Table Of Content

DOCUMENT RESUME UD 029 719 ED 366 695 McPartland, James M. AUTHOR Dropout Prevention in Theory and Practice. TITLE Center for Research on Effective Schooling for INSTITUTION Disadvantaged Students, Baltimore, MD. Office of Educational Research and Improvement (ED), SPONS AGENCY Washington, DC. PUB DATE 93 36p.; Paper commissioned for At-Risk Evaluation. For NOTE a related document, see UD 029 720. Information Analyses (070) -- Reports - General (140) PUB TYPE MF01/PCO2 Plus Postage. EDRS PRICE Academic Persistence; Criteria; *Dropout Prevention; DESCRIPTORS Dropout Research; Economically Disadvantaged; High Schools; High School Students; Minority Groups; *School Holding Power; *School Role; Student Attitudes; *Student Motivation; Surveys; Withdrawal (Education) ABSTRACT This paper presents a four-fold typology developed as a general theory of student motivation to stay in school and work hard at learning tasks. Each of the four-fold categories is described with an initial statement of the specific source of student motivation, an analysis of how the source fits in more general motivational theories, and how the experiences of poor and minority students make them especially at risk for lacking motivation. The four-fold categories that are discussed involve the opportunities that exist for success in schoolwork, the human climate of caring and support, the relevance of school to a student's community and future, and the help that is given in attaining freedom from personal problems. Analysis of a sample of dropout students is presented that shows activities designed to prevent them from dropping out are not up to the task. This is because the tasks are not basic or intense enough to reform the primary causes identified by educational theories of low student motivation to remain in high school. Reforms are needed to change the atmosphere from the current emphasis on controlling and sorting students to a new emphasis on supporting and caring for individual learners through major modifications in the roles and responsibilities of teachers and students, including services geared toward assisting students wirh outside problems. (Contains 27 references.) (GLR) *********************************************************************** * * Reproductions supplied by EDRS are the best that can be made * * from the original document. *********************************************************************** Dropout Prevention in Theory and Practice James M. McPartland Johns Hopkins University Students Center for Research on Effective Schooling for Disadvantaged 100C/M014 Of tostowesolo spe 00A1011.01 00400100 OA. $s EducstaroOltsseste, col 090004 ONO ottostotstton lin 10OCKO00040%A of 1%0 0000 pstsoo 0000 Os to OW tles. 1 \11(rs et, A. scovod so;v:11:0 Otteetroa ot deco.% cuttorpown t ottica 0 toode,o, °MI:WA ooucy i 4°,514. ot 6e "Mon fob t.tila OEM 2 BEST CM' iiVLABLE Is there a small set of common themes in the various explanations for why certain students drop out of school and in the panoply of current programs to reduce these risks? Such an organizing scheme would be useful for both theory and practice, going beyond the usual categories of demographic risk factors to better understand students' own reasons for staying in school and giving school planners a more comprehensive check-list of program components needed to increase the holding power of schools. A small set of program components with high priority in a clear theory of dropout prevention would also be useful in evaluating data on current dropout prevention efforts in American schools. This chapter will present a four-fold typology developed as a general theory of student motivation to stay in school and work hard at learning tasks. To show its usefulness in organizing a rich array of ideas and potential solutions, major themes developed in other chapters of this volume and practical dropout prevention approaches described earlier will be located within this typology. In addition, recent national survey data on high school dropout programs for at-risk students will be analyzed to validate the typology's categorization of dropout prevention approaches and to describe how well actual practice meets the needs indentified in theory. I. A typology of sources of student motivation to stay in school. School officials designing a dropout prevention program for their own locality cannot easily learn from the experiences of others who attempted the same thing, because each of the numerous written accounts of such efforts stands alone unique program for the given as a case study combining different features into a situation. It is unlikely that a gm= developed elsewhere can be duplicatdd exactly in another site, because local talents and priorities for school reform, the 3 and the conditions of the particular needs and interests of the students to be served, brand-name prepackaged school to be changed will differ. Instead of some require a coherent set of complete program to be replicated, local school reformers schools that serve at-risk general component& to increase the holding power of Each of the components students which can be adapted to fit local circumstances. judgments about the most could then be given different priorities to fit professional could be implemented in serious problems at the local site, and each dimension demography and different forms to meet the nuances of the school's own resources. educational researchers to For the same reason, it has also been difficult for in American schools. Most previous get a handle on dropout prevention activities population rather than research has focused on profiles of the dropout student effects. While existing surveys analyses of dropout prevention programs and their dropout problem claims to have revealed that almost every school with a significant what is actually going have a "dropout prevention program," how does one assess features are most effective? To further on in nch school and what special than others requires a testable understand Eby particular approaches work better school reform to reductions in theory that links particular general components of through some key student processes dropout rates of particular at-risk populations such as alienation or motivation. Hopkins University Center for A small group of researchers at the Johns Students has developed a Research on Effective Schools for Disadvantaged better organize case conceptual framework on dropout prevention approaches to better research basis for developing studies materials on the issue and to provide a 4 dropouts.