graduation Rates
High School Dropouts Page 4 of 11
Issue Brief Vol. 1, Issue 2
Data from the CPS showed an
association between family income and
dropping out. According to the 2000 CPS
event (annual) dropout rate data, high
school students from families within the
lowest 20% income range were 6 times
as likely as those with families in the top
20% income distribution to drop out of
high school (NCES, 2001). Ten percent
of students in the lowest 20% income
bracket dropped out of high school,
whereas 5.2% in the middle 60% and
only 1.6% of students in the top 20% of
the income distribution dropped out
(NCES).
the end of the 4 years of high school.
Graduation rates were statewide, 82.8%;
White, 88.2%; Asian, 90.6%; Native
American, 84.6%; African American,
79.8%; and Hispanic, 75.7%. Texas
graduation rates, then, are substantially
lower for African American and Hispanic
students as compared to their White peers.
Factors Relating to Dropping Out
Broadly stated, researchers have
acknowledged that many factors influence
dropping out, including the conditions of
schooling, individual personality traits,
home environment, and the economic
context within which students live (Fine,
1987; National Research Council, 2001;
U.S. General Accounting Office, 2002).
Early interventions, before middle school
and high school, are commonly
recommended as the most powerful
strategies to prevent students from
dropping out (Stegelin, 2002; Temple,
Reynolds, & Miedel, 2000) because
dropping out of school seems to be the
result of a long-term process of
disengaging from school (Alexander &
Entwisle, 1997; Finn, 1989; Hess, 2000).
Although research has identified no single
cause for dropping out, researchers
typically have followed two distinct lines of
inquiry. The first line examines individual
student factors such as social and
economic environment and ethnicity. The
second line identifies the institutional
factors and the conditions of schooling that
impact dropping out.
Student Factors
Family Income
In general, students in low
socioeconomic neighborhoods are more
likely to drop out of school than students
in more affluent neighborhoods. For
example, in their longitudinal study of
over 1,100 students, South, Baumer, and
Lutz (2003) found that the
socioeconomic status of a students
neighborhood is more associated with
the probability of dropping out than
adolescents' delinquent behavior,
student attachment to school and
parents, and parental control over
adolescent behavior. They also
suggested that students in
socioeconomically distressed
neighborhoods feel that school
completion offers little either to improve
the quality of life in their neighborhood or
to provide mobility into a better one.
Socioeconomic Status of Neighborhoods
Students from low-
income families drop out
at almost twice the rate
of middle-income
families.
High School Dropouts Page 5 of 11
Issue Brief Vol. 1, Issue 2
Several education scholars have
recognized the particular social and
cultural challenges faced by African
American males. Cooper and Jordan
(2003) examined the complexities of
educational and social conditions
encountered by African American males in
public schools and the effectiveness of
comprehensive school reform to overcome
the barriers of learning that hinder the
urban male student. Jordan and Cooper
(2003) argued that cultural relevance and
studentteacher cultural synchronization is
critical in successfully educating students
and keeping them in school.
A longitudinal study (Davis, Ajzen,
Saunders, & Williams, 2002) that
explored high school completion among
African Americans found that intentions
to complete the year were predicted
accurately from attitudes (beliefs about
short- and long-term consequences),
subjective norms (perceived
expectations of family, teachers, and
friends), and perceived behavioral
control (requisite academic abilities,
conflict with peers and teachers, and
distracting life conditions). Intentions
and, to a lesser extent, perceived
behavioral control, predicted graduation
almost 3 years later.
Nationally, Hispanics are disproportionately
represented among high school dropouts.
Indeed, while only comprising 15.1% of the
population, 38.6% of all dropouts in 2000
were Hispanic (NCES, 2001). Over most of
the last 30 years, 3 out of every 10
Hispanics aged 1624 in the United States
were out of school and lacking a high
school credential (NCES).
