Full Report - Center for Collaborative Education

Recommendations

Info

Table 32. Annual High School Dropout Rates of LEP students in ELL programs by English Proficiency Level. BPS, SY2009. LEP LEP MEPA Test Takers 1 Level 12 Level 23 Level 34 Level 45 Rate of English Proficient Annual High School Dropout Rates 7.0% All 6.6% 9.2% 7.4% 5.3% 2.9% LEPs Not in an ELL Program 8.7% 12.2% 6 13.0% 6 9.7% 4.3% LEPs In ELL Program7 5.9% 9.0% 6.4% 3.5% 2.3% SEI 6.5% 10.4% 7.1% 3.8% 2.6% Other bilingual (TBE and SIFE) 1.2% 2 3.0% 2 0% 0% 0% Note:. 1 The differences in the high school dropout rates between the following groups of LEP students were significant: in and not in programs (p=.006, minimal effect size); SEI and other bilingual programs (p=.001, minimal effect size); SEI and not in program (p=.038, minimal effect size); and other bilingual program and not in program (p=.000, small effect size). 2 The differences in the high school dropout rates between the following groups of LEP students scoring at MEPA Level 1 were significant: SEI and other bilingual program (p=.021, small effect size) and other bilingual program and not in program (p=.047, small effect size). 3 The differences in the high school dropout rates between LEP students scoring at MEPA Level 2 in different programs were not significant. 4 Differences in the high school dropout rates between the following groups of LEP students scoring at MEPA Level 3 were significant: in and not in programs (p=.000, small effect size); SEI and not in program (p=.000, small effect size); and other bilingual and not in program (p=.034, small effect size). 5 Differences in the high school dropout rates of LEP students scoring at MEPA Level 4 were not significant when comparing by ELL program type. 6 Represents less than 10 students. 7 Not all ELL programs appear here because (a) there are no Two-Way programs in high schools and (b) this analysis is based on SIMS data which does not disaggregate SEI programs or other bilingual programs. ! IN DEPTH: A Brief Look at LEP Dropouts and MCAS Participation in a high-stakes testing regime, especially where graduation depends on testing outcomes, is often mentioned as a precipitant of dropout behavior among students in reaction to fear of the tests or to having failed them. We explore this question by conducting a small retrospective cohort study of twelfth grade LEP students who dropped out in SY2009 and observing their Grade 10 MCAS testing outcomes in the three years that preceded the dropout behavior (i.e., tests taken at any point between Grades 10 and 12, as is possible under the MCAS system). All were BPS students for the whole study period. Forty-nine LEP twelfth graders dropped out in SY2009. Of these dropouts: • 10.2% (5 students) dropped out in twelfth grade having never taken neither the tenth grade MCAS ELA nor the tenth grade MCAS Math exams between SY2006-SY2009. • 22.4% (11) passed both the Grade 10 MCAS ELA and Grade 10MCAS Math exams at some point during the period SY2006-SY2009. • 63.2% (31) failed one or both tenth grade MCAS ELA and Math exams. + 22.4% (11) of the dropouts dropped out having failed both the Grade 10 MCAS ELA and Grade 10 MCAS Math exams. + 10.2% (5) dropped out having failed one Grade 10 MCAS exam and having never taken the other Grade 10 MCAS exam. + 30.6% (15) dropped out having taken both exams but only having passed one of them (5 passed ELA, 10 passed Math). This indicates that a much higher percentage of LEP dropouts in SY2009 had failed one or both MCAS tests required for graduation. 60 Improving Educational Outcomes of English Language Learners in Schools and Programs in Boston Public Schools
In Sum This chapter has focused on a critical issue in regard to the education of LEP students: their high rates of dropping out. Between SY2006 and SY2009, the dropout rates of high school students declined substantially; by SY2009, the high school dropout rate of LEP students was lower than that of English proficient students. Among LEP students, the largest proportion of dropouts (53.2%) left school in the late high school grades. Many of the factors associated in the literature with higher rates of dropping out in high school (and for which data were available) have been reviewed here. For example, in our review of the interaction of demographic factors and dropout behavior among LEP students we found that differences in gender, income, and mobility were found to be significant in the dropout rates of LEP students in high school. English proficiency was also a factor; higher rates of dropping out were found among the students scoring at the lowest levels of MEPA performance. Comparisons of the characteristics and behavior of LEP high school students who dropped out with those of students who remained in school, showed that among dropouts there was a higher proportion of males; of those who were not eligible for free or reduced price lunch (not low-income); of native speakers of Spanish and Portuguese; of mobile students; of students with disabilities; and students scoring at MEPA Levels 1 and 2, as compared to LEP students who did not drop out. All of these differences, except for disability, were found to be statistically significant. LEP students who dropped out of high school in SY2009 had a significantly lower median attendance rate and significantly higher out-of-school suspension and retention rates than those who did not drop out. Factors related to schools characteristics and program participation were also reviewed and some proved to be significant in the dropout rates of LEP students. For example, the high school dropout rate is lower among LEP students enrolled in ELL programs than among those in programs not for ELLs. The same is true across LEP students at all levels of English proficiency. Dropout rates among students not in ELL programs are particularly high among those scoring at the lower levels of MEPA. Finally, differences in a school’s LEP density, accountability status, and teacher qualifications were found to be significant in relation to the dropout rate of LEP high school students. 