*1 We and testing theories of the causes and alleviation of school existing interview assembled existing accounts of dropout prevention programs and themes. data from dropouts themselves, from which we sought to derive common perspective of the We decided to develop our conceptual framework from the and engage with student, and how general sources of motivation to stay in school school environment. schoolwork are influenced by particular experiences with the of student motivation So we also considered general treatments on different types four-fold typology in in developing our framework*2. We present the resulting of this volume. this chapter with some recent reformulations to meet the goals the crosstabulation Any typology is a theoretical categorization produced by four-fold typology of two or more defming variables. Actually, we developed our categories before we recognized that the same as a stand-alone list of four generic underlying categories could be generated by the intersection of two more general format, using variables. Figure One presents our typology in the more traditional two initial variables to create the four key components. Organizational We begin with the underlying variables of Type of for the Organization Environment (Formal and Informal) and Point of 'Aeference Organization of Members (Internal and External). In terms of the School as the 1* This group included Jomills Braddock, Edward Mc Dill, James McPartland, Gary Natriello, published in Natriello, Pallas, and Aaron Pallas. Earlier discussions of this work have been Pallas, 1990, McPartland and Mc Dill, McPartland and Royster, 1988, Natriello, Mc Dill and Slavin, 1990, and Braddock and McPartland, 1993. 2** Our sources included students accounts of reasons why they drop out (Ekstrom, et al., 1987). 2) 1986; Pallas, 1986; Peng and Takai, 1983; Rumberger, 1983; Wagenaar, Natriello, et al., 1990; compendiums of dropout prevention programs (Branch et al., 1986; Danzberger, 1987; NCCE, USGAO, 1987; Slavin, Karweit and Madden, 1989; Hahn and theories of students motivation 1988; OERI, 1987; Off, 1987; Rumberger, 1987). 3) academic al., 1991; Lepper, 1988; (Ames and Ames, 1984, 1985, 1989; Brophy, 1987; Blumenfeld, et Willis, 1991). 5 Environment translates into the school's interest, the distinction of Organizational and the social relatdons of the school as academic goals as the Formal dimension is similar to the distinction of school environments the Informal dimension. This Whelage and his co- alternative schools developed by recent general theories of environments by Bryk and his associates workers (1989) and of effective learning goals" goals" and "learning community (1990), who use the terms "bureaucratic in terms of school refers The other underlying variabie as their basic dimensions. and connections the Internal Point of Reference to experiences within school as dimension. The intersection of these with the outside world as the External will use to analyze different variables produces the four key components we hard at school learning stay in school and work sources of student motivation to goals. four-fold categories with an initial We will next describe each of the analysis of how the of student motivation, an statement of the specific source of how the motivational theories, a description source fits in more general lacking make them especially at-risk for experiences of poor and minority students earlier of the themes and examples from the source of motivation, and a review chapters in this volume that best fit the category. in Students need to feel successful Opportunities fgr success in schoolwork. but efforts at classroom assignments, schoolwork to continue giving their best failure in their quest for experience only frustration and many at-risk students national survey of recent high school academic recognition and rewards. When a checiz-list of 21 items, dropouts*3 asked their reasons for leaving school on a Education Longitudinal Study of 1988 3* We will make repeated references to the National 6 like school" the next most frequent besides reporting the general reason "I didn't school" and "I couldn't keep up with my responses included "I was failing studies of factors that schoolwork" (Ingels et al, 1992). Several correlational of school failure such as low report card predict dropping out have found measures powerful precursors of leaving school marks and retention in grade to be the most Smith, 1989). On the recent before graduation (Rumberger, 1987, Shappard and school dropouts had been held back a grade in survey over 40 percent of high The importance of school success school in the past two years (Ingels et al, 1992). when the major reason dropouts would was also emphasized in the same survey found to be "you felt sure consider returning to school from a list of 17 items was you could graduate." deprives at-risk students of the Lack of frequent success at schoolwork from the immediate rewards of good motivation to stay in school that should come Without these positive responses to their grades, teacher praise, and family pride. their self-confidence as learners and efforts at classroom tasks, at-risk students lose Rather than continue to pursue good grades stop caring about doing well in school. they cease to place value on school which they find are usually out of their reach, (Natriello, reflects on the own worth and self-esteem success as something that 1989). backigounds are particularly at-risk Many students from poor or minority because they have weaker of being deprived of opportunities for school success communities to support learning of academic resources at home and in their who left school between 1988 when they (NELS:88) that included a survey of 1034 dropouts in 1990 when they should have been completing were eighth graders and two years later high school and then dropped out (Inge ls et grade 10. About 90 percent of them had started al., 1992). 