Hispanic individuals who are recent
immigrants have a particularly high dropout
rate. CPS data for 2000 showed a status
dropout rate of 44.2% for Hispanic 16-
through 24-year-olds born outside the
United Statesmore than double the rates
of U.S. first- and second-generation
Hispanic youth (14.6% and 15.9%,
respectively; NCES, 2001).
Among students whose families are
employed as migrant agricultural laborers,
often Mexican Americans or Mexican
immigrants, additional social factors
complicate their high school completion:
social prejudice, lack of communication
between students and schools, mobility,
lack of educational continuity, living
conditions that make studying difficult, and
high levels of student responsibility for
family matters (Martinez & Cranston-
Gingras, 1996; Martinez, Cranston-
Gingras, & Velazquez, 2001). Some young
immigrants may have entered the country
at an older age or purely for employment;
another important barrier is language
(NCES, 2001).
Another explanation for the high dropout
rate among Hispanic students is offered
by Valenzuela (1999), who concluded
that school environments that devalue or
deny students cultural identities and
languagewhat she called subtractive
schoolingalienate students and make
them closed to learning, even in the face
of obvious academic talent. She
contended that these subtractive
experiences plague the education of
Mexican American, Mexican immigrant,
African American, American Indian, and
Puerto Rican students. However, the
effects can be reversed through
authentically caring pedagogy that builds
on students cultural strengths.
African American Students
Hispanic Students
Hispanics are more
likely than African
Americans to drop out,
but both face similar
problems.
High School Dropouts Page 6 of 11
Issue Brief Vol. 1, Issue 2
Grade retentionwhen a student repeats
the same grade level of schoolhas
increased in recent years, primarily due to
an increased emphasis on accountability
and standards (Jimerson, Anderson, &
Whipple, 2002) and despite evidence that
retention is at best a short-term fix
(Anderson, Whipple, & Jimerson, 2002;
Roderick, 1995). By ninth grade, 3050%
of all students will have been retained at
least once and will thus be overage for
their grade level (Jimerson, Ferguson,
Whipple, Anderson, & Dalton, 2002).
In their review of 17 research studies,
Jimerson, Anderson, and Whipple (2002,
Abstract) found compelling evidence that
grade retention is one of the most
powerful predictors of dropout status.
Indeed, overwhelming evidence shows that
being retained in earlier grades
dramatically impacts students risk of
dropping out of high school (Anderson et
al., 2002; Roderick, 1995; TEA, 1996).
Retained students are 211 times more
likely to drop out during high school than
nonretained students (Jimerson, Ferguson,
et al., 2002). Moreover, the effects of grade
retention combine with other student
factors, such as ethnicity, socioeconomic
status, and emotional disengagement.
Texas students who are overage for grade
level, as a result of being retained in grade,
are disproportionately represented among
high school dropouts. Students who are
overage make up approximately 80% of
those who dropped out in 20012002
(TEA, 2003b). According to the TEA (1996,
p. 3), Being overage for grade is a better
predictor for dropping out than
underachievement.
Moreover, retention can escalate:
Overage students were retained more
than twice as often as their at-age
counterparts (TEA, 1996, p. 3). Students
retained two grades have a phenomenal
90% risk of dropping out of high school
(Roderick, 1995).
Student factors impact retention rates,
which may explain the related impact on
dropout rates. For instance, economically
disadvantaged and urban students are
more likely to be retained (TEA, 1998).
School Factors
Grade Retention
Grade retention influences the students
subsequent self-esteem, socio-emotional
adjustment, peer relations, school
engagement, and other factors [that] are
also highly associated with school
withdrawal (Jimerson, Anderson, &
Whipple, 2002, p. 453). Roderick (1995)
cited three aspects of retention that
place students at risk of dropping out: (a)
Retention does not seem to fix the
problem; (b) it sends a message of
failure to the student, who then may
suffer from long-term self-esteem and
engagement problems; and (c) retention
makes the student overage during
adolescence, increasing the risk of
disengagement from school.
