Should we raise or lower the dropout age?

Requiring Maryland students to remain in school until they turn age 18 could drastically reduce dropout rates

This conclusion, published in the Baltimore Sun on 11 February 2008 (and available here), was the result of "A yearlong study by a statewide task force of 50 educators, community leaders and legislators." It is obvious that not allowing students to drop out will decrease the number of students who drop out, however this conclusion is based on a very narrow conception of the complex educational system, which simply sees dropping out as bad. This view does not recognize the broader unintended consequences that could potentially result from increasing the compulsory attendance age.

In the spectrum of high school students, those who drop out are generally the farthest behind academically, and also have a harder time getting along with the various adults in the building, and are more disruptive in the classroom as a result. It is true that if we force these students to stay in school, they will make more academic progress. However, it will be to the detriment of the remainder of the student body in the last two years of high school. Forcing disruptive students to stay in school longer will benefit those students, but it has other negative side effects. It could reduce the graduation rate, and the students who do graduate will be even less adequately prepared for college or work.

Continuing this line of thought to its logical conclusion, we should actually decrease the compulsory attendance age. To be clear, I would not suggest this as a one-piece reform of our current system, and for one important reason: once a student drops out, they have essentially waived their right to any further free public education. Instead, I imagine a system with compulsory attendance until age 13, and then every student has a right to 5 further years of free public education; if a student drops out at any point, they can always come back to complete their 5 years. There would be separate schools for returning students of different ages, to prevent having older returning students put in class with normally-tracked students--also, the schools could offer evening or weekend hours for returning students who work. Similarly, if a student falls significantly behind (say, two years), they would be transferred to an alternative school.

This system would benefit everyone, even students who drop out. For students who move through the system normally, they will enjoy a classroom environment with fewer distractions where students are all on a similar academic level. Nowadays, many adults who previously dropped out are struggling to earn their GEDs. In this alternative system, these adults would still have access to the public education that they left behind when they dropped out.

These changes may sound crazy, but they are in fact how most universities work (minus the "free public" part--or at least the "free" part). If a student has difficulties with academics or conduct, they may be forced to take a leave of absence--it is clear that attending a university is a privilege. While everyone has a right to a certain level of free public education, our current system is designed more along the lines that every parent has a right to free public child care. This brings up the big question regarding allowing 13 year olds to drop out--if they're not in school, what are they doing? Children between 13 and 18, if they are not attending school, could be required to participate in some sort of non-trivial work or volunteer activities (which raises another whole series of questions regarding child labor, etc., but that's beyond the scope of this post).

The ultimate goal of this system is to ensure that education is not a limited-time offer. Students will have the opportunity to learn when they are ready to learn, rather than wasting their opportunities and teenage years by sitting in classrooms they don't want to be in, only to later learn the tough real-world lessons about the value of an education. In this sense, even the students who drop out will learn at a faster rate--they will learn these life lessons sooner, then will have the opportunity to return and receive the free public education they had previously not valued.

High Expectations: The "Softer" Side

At the risk of beating the proverbial horse to death, I feel compelled to weigh in on the school violence issue that has recently been brought to light over the past week or so. The first that I heard of the incident was actually when a friend of mine who is currently living in D.C. sent me a link to an online news story. Besides that, I did not engage in any conversation about the topic, with students or teachers, until the very end of the day when it was brought up in passing in the main office by one of our fantastic administrative assistants, who is also a parent. However, even at that point, I feel like we both sort of walked away with a "that's a shame," shaking-of-the-head response. Was I completely numb to the incident?

After watching the news on TV, which repeatedly highlighted the cell phone video & snippets of the teacher's interview, I had some serious reservations about the circumstances surrounding the attack and the legitimacy of the teacher's explanation. Now, don't get me wrong, under no circumstances do I believe that a physical response is the appropriate one for a student to have. And I do whole-heartedly understand the fact that there are fantastic teachers who are attacked with non-existent repurcussions. However, I have to ask whether or not this issue brings to light not only the issue of the failure of certain administrations to report violent incidents, but also the role of building relationships between teachers & students, as well as between administrators & students.


