Activity 2:
New Research Studies
The second activity consists of commissioning new research on topics not
adequately covered by existing research.
Because of the short time frame for these studies, some of the studies will utilize existing databases,
such as local school district databases, state databases on school accountability, and national databases
that have sizeable California subsamples. By drawing on several databases, some common research questions
can be answered to see if the findings converge, thereby increasing our confidence in the findings. At the
same time, some databases have unique data. For example, while the data described in the first four
studies described below all contain information on school characteristics, such as school size and student
composition, only studies 5 and 6 will utilize data on student attitudes, such as their engagement in
school. Consequently, the results from the combined studies will yield more robust findings than could be
achieved through a single study.
The new studies and the scholars who will perform them are (working titles listed in alphabetical order
by author):
- • What's Motivating Youths in Differing Schools?,
by Bruce Fuller and Margaret Bridges (PACE).
The dropout literature tends to focus on factors that predict whether students drop out or
not. These factors are often called risk factors. Other research has attempted to
identify factors that account for why some students are resilient and succeed despite
the presence of such individual and institutional risk factors [35].
This study will
identify two samples of ninth grade students in a number of high schools who were
at-risk of dropping out based on their middle school performance-one group who also
failed a core course in the first semester of ninth grade (failing students), which
makes them still more at-risk of dropping out, and another group who passed all their
first semester classes and, as a result, are less at-risk of dropping out
(resilient students). The study will conduct focus groups of these two groups of
students to identify the factors that are facilitating or impeding their progress
in school, building on the recent academic literature and recent studies [36}.
The study will address the following research questions:
- a. What do failing and resilient students find motivating or
discouraging in their first year of high school?
- b. To what extent do students' relationships with teachers,
peers, and parents provide encouragement and support that contributes
to their progress in school?
- c. To what extent do these findings vary among different types of schools?
- • Follow-up Study of Students Who Did Not Pass the
California High School Exit Exam (CASHEE),
by Michael Furlong, Shane Jimerson, and Russell W. Rumberger
(UC Santa Barbara) [37].
All students in California were required to pass the CASHEE in order to
graduate in 2006. According to the latest figures, 400,000 passed [38],
which means that up to 120,000 did not pass either because they dropped out
of school or remained in school and failed the test [39]. What happened to
those students? The California Department of Education has identified a
number of options for those students to earn their diploma or an alternative
certificate [40]. This study will identify a sample of high school junior and seniors,
in four high schools, who had not passed the CAHSEE prior to the beginning of the
current school year; first surveying them before the end of the year to ask about
their future educational plans, aspirations, and school experiences; and then
surveying them again in the fall to see what options, if any, they pursued and
their current education and employment activities.
The study will address the following research questions:
- a. What are past educational experiences, current attitudes, and
future plans for students who, prior to the current school year,
had not passed the CAHSEE?
- b. What happens to those students in the next school year-how
many of the juniors return to school, how many of the seniors receive
a diploma, GED, or pursue some other educational option?
- c. What factors predict which students eventually graduate from high school?
- • Early Predictors of High School Dropout,
by Michal Kurlaender (UC Davis) and Sean Reardon (Stanford)
Kurlaender and Reardon are working on the CAHSEE study mentioned above and have agreed, with some supplemental support, to conduct some additional analyses and write a report with data from the four districts in the CAHSEE study (San Francisco, San Diego, Long Beach, and Fresno) that focuses on early predictors of high school dropout.
This study will address similar questions for study 1, particularly:
- a. What knowable student characteristics (attendance, course failures,
discipline problems) in high school can identify students as being at risk
of not graduating from high school?
- b. What knowable student characteristics in middle school can
identify students as being at risk of not graduating from high school?
- • Profiles of High School Dropouts and Graduates in Los Angeles Unified School District,
by Jeannie Oakes (UCLA)
One valuable source of information on high school dropouts and graduates are district databases.
These databases contain historical records of students' grades, attendance, and test scores,
often since elementary school. Hence, they can be used to identify early indicators of school
performance and risk for high school dropout [29]. Oakes will analyze data from the Los Angeles
Unified School District, which will complement ongoing studies by Julia Betts (UC San Diego)
and Sean Reardon (Stanford) who are conducting studies of the California High School Exit
Exam (CAHSEE) using data from the San Francisco, San Diego, Long Beach, and Fresno school
districts [30].
The study will address the following research questions:
- a. What proportion of students who first entered the ninth grade in the fall of 2001
graduated in 2005?
- b. What pathways did graduates and non-graduates take in high school in terms of
course failures,
grade retention, school mobility, enrollment in alternative programs
(e.g., continuation high schools, independent study, etc.)?
- c. What knowable student characteristics (attendance, course failures,
discipline problems) in high school can identify students as being at risk of
not graduating from high school?
- d. What knowable student characteristics in middle school can identify
students as being at risk of not graduating from high school?
- • California High Schools That Beat the Odds in High School Graduation,
by Tom Parrish and Miguel Socias (AIR)
The California Department of Education collects extensive data on California students
and schools, including a database of school performance indicators. Researchers have used
these data to identify schools that outperform other schools with similar demographics
[33].