Emotional Impact of Being Overage
The statistics for overage students and
retention are disproportionate along racial
lines, similar to dropout rates (Anderson et
al., 2002; Roderick, 1995; TEA, 1998). For
Black males in Austin, Texas, retention
increased the risk of dropping out of high
school by 27% (Grissom & Shepard, 1989,
as cited in Anderson, 1998). According to
the TEA (1996), Hispanic and African
American students were retained more
Race and Retention
Overage or retained
students are 211
times more likely to
drop out in high school.
Texas students who
are overage for grade
level, as a result of
being retained in
grade, are
disproportionately
represented among
high school dropouts.
High School Dropouts Page 7 of 11
Issue Brief Vol. 1, Issue 2
than twice as often as White students:
Almost 7 out of 10 of all retained students
were Hispanic or African American (p. 3).
Hispanic students are at particular risk of
retention, which may explain their greater
risk of dropping out of high school
(Jimerson, Anderson, & Whipple, 2002).
Research has shown that the transition to
ninth grade is vital. In Texas public high
schools, slightly more than 31% of the
students are enrolled in grade 9, thus
suggesting a fairly high retention rate for
grade 9 students, a fairly high dropout rate
after grade 9, or a combination of both
phenomena. Moreover, the greatest
incidence of dropping out is in Grade
9approximately 28% (TEA, 2003b).
Likewise, the greatest incidence of grade
retention is in Grade 9 (17.8% for
19961997, compared to an overall
retention rate of 4.2% for all Grades K12)
(TEA, 1996, 1998). Again, a
disproportionate number of Hispanic and
African American students are retained in
ninth gradefor 19961997, twice as
many as White students (TEA, 1998). One
fourth of these minority students are
retained in ninth grade (TEA, 1996, 1998).
The transition to high school is significant
in the decision of students to drop out of
school. This transition often offers critical,
yet neglected, opportunities for
interventions (Lan & Lanthier, 2003) and
for the formation of significant social
attachments, including peer and family
relationships (Marcus & Sanders-Reio,
2001; Pong & Ju, 2000; Vitaro, Larocque,
Janosz, & Tremblay, 2001), both of which
can reduce the likelihood of dropping out.
School organization factors that can help
retain at-risk ninth graders include (a)
decreasing alienation of high school by
breaking down the school into small-school
units to increase personalized instruction,
(b) expanding the roles of homeroom
teacher to include mentor and guide, (c)
creating clusters of students who remain
together for several classes, (d) alternative
and minischools, (e) create alternatives to
retention prior to ninth grade, and (f)
providing smoother transition to high
school using adult advocacy (Ascher,
1987).
These suggested solutions relate to other
researchers findings regarding school
organization and dropout rates.
The Ninth Grade
Lee and Burkam (2003) explored how high
school structure and organization may
influence students decisions to stay in
school or to drop out. In a quantitative
study of 3,840 students in Grades 1012 in
the 30 largest metro (urban and suburban)
areas in the United States, the authors
found that explanations of dropouts that
rely solely on students social background
and school behaviors are
incompleteschools can exert important
organizational effects on students'
decisions to dropout or to stay in school.
Schools that offer more challenging
courses and fewer remedial or
nonacademic courses hold students in
school.
Further, school size influences school
outcomes; smaller schools (not larger than
1,500 students) are generally more
effective at retaining students than small
schools and very large schools (2,500+;
Lee & Burkam, 2003). Aschers (1987)
findings showed that small school
organization reduces the risk of retention
and dropping out for ninth graders.
School Organization
School organization can
affect students decisions
to drop out.
Small schools and
mentors can help retain at-
risk ninth graders.
Texas students are
more likely to drop out in
Grade 9.
High School Dropouts Page 8 of 11
Issue Brief Vol. 1, Issue 2
Caring teachers and
caring adults help
connect students to
school.
Culturally Relevant Teaching Practices
Culturally relevant teaching practices have
been cited as beneficial in successfully
educating racial and ethnic minorities.
Mitchell (1998) suggested that what
teachers do in the affective domain to
establish or maintain student motivation
and engagement is key to academic
achievement. This position is supported by
the work of other researchers (Foster,
1993; Hunter-Boykin, 1992; King, 1993;
Ladson-Billings, 1994, 1995).