This past Monday, Dr. Alonso was in my classroom for about an hour. As a part of his lesson with my class, he highlighted the relationship between suspensions & student achievement data. His information was well presented, and my students picked up on the correlation that he was drawing between higher suspensions and lower test scores. In fact, when he asked my students to raise their hand if they had ever been suspended... nearly 75% of them did so. This definitely resonated with them. The most interesting thing that I took away from his entire hour-long visit though, was when Dr. Alonso asked my students for suggestions about what the policy should be to thwart would-be violent incidents, and even suspension-worthy incidents overall. My students responded that a) they did not believe that the student attack was appropriate in any way, but that b) building relationships between students and teachers is the best preventative measure to something like this happening. To be quite blunt, one of my students said that if a teacher disrespects him, that he will disrespect them back. To this, a saw a room full of bobbing heads. It's the Golden Rule, with a teenage twist.

So, I have to ask: are we spending too much time focusing on the reactive measures, as opposed to the proactive measures? Relationship building, counseling, and extracurricular activities that students are actually interested & engaged in are a must. If students don't have an outlet, or are in a classroom where the teacher continuously yells at them, belittles them, or quite simply doesn't give a damn... will suspending them or revoking other privileges make a difference? I'd argue that as soon as they are placed back into that toxic environment, that they would revert to their original behaviors.

There are certainly students that I have had adversarial relationships with in the past. Admittedly, I also feel that the vast majority of these relationships could have been "flipped" if I had given a little with my own classroom rules and expectations. Is it important to hold high expectations? Absolutely. Is it acceptable for students to come into class day after day, put their head down, and refuse to work because they worked late the night before? Absolutely not. Is it acceptable for students to curse at the teacher? Absolutely not. Is it necessary for a teacher to issue detention every time a student utters a curse? I'd argue not... This was not the teacher that I was last year, though. I thought that I was being principled... and I'd venture to say that I was being obstinate some of the time. I understood the concept of holding my students to high expectations - but was doing so, withouth exception, having the desired outcome?

I don't want to come off as being "soft" or making excuses. I think that what occurred, and the decision that the student made to attack the teacher was inexcusable. On the other hand, I do think that it brought to light important issues that we have in our schools (and as Dr. Alonso has recently pointed out via use of the media & bcpss website: http://www.bcpss.org/webapps/portal/frameset.jsp) for community involvement and relationship building. Is what occurred the student's "fault"? I'm not so sure how to answer that... in my heart of hearts, I believe that at some point, that child was failed. Her actions were inappropriate, but I have to wonder what was going on inside of her head that led her to make that decision. If she had the support services that she quite possibly needs, or had more supportive relationships with teachers in her school (which she very well may have with some teachers), could this have been prevented? I seriously doubt that a long-term suspension or expulsion is going to change her outlook on life... which, to me, is troubling. So, while I absolutely believe that high expectations are essential... I have to question whether or not we need to let our "softer" side show more often than many of us do (myself included). Can we do this, while still setting our students up for success and working to bring them up to par with their more affluent peers? I believe that we absolutely can...

Achievementrap

Achievementrap: How America is Failing Millions of High-Achieving Students from Lower-Income Families, a report by the Jack Kent Cooke Foundation & Civic Enterprises (http://www.jackkentcookefoundation.org/jkcf_web/Documents/Achievement%20Trap.pdf) finds that high-achieving students from lower income families (students who score in the top 25 percent on national tests and whose family incomes are below the national median - $50,000 for a family of 4 - are failing to complete college in much larger numbers than high-achieving students from families with means. Surprisingly these students are not dropping out of college primarily because they cannot afford it. Finances do come into play to the extent their families need them to return home and produce income, but the main reason these kids drop out is because they are not graduating from high schools offering the requisite rigor needed to succeed in college and they are not choosing colleges that are equipped to support the particular needs of the high-achieving, low-income student.

The study tracks students from first grade through graduate school. In first grade 28 percent of students performing at the top quarter of the nation are from low-income houses while 72 percent are from higher-income houses. By fifth grade only about half of lower-income students remain high ahievers while 69 percent of higher-income students do. Higher-income students are also more likely to move up to the ranks of the high achievers than are the low-income high achievers. The study goes on to talk about college acceptances, graduation rates and graduate school admissions and completion rates.