7 subjects. Although their families often care deeply about their school success, weak and neighborhoods that parents whose own educational accomplishments are continuing have serious distractions from schoolwork place their students at a begin disadvantage in competing for academic rewards. At-risk students usually for their school less well prepared for schoolwork and remain well below average entire school careers. Many ideas have been presented in the preceding chapters to increase school opportunities for academic success of at-risk students by changing specific intensive practices. The overview chapter by Legters and Mc Dill includes offering initial disadvantages and build a finn programs in the early grades to overcome foundation of basic reading skills; providing substantial extra help through peer grade tutoring or extended course time in later grades to prevent failures and rewards retentions; and changing the criteria for school success to make academic for individual accessible to all students who work hard through added recognition with a growth and improvement or replacement of boring paper-and-pencil tests variety of assessment modalities where all students can show what they have make learned and will care to do so. Fine outlines new assessment approaches to Philadelphia schools work better for at-risk students, including portfolios, exhibitions, performances and other ways for students to demonstrate competencies beyond the traditional short paper and pencil tests. De Young reports improve its high dropout rate by instituting a on a rural high school that was able to backed up by a number of new rewards for new climate of success for all students from good attendance and course work and extra help for individual students place emphasis on counselors, one-on-one teacher tutors, and administrators who 8 helping rather than punishing students who had problems in school. reform are The practical difficulties in bringing about real classroom reforms in highlighted in the chapter by Hess, which describes how school-based Chicago to address high levels of student failures, retentions and low test performance have initially favored "add-on" programs such as after-school, pre- school or summer school. Hess reports that efforts to reform the regular because classroom experiences of students have been much less frequent, in part significant they require a high degree of teacher willingness to change and directions. professional development time and staff support to implement new junior high Rumberger and Larson describe how the ALAS program for including close Chicano students provides immediate feedback to student behavior, teacher monitoring of period-by-period attendance and regular (daily if necessary) feedback to students And parents on classroom performance and attendance. American Boykin's analysis of the educational reforms best suited for African routine children includes a strong emphasis on talent development through for assessing and opportunities for success experiences, as opposed to the penchant in our sorting individuals that he sees as the traditional overriding perspective of human school systems with underlying assumptions about the distribution of all learners. capacities which limit expectations, support for, and encouragement curriculum For Hispanic learners, Valdivieso and Nicolau call for a standard core involved active that includes no program or classroom track;ng, is based on provides added learning activities, provides extra time and help from tutors and deficits or who needs class time for any student who has serious English language help to succeed in other core subjects. 9 feel that the adults Human climate of caring_and support. Students need to in their pursuit of school in their school are on their side and ready to help them experience a close positive goals. But many poor or minority students rarely teachers and experience with school adults or, even worse, come to believe that into categories defined by other school officials are primarily there to scln them efforts and ambitions as a lower grades and tracks rather than to Eupps In their "community of learners" learner. Rather than seeing their school as a supportive Impersonal institution that (Wehlage et al., 1989), many at-risk students see an for them during their growing years. A serves as an often hostile holding-pen for dropping out of school found that "I recent national survey of students' reasons right after reasons couldn't get along with teachers" ranked close to the top, Negative perceptions of concerning failure at schoolwork (Ingels et al., 1992). reinforced by student peer teachers and the general school climate are often strongly and experiences. The same national groups who share the same backgrounds of recent dropouts had close friends who survey shows that nearly three quarters had high-school- also left school before graduation, and almost the same percentage aged brothers or sisters who had also dropped out. be a powerful force in The motivation derived from teachers and peers can tasks. Teacher approval can be a how individual students approach their learning the earliest grades, and peer acceptance strong influence on student efforts from students move into early adolescence and emerges as another dominant factor as abilities and peer norms for a adolescence. Teacher expectations of a student's the individual student defines student's behavior will often become internalized as teacher who communicates low his or her own self-expectations and priorities. A 1 0