Similarly, funds of knowledge (Moll &
Gonzlez 1994) help to affirm and build on
the strengths of students to take full
advantage of social and cultural resources
in service of academic goals (p. 441). The
funds of knowledge perspective suggests
that important cultural resources are
available for teaching that are located in
the households of the schools immediate
community. These resources, once
located, identified, and documented, were
used successfully in classrooms studied by
the researchers. The researchers
described collaboration with teachers and
families that resulted in successful
pedagogical practices for language
minority children.
Caring School Climate
Students are less likely to drop out of
schools in which they feel they have
positive relationships with their teachers
(Lee & Burkam, 2003). Worrell and Hale
(2001) examined the impact of hope in the
future and school climate as protective
factors in school dropouts and graduates.
Retrospectively, dropouts rated perceived
school climate significantly lower than did
graduates, and graduates rated the
importance of attending college
significantly higher than did dropouts.
Dropouts and graduates who left school
after the study was conducted did not
report differences on the risk factors
measured, nor did they differ on perceived
school climate or the importance of
attending college. However, hope in the
future significantly predicted dropout
versus graduate status for these
participants.
Fostering authentic, caring school climates
that affirm culturally relevant, caring
pedagogy can result in student academic
success. Reyes, Scribner, and Paredes-
Scribner (1999) found that collaborative
governance and leadership, including a
clear vision shared by the school
community; collaborative, dedicated
administrators; and humanistic leadership
philosophies were among the attributes of
schools that were successful in educating
Mexican American students to high levels
of achievement. Without attending to
distinctive contributions of culture,
educational efforts with these students are
likely to be unsuccessful (Garcia, 1995;
Knapp & Woolverton, 1995; Reyes, Velez,
& Pena, 1993; Velez & Saenz, 2001).
Caring teachers (Croninger & Lee, 2001)
are an important source of social capital for
students. These teacher-based forms of
social capital reduce the probability of
dropping out by nearly half. However,
students who come from socially
disadvantaged backgrounds and who have
had academic difficulties in the past find
guidance and assistance from teachers
especially helpful. Caring adults, too, are
among the assets that young people need
to succeed (Benson, Galbraith, &
Espeland, 1998).
Participation in school activities is an
additional strategy for schools to help
students form school attachments to
prevent dropping out. A study by Davalos,
Chavez, and Guardiola (1999) examined
extracurricular activity, perception of
school, ethnic identification, and the
association of these variables with school
retention rates among Mexican Americans
and White non-Hispanics. They found that
students reporting participation in
extracurricular activity were 2.3 times more
likely to be enrolled in school than were
those not participating in extracurricular
activity.
More challenging
coursework and fewer
remedial courses hold
students in school.
High School Dropouts Page 9 of 11
Issue Brief Vol. 1, Issue 2
Conclusion
Despite the increased importance of a high
school education, national high school
completion rates have barely increased
over the last 30 years (NCES, 2001). As
Americas global primacy and economic
competitiveness relative to other
industrialized countries has been
challenged, it has become more important
that all human capital be developed to its
highest capacity. Much of this opportunity
to develop human capital exists among
those groups whose education historically
has been neglected: low-income students,
children of color, immigrants, and those
educated in underresourced, urban public
schools.
The research literature on high school
dropouts has argued for several levels of
action. First, there is a call for the
comprehensive societal commitment to
successfully educate all students. The
current federal education law, the No Child
Left Behind Act of 2001, specifically
emphasizes educator accountability for the
success of students from low-income
families, including racial and ethnic
minority students. Further, the research
supports the implementation of individual,
more personalized interventions from
educators and other caring adults that
provide more social and emotional support
for learning. These would include helping
students understand the necessity of a
solid education to their future employment
opportunities, assisting them to set and
accomplish educational goals, and
planning their transitions for the future,
while reducing student grade retention and
subsequent dropout.
