26.07.2013 Views

Full Report - Center for Collaborative Education

Full Report - Center for Collaborative Education

Full Report - Center for Collaborative Education

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

IN DEPTH:<br />

Absenteeism, Suspensions, Retention, and Dropping Out<br />

In this “in depth” view we focus on the impact of high absenteeism, discipline problems, and<br />

retention in grade, all of which have been well documented in the literature as key individual<br />

factors in dropping out. We compare the median attendance rate, the suspension rate, and<br />

the retention rate of high school students who dropped out and who remained in school in<br />

2009 (Table 30). We found that among LEP students who dropped out in SY2009, the median<br />

attendance was much lower (63.1%) than among those who stayed in school and that<br />

the difference in attendance rate between the two groups was statistically significant. Similarly,<br />

the suspension rate among those LEP students who dropped out was more than twice<br />

that of those LEP students who remained in school and this difference was also significant.<br />

Finally, we examine the rate of retention and found a higher proportion of students retained<br />

in grade among the dropouts than among those who did not drop out; this difference was<br />

also statistically significant. The situation of EP students mirrors that of LEP students.<br />

Table 30. Attendance, Suspension and Retention of High School Dropouts. BPS, SY2009<br />

EP LEP1 Dropped Out Did Not Drop Out Dropped Out Did not Drop Out<br />

Median Attendance Rate 56.8% 87.7% 63.1% 87.1%<br />

Suspension Rate 11.9% 6.6% 6.3% 3.0%<br />

Retention Rate 42.7% 8.8% 34.9% 19.8%<br />

Note: 1 The differences in attendance rates, suspension rates and retention rates between LEPs who dropped out and those<br />

who stayed in school were all found to be statistically significant (p= .000, p=.011 with minimal effect size, and p=.000 with<br />

minimal effect size, respectively).<br />

E What Are the Annual High School<br />

Dropout Rates of English Language<br />

Learners in Different Types of<br />

Schools and Programs?<br />

In this section we consider the differences in the<br />

dropout rates of LEP students in different types of<br />

schools and programs. The presentation of data<br />

is more limited than in other chapters, because<br />

the number of students is relatively small and they<br />

disaggregated across a relatively large number of<br />

programs and school characteristics. There<strong>for</strong>e, in<br />

some cases, we are unable to report findings <strong>for</strong><br />

reasons of confidentiality.<br />

Dropout Rates in Schools of Different Characteristics.<br />

We re-visit first the characteristics of<br />

schools presented earlier and present the dropout<br />

rates <strong>for</strong> LEP high school students at these schools.<br />

As a point of comparison we present the high<br />

school dropout rates <strong>for</strong> all BPS students and <strong>for</strong> all<br />

LEP students (Table 31).<br />

Differences in the poverty rate of schools, the<br />

density of their LEP student enrollment, attainment<br />

of AYP goals and the qualifications of their teachers<br />

were all statistically significant school characteristics<br />

in relation to the dropout rate of LEP high<br />

school students. The dropout rate among students<br />

in schools with a poverty rate between 25% and<br />

75% was almost three times that of schools with<br />

58 Improving <strong>Education</strong>al Outcomes of English Language Learners in Schools and Programs in Boston Public Schools

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!