This study will use the same dataset to identify high schools that have lower and higher
graduation rates than similar schools, and also schools that have both higher graduation
rates and higher test scores than predicted, to identify schools that are effective on
both sets of performance indicators [34]. Once identified, telephone interviews will be
conducted with principals of a sample of high performing and low performing schools.
These results will be compared to results of high and low performing schools based on
a recently completed study of test score performance.
The study will address the following research questions:
- a. Which high schools in California are doing better than expected in
getting their students to graduate, adjusting for student composition?
- b. Do high schools that "beat the odds" in graduation rates also "beat the odds"
in terms of test score performance?
- c. What school characteristics explain why some schools do better than
expected in terms of high school graduation rates?
- d. Do similar characteristics explain why some schools do better than
expected in terms of high school graduation rates and high test scores?
- • Student and School Predictors of High School Graduation in California,
by Russell W. Rumberger (UC Santa Barbara)
This study will build on several earlier studies that examined student and school level
predictors of high school dropout and graduation [31]. This study will utilize more recent data
from the Education Longitudinal Study of 2002 (ELS:2002), a new longitudinal survey of high
school sophomores undertaken by the National Center for Education Statistics started in 2002 [32].
This study would analyze data from the first follow-up transcript study for a subsample
of approximately 1500 students from 77 high schools in California to identify
student and school factors that predict whether or not students graduated from
high school in 2004.
The study will address the following research questions:
- a. What individual behaviors and attitudes
(e.g., retention, course failure, test scores, engagement,
aspirations) predict whether 10th grade students graduate from high school?
- b. Controlling for the background characteristics of students, what high schools
in California have better-than-expected graduation rates and which ones have
worse-than-expected graduation rates?
- c. What school characteristics (e.g., size, student composition,
climate, teacher quality) predict whether schools have better-than-expected
graduation rates?
[29] For example, school record data was used in Chicago to create an “on-track” indicator based on credits earned and grades that predicted whether students were likely to graduate from high school in four years.
See: Elaine Allensworth and John Q. Easton. The on-track indicator as a predictor of high school graduation. Chicago: Consortium on Chicago School Research, University of Chicago, 2005. Retrieved November 1, 2006, from
http://ccsr.uchicago.edu/content/publications.php?pub_id=10.
A more recent study of predictive indicators was recently complete for Philadelphia.
See: http://www.projectuturn.net/downloads/pdf/Unfulfilled_Promise_Project_U-turn.pdf
[30] Reardon is still negotiating with Fresno to obtain data, but data have been secured from the other three distrists. Both the Betts and Reardon studies are focusing on the CAHSEE, not high school graduation more generally. In addition, the Reardon study is not scheduled for completing until December, 2008.
For a description of his project, see: http://irepp.stanford.edu/projects/cahsee.html.
Betts is conducting a study of CASHEE in San Diego for the PPIC.
See: http://www.ppic.org/content/pubs/wip/WIP_JBR.htm
[31] Russell W. Rumberger, “Dropping out of middle school: A multilevel analysis of students and schools.” American Educational Research Journal, 32(1995), 583-625; Russell W. Rumberger and Katherine Larson, “Student mobility and the increased risk of high school drop out.” American Journal of Education, 107(1998), 1-35. Russell W. Rumberger and Scott L. Thomas, “The distribution of dropout and turnover rates among urban and suburban high schools.” Sociology of Education, 73(2000), 39-67; Russell W. Rumberger and Gregory J. Palardy, “Test scores, dropout rates, and transfer rates as alternative indicators of high school performance." American Educational Research Journal, 41 (2005): 3-42.
[32] See: http://nces.ed.gov/surveys/els2002/.
[33] Thomas B. Parrish, Amy Merickel, Maria Perez., Robert Linquanti, Miguel Socia, Angeline Spain, Cecilia Speroni, Phil Esra, Leslie Brock, and Danielle Delancey. Effects of the implementation of Proposition 227 on the education of English learners, K-12: Findings from a Five-Year Evaluation. Palo Alto, CA: American Institutes for Research and WestEd, 2006.
[34] Parrish and his AIR colleagues have just completed a similar study for the California school finance project. For a description of their study, see: http://irepp.stanford.edu/projects/list-researchers/AIR_models_050406.pdf
[35] Richard Jessor, "Successful adolescent development among youth in high-risk settings." American Psychologist, 48 (1993): 117-126.
[36] For example: John M. Bridgeland, John J. DiIulio Jr., and Karne B. Morison, The silent epidemic: Perspectives on high school dropouts. Washington, D.C.: Civil Enterprises, 2006.
[37] Rumberger conducted a pilot study in the summer of 2006 to investigate one method for collecting data on students who had not passed the CAHSEE in three California school districts. A solicitation letter and permission form was mailed to 729 students inviting them to take either an online or telephone survey; only 30 completed permission forms and 9 completed the survey. Clearly another, more labor-intensive method will have to be used to conduct this study.
[38] See: http://www.cde.ca.gov/nr/ne/yr06/yr06rel130.asp
[39] According to the CDE website, Dataquest, there were 520,000 ninth graders enrolled in 2002-03. See: http://data1.cde.ca.gov/dataquest/
[40] See: http://www.cde.ca.gov/ta/tg/hs/documents/optionsltr.pdf