Finally, the research advocates for the
adaptation of schooling institutions to
better respond to the needs of all learners,
including discipline and attendance policies
that maintain high standards without
alienating students from schools,
scheduling adaptations that accommodate
student needs, smaller school
communities, and more challenging and
engaging coursework. This is an ambitious
agenda, even for America, but it is one that
is within the capability of a committed
American society.
References
Alexander, K. L., & Entwisle, D. R. (1997). From
first grade forward: Early foundations of high
school dropout. Sociology of Education, 70(2),
87-107.
Anderson, B., with the RMC Research Corp. (1998,
Winter). Retention in the early grades: A review
of the research. Of Primary Interest, 6(1).
Available at
http://www.ldonline.org/ld_indepth/legal_legislativ
e/retention_in_early_grades.html
Anderson, G. E., Whipple, A. D., & Jimerson, S. R.
(2002). Grade retention: Achievement and
mental health outcomes. Bethesda, MD: National
Association of School Psychologists. Available at
http://www.nasponline.org/pdf/graderetention.pdf
Ascher, C. (1987, June). The ninth gradeA
precarious time for the potential dropout (ERIC
Digest, 34). New York: ERIC Clearinghouse on
Urban Education. Available at
http://www.ericdigests.org/pre-926/ninth.htm
Benson, P. L., Galbraith, J., & Espeland, P. (1998).
What teens need to succeed: Proven, practical
ways to shape your own future. Minneapolis, MN:
Free Spirit.
Cooper, R., & Jordan, W. J. (2003). Cultural issues
in comprehensive school reform. Urban
Education, 38(4), 380-398.
Croninger, R. G., & Lee, V. E. (2001). Social capital
and dropping out of high school: Benefits to at-
risk students of teachers' support and guidance.
Teachers College Record, 103(4), 548-582.
Davalos, D. B., Chavez, E. L., & Guardiola, R. J.
(1999). The effects of extracurricular activity,
ethnic identification, and perception of school on
student dropout rates. Hispanic Journal of
Behavioral Sciences, 21(1), 61-77.
Davis, L. E., Ajzen, I., Saunders, J., & Williams, T.
(2002). The decision of African American
students to complete high school: An application
of the theory of planned behavior. Journal of
Educational Psychology, 94(4), 810-820.
Dillow, S. (2003). Education Statistics Quarterly
(No. NCES-2003-604). Washington DC: U.S.
Department of Education, National Center for
Education Statistics.
The work reported here
is an outgrowth of the
larger Houston A+
Challenge initiative.
High School Dropouts Page 10 of 11
Issue Brief Vol. 1, Issue 2
Dillow, S. (2003). Education Statistics Quarterly
(No. NCES-2003-604). Washington DC: U.S.
Department of Education, National Center for
Education Statistics.
Fine, M. (1987). Why urban adolescents drop into
and out of public high school. In G. Natriello
(Ed.), School dropouts: Patterns and policies (pp.
89-105). New York: Teachers College Press.
Finn, J. D. (1989). Withdrawing from school.
Review of Educational Research, 59(2), 117-142.
Foster, M. (1993). Educating for competence in
community and culture: Exploring the views of
exemplary African American teachers. Urban
Education, 27(4), 370-394.
Garcia, E. E. (1995). Education of Mexican
American students: Past treatment and recent
developments in theory, research, policy, and
practice. In J. A. Banks & C. A. M. Banks (Eds.),
Handbook of research on multicultural education
(pp. 372-387). New York: Simon & Schuster
Macmillan.
Haycock, K., & Huang, S. (2001). Are today's high
school graduates ready? Thinking K-16, 5(1), 3-
17.
Hess, R. S. (2000). Dropping out among Mexican
American youth: Reviewing the local literature
through an ecological perspective. Journal of
Education for Students Placed at Risk, 5(3), 267-
290.
Hunter-Boykin, H. (1992). Responses to the African
American teacher shortage: "We grow our own"
through the Teacher Preparation Program at
Coolidge High School. Journal of Negro
Education, 61(4), 483-495.
Jimerson, S. R., Anderson, G. E., & Whipple, A. D.
(2002). Winning the battle and losing the war:
Examining the relation between grade retention
and droppin out of high school. Psychology in the
sc hools, 39(4), 441457.
Jimerson, S. R., Ferguson, P., Whipple, A. D.,
Anderson, G. E., & Dalton, M. J. (2002).
Exploring the association between grade
retention and dropout: A longitudinal study
examining socio-emotional, behavioral, and
achievement characteristics of retained students.
The California School Psychologist, 7, 5162.
Jordan, W. J., & Cooper, R. (2003). High school
reform and Black male students: Limits and
possibilities of policy and practice. Urban
Education, 38(2), 196-217.
King, S. H. (1993). The limited presence of African
American teachers. Review of Educational
Research, 63(2), 115-149.
Knapp, M. S., & Woolverton, S. (1995). Social
class and schooling. In J. A. Banks & C. A. M.
Banks (Eds.), Handbook of research on
multicultural education (pp. 548-569). New York:
Simon & Schuster Macmillan.
Ladson-Billings, G. (1994). The dreamkeepers.
San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Ladson-Billings, G. (1995). Toward a theory of
culturally relevant pedagogy. American
Educational Research Journal, 32(3), 465-491.
Lan, W., & Lanthier, R. (2003). Changes in
students' academic performance and perceptions
of school and self before dropping out of schools.
Journal of Education for Students Placed at Risk,
8(3), 309-333.
Lee, V. E., & Burkam, D. T. (2003). Dropping out of
high school: The role of school organization and
structure. American Educational Research
Journal, 40(2), 353-393.
Marcus, R. F., & Sanders-Reio, J. (2001). The
influence of attachment on school completion.
School Psychology Quarterly, 16(4), 427-444.
Martinez, Y. G., & Cranston-Gingras, A. (1996).
Migrant farmworker students and the educational
process: Barriers to high school completion. High
School Journal, 80(1), 28-39.
Martinez, Y. G., Cranston-Gingras, A., &
Velazquez, J. A. (2001). Youth from migrant
farmworker families: Perspectives of school
personnel. Journal of At-Risk Issues, 7(3), 4-11.
McCaul, E. J., Donaldson, G. A. J., Coladarci, T., &
Davis, W. E. (1992). Consequences of dropping
out of school: Findings from High School and
Beyond. Journal of Educational Research, 85(4),
198-208.
Mitchell, A. (1998). African American teachers:
Unique roles and universal lessons. Education
and Urban Society, 31(1), 104-122.
Moll, L. C., & Gonzlez, N. (1994). Lessons from
research with language minority children. Journal
of Reading Behavior, 26(4), 439-456.
National Center for Education Statistics. (2001).
Dropout rates in the United States: 2000.
Washington, DC: Author. Retrieved April 8, 2004,
from http://nces.ed.gov/ubs2002/droppub_2001
National Research Council. (2001). Understanding
dropouts: Statistics, strategies, and high-stakes
testing. Washington, DC: Committee on
Educational Excellence and Testing Equity,
National Academy Press.
Pong, S.-L., & Ju, D.-B. (2000). The effects of
change in family structure and income on
dropping out of middle and high school. Journal
of Family Issues, 21(2), 147-169.
Reyes, P., Scribner, J. D., & Paredes Scribner, A.
(1999). Lessons from high-performing Hispanic
schools: Creating learning communities.
Williston, VT: Teachers College Press.
Reyes, P., Velez, W., & Pena, R. (1993). School
reform: Introducing race, culture, and ethnicity into
the discourse. In C. A. Capper (Ed.), Educational
administration in a pluralist society (pp. 66-85).
Albany: State University of New York Press.
Were on the Web!
www.edb.utexas.edu/hsns
The Houston A+ Challenge received funding from the Carnegie Corporation and the Bill
and Melinda Gates Foundation to support a 5-year initiative to work with 24 large high
schools in the Houston Independent School District engaged in a student-focused, whole-
school change effort. The initiative, called Houston Schools for a New Society, redesigns
high schools into small, theme-based academies to produce graduates ready for the
demands of the 21st century.