In order to address this disparity the Gates and other foundations will be increasing funding for College Advising Corps, a program modeled after Teach for America that will train college graduates from highly selective schools to serve as college counselors for high school students. This program has been effective in increasing the suitability of the college "match" for low-income students, and has suggested that counselors directly out of college themselves are most effective as mentors in the college process.

The most promising thing I learned from this research is that high-achieving kids in first grade are almost equally divided by race. Of the high-achieving first graders White students only slightly out-number African-American students; the same is true for Latino, Hispanic and Asian first graders. The challenge is to keep these numbers close throughout the twenty years of education, and to that end 18 colleges and universities have pledged to close the gap between graduates in the area of race and socioeconomic status http://www.insidehighered.com/news/2007/10/31/system.

The Cooke study further points to the need for quality teachers and supports for students from low-income homes. The summer learning loss that occurs each year of a low-income student's life results over time in a disparity of several grade levels http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Summer_learning_loss. The summer enrichment programs in Baltimore aim to address this issue, but are limited in their reach. One such program, Middle Grades Partnership partners public and independent school teachers and students for summer academic programs. Public school principals select high achieving middle school students to participate and the goal is to keep these students engaged through middle school so that they are on grade level or above for high school. The Cooke study shows that high achieving eighth graders graduate from high school whether they are low-income or higher-income. Just one more reason to ramp up expectations and quality in middle schools.

Taking Back What's Ours

These past few weeks in the media have really brought things into perspective. The violence that takes place in our schools everyday has finally gotten the attention it deserves. Ironically, the whistle blower was a student who thought it would be fun to videotape a teacher being beaten by a fellow classmate. Well, joke’s on you because now you’ve given a face to what many of us have been talking about for months. On behalf of the teachers I know and work with daily: Thanks!!! You’ve done us a huge favor.

Sadly, I’ve had to watch my colleagues leave our building because they’ve suffered major anxiety attacks, nervous breakdowns or injuries caused by flying books. The teachers at my school are fed up and we’ve decided that we are not going to take it anymore. Our students have believed that their actions can go unpunished, but we have turned the tables on them and instituted our own form of justice: we’re taking away the things that mean the most to them.

As class advisors, we are responsible for planning the many major events for the students such as class trips, dances, etc. These are staples of the high school experience, but why should the students who are continually causing the problems in the school and depriving their peers of the education they deserve be allowed to participate in the fun? We say they shouldn’t. They have their “fun” daily when they verbally and physically assault our teachers "just because". So as a staff, we have come together and formed a united front. If you treat my colleague disrespectfully, you will be reported to your designated class advisor and you will lose your opportunity to attend the prom or whatever other activity we decide. Is it harsh? Perhaps. Do we care? Not really. Until they are able to see true and tangible consequences for their actions, they won’t have a reason to care about the things they do and how it affects the school as a whole. The administration has shown us that they are not prepared to do anything, so we’ve taken the initiative to say enough is enough. How far does it have to go before these kids see they can’t do what they want to do to us and get away with it?

A student at our school has cursed all of her teachers and went so far as to claim that one touched her inappropriately (which she later said was “just a joke”). What was her punishment? A note of apology. Are you kidding me? She could have caused this person their life and all she has to do is write a letter? But the hammer came down on her this week as she was barred from attending the Senior Class trip, a decision that was made (and not supported by her administrator, who thought the punishment a bit harsh) by the class advisor. Sweet hallelujah!!! I think she’s gotten it now. Maybe she hasn’t, but I believe it’s a step in the right direction. At this point in the game, I’ll try anything.

Overage Students and Social Promotion

In reading an educational-themed blog published by an inner city Chicago teacher, I came across this particular post on the social promotion of students. The writer spoke specifically about a hard-working group of students operating way below grade level in his eleventh grade class. In his classroom setting, compounded by challenges of over-crowding and the negative school culture, he felt he would be unable to realistically move these students 4-5 grade levels in a single year. Therefore, they would fail to be operating at the appropriate grade level at time of promotion. Based on the progress and effort exhibited by these students, should they be promoted to the next grade? I think that his questions are particularly relevant to teachers and administrators in Baltimore City schools.