1 We are not able to test some of these variables because of the unavailability of data. Tung et al. show a slightly higher high school dropout rate (12.1%) in SY2006 than the data used for this study showed for the same year. 2 For a description of the methodology used to assess the dropout rates for this study and for a comparison of MDESE dropout data for Boston with that produced by the database developed for this project, see Appendix 1. Information on the dropout rates of sub-populations of English proficient students can be found in Appendix 2. Improving Educational Outcomes of English Language Learners in Schools and Programs in Boston Public Schools 61
Page 1 and 2:
Center for Collaborative Education
Page 3 and 4:
This report, Improving Educational
Page 5 and 6:
VII. DROPPING OUT 48 A. What Are th
Page 7 and 8:
CHAPTER I. INTRODUCTION
Page 9 and 10:
Language Learners (OELL) has attemp
Page 11 and 12:
CHAPTER II. THE STUDY
Page 13 and 14:
epresented by the blocks in differe
Page 15 and 16: Table 2. Variables, Definitions, an
Page 17 and 18: CHAPTER III. ENROLLMENT AND CHARACT
Page 19 and 20: Figure 1. Change in Enrollment of S
Page 21 and 22: Native speakers of Haitian Creole a
Page 23 and 24: In Sum Following a swift decline in
Page 25 and 26: One of the foci of this study is th
Page 27 and 28: School Poverty Rate. Income status
Page 29 and 30: ed a significantly smaller proporti
Page 31 and 32: In Sum In this chapter we focused o
Page 33 and 34: One of the deepest and most far-rea
Page 35 and 36: the transfer of large numbers of LE
Page 37 and 38: education. There are no studies of
Page 39 and 40: IN DEPTH: Enrollment of English Lan
Page 41 and 42: Table 14. Nature of Primary Disabil
Page 43 and 44: choices. From the data gathered, it
Page 45 and 46: Becoming fully literate in English,
Page 47 and 48: Populations focused upon in this an
Page 49 and 50: Table 19. English Proficiency Level
Page 51 and 52: who attained the level of English p
Page 53 and 54: ed among those LEP students scoring
Page 55 and 56: High dropout rates among Boston Pub
Page 57 and 58: B What Is the Annual High School Dr
Page 59 and 60: C What Are the Rates of Attendance,
Page 61 and 62: Table 26. Median Attendance Rates o
Page 63 and 64: Table 29. Attendance, Out-of-School
Page 65: Table 31. Annual High School Dropou
Page 69 and 70: The tests of the Massachusetts Comp
Page 71 and 72: student achievement (Rumberger, 199
Page 73 and 74: Table 34. MCAS Math Pass Rates of S
Page 75 and 76: Table 36. MCAS ELA, Math, and Scien
Page 77 and 78: Pass Rates in MCAS ELA, Math, and S
Page 79 and 80: IN DEPTH: Attendance Rates of MCAS
Page 81 and 82: portions of core academic courses t
Page 83 and 84: D What are the MCAS ELA and Math Pa
Page 85 and 86: LEP Students at MEPA Performance Le
Page 87 and 88: school that they attend; if student
Page 89 and 90: Results: English Language Arts In a
Page 91 and 92: 1 Massachusetts meets the requireme
Page 93 and 94: A Overall Findings and General Reco
Page 95 and 96: Designation as student with a disab
Page 97 and 98: B Specific Findings and Recommendat
Page 99 and 100: Recommendation 7: Parents of LEP st
Page 101 and 102: Recommendation 14: Monitor indicato
Page 103 and 104: (2) We found instances in which stu
Page 105 and 106: Recommendation 30: The quality of i
Page 107 and 108: Commonwealth of Massachusetts. (201
Page 109 and 110: Nathan, J., & Thao, S. (2007). Smal
Page 111 and 112: Vaznis, J. (2011, Sept. 18). US fin
Page 113 and 114: Overview The report sought to answe
Page 115 and 116: Table 1. Variables, Definitions and
Page 117 and 118:
In TBE learn solely in English. In
Page 119 and 120:
Table 2: Variables, Definitions and
Page 121 and 122:
! ! ! 5. Limitations of the Data Wh
Page 123 and 124:
Table 8: MCAS ELA Pass Rates of LEP
Page 125 and 126:
Table 10. Variables Considered in H
Page 127 and 128:
APPENDIX 2: Additional Tables and F
Page 129 and 130:
! Table 3.2. Characteristics of Eng
Page 131 and 132:
! ! Table 6.3. English Proficiency
Page 133 and 134:
! Table 7.3. Attendance, Out-of-Sch
Page 135 and 136:
! ! ! Figure 8.3. Science Pass Rate
Page 137 and 138:
Table 8.2. MCAS Math Pass Rates for
Page 139 and 140:
APPENDIX 3: Characteristics and Out
Page 141 and 142:
! ! ! ! ! ! Table 4. MCAS ELA and M
Page 143 and 144:
A discussion of our HLM analyses of
Page 145 and 146:
ELA scores on average than LEP stud
Page 147 and 148:
Improving Educational Outcomes of E
show all

Full Report - Center for Collaborative Education

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?