The central goal of the challenge is to determine whether it is possible to develop and to
institutionalize high school reform nationally by investing in specific urban areas through
intensive intervention. The HA+C strategy undertakes work in four areas:
1. Restructure large comprehensive high schools into small learning communities.
2. Install a literacy framework across the core curriculum.
3. Create an adult advocacy program to mentor and to help each high school student.
4. Create new knowledge about the challenges and issues related to the restructuring of
high schools in urban areas.
We have designed an evaluation program to learn from the HA+C experience to promote
further high school improvement in Houston and other urban school districts across the
country.
Study of High
School
Restructuring
Houston Schools for a New Society
Evaluation
The University of Texas
Dept. of Educational Administration
1 University Station D5400
Austin, TX 78712
512-475-8569
512-475-8580
2004 Study of High School
Restructuring, University of Texas
Edited and designed by
Jennifer E. Cook
Study of High
School
Restructuring
Principal Investigator:
Pedro Reyes, Ph.D.
Project Manager:
Ed Fuller, Ph.D.
Were on the Web!
www.edb.utexas.edu/hsns
About Our Organization
Roderick, M. (1995, December). Grade retention
and school dropout: Policy debate and research
questions. Phi Delta Kappa Center for
Evaluation, Development, and Research, 15.
Available at http://www.pdkintl.org/edres/
resbul15.htm
South, S. J., Baumer, E. P., & Lutz, A. (2003).
Interpreting community effects on youth
educational attainment. Youth & Society, 35(1),
3-36.
Stegelin, D. A. (2002). Early literacy education:
First steps toward dropout prevention, effective
strategies for school improvement and dropout
prevention. Clemson, SC: National Dropout
Prevention Center.
Sum, A., Khatiwada, I., Pond, N., Trub'skyy, M.,
Fogg, N., & Palma, S. (2003). Left behind in the
labor market: Labor market problems of the
nation's out-of-school, young adult populations.
Boston: Northeastern University, Center for
Labor Market Studies. Available at
http://www.nupr.neu.edu/2-03/left_behind.PDF
Temple, J. A., Reynolds, A. J., & Miedel, W. T.
(2000). Can early intervention prevent high
school dropout? Evidence from the Chicago
ChildParent Centers. Urban Education, 35(1),
31-56.
Texas Education Agency. (1996). Grade level
retention. In 1996 comprehensive biennial report
on Texas public schools. Austin: Author.
Available at http://www.tea.state.tx.us/reports/
1996cmprpt/04retain.html
Texas Education Agency. (1998). Grade level
retention. In 1998 comprehensive biennial report
on Texas public schools (pp. 4146). Austin:
Author.
Texas Education Agency. (2003a). 200203 AEIS
state report. Austin: Author. Retrieved April 8,
2004, from http://www.tea.state.tx.us/perfreport/
aeis/2003/state.html
Texas Education Agency. (2003b). Secondary
school completion and dropouts in Texas public
schools, 2001-02 (Document No. GE03 601 04).
Austin: Author.
U.S. General Accounting Office. (2002). School
dropouts (No. GAO-02-240). Washington, DC:
Author.
Valenzuela, A. (1999). Subtractive schooling: U.S.-
Mexican youth and the politics of caring. Albany:
State University of New York Press.
Velez, W., & Saenz, R. (2001). Toward a
comprehensive model of the school leaving
process among Latinos. School Psychology
Quarterly, 16(4), 445-467.
Vitaro, F., Larocque, D., Janosz, M., & Tremblay,
R. E. (2001). Negative social experiences and
dropping out of school. Educational Psychology:
An International Journal of Experimental
Educational Psychology, 21(4), 401-415.
Worrell, F. C., & Hale, R. L. (2001). The
relationship of hope in the future and perceived
school climate to school completion. School
Psychology Quarterly, 16(4), 370-388.