Where social promotion may arise at all grade levels, I have witnessed it specifically at the middle school level. In my middle school of approximately 600 students, 188 were reported as overage at the start of the 2007-2008 school year, and two of my four classes were comprised of students repeating the grade for the second or third time. Students repeated the grade due to a variety of factors including chronic absence, behavioral issues that substantially interfered with learning, or failure of one or more major subjects. Social promotion was not exercised in the case of many students.

The climate of the school building is influenced strongly by a wide population of students ranging from 11 to 16 years of age. A culture of failure pervaded the classes composed completely of repeating students. While I would not argue that each of these students should have been pushed on if they did not meet grade-level standards, it is important to consider the impact of holding students back to repeat a grade both on the child and on the school. What should be done?

My building is now facing the question of how to appropriately promote students that still may not be where they need to be. We have students that began the year in the sixth grade and will begin next year in the ninth – they have spent about one academic quarter in each grade. Middle school in a single year? I am baffled as to how this is considered a favorable, or even acceptable, plan of action. Ultimately the issue rests in the hands of strong instruction, from early grades to the middle school years. Without such, it can be feared that issues surrounding failure, overage students, and social promotion will continue to exist in our schools.

Why does it feel like things are only going to get worse?

It has been over a week now since a teacher was beaten by one of her students, recorded via video phone, and then thrown into the national news spotlight. I cannot get this incident off of my mind. I am not sure which part of this whole affair bothers me most: the reactions of some of my colleagues or the feeling that things are only going to get worse before they begin to get better.

I first discovered the incident Thursday morning, waiting in line for my coffee at Daily Grind, scanning the headlines of the Baltimore Sun. To be honest, I wasn't really surprised. I personally know two other teachers who have been literally attacked by their students this year. I have heard numerous other similar stories. And I do not believe that this is a new phenomenon either. One of the teachers at my school transferred there after a gang of students threw notebooks and textbooks at him in the middle of the cafeteria of another city middle school. The administration did nothing in response. That was four years ago, and I am sure that his experience was not the first of its kind.

So, no, I was not surprised by the headline, "Teacher attacked by student." Based on other colleagues experiences over the past two years that I have taught in this city, I was not particularly surprised to further discover that the student witnesses did little to aide the teacher or that the principal accused the teacher of using a "trigger word," rather than simply coming to the victim's defense.

No, the real shock came when I was discussing this event with some of my colleagues, also teachers, who expressed a belief that either A: the teacher must have done something to merit this beating, or B: that she was wrong to go to the media because "what happens in Baltimore should stay in Baltimore," and this kind of negative attention will only make the world think less of our students. Unfortunately, it's this kind of thinking that has led us to this horrible state of affairs. The conduct of our students, and lack of reasonable consequences for student actions, has been kept private for far too long.

Look at the most recent Sun article on this topic, "Attack highlights 'chronic problem.'" The school year isn't over yet and already 112 students have been expelled for assaulting staff members. Based on the high number of incidents that go unreported, I believe that the number could actually far exceed 112.

Even more disturbing than these current numbers is the feeling that things may get worse before they get better. The worst thing that could happen for a student who assaults a staff person is that they would be arrested. According to the figures in the "Attacks highlight 'chronic problem'" article, less than half of the students who were expelled were actually arrested by school police. A less severe consequence is suspension; 515 students in Baltimore City were suspended for staff member assaults last year. Many student actions go completely unpunished. So what do all of these consequences (or lack of) teach our students? Based on the rising number of incidents I would venture to guess... not a whole lot.

I believe that our students are in desperate need of counseling services. Hundreds (thousands?) of our children and young adults never have any type of adult mentoring or therapeutic counseling, despite the fact that their young lives are in almost constant turmoil. As educators, most of us are doing the very best we can just to teach our students basic content and skills. We are so ill-equipped to give them the guidance, support, and perhaps even mental health care that they need. I have said previously in this post that I fear the current situation may only get worse because I have been led to believe that the number of counselors in city schools will be severely cut back next year. On top of that, special education students are far and away the primary recipients of counseling services, while they are by no means the only students in need.

In the midst of this rather hopeless train of thought, I do have one idea. There is a style of conferencing called "restorative justice" or "real justice" that puts perpetrators and victims face to face and forces perpetrators to take real responsibility for their actions. This type of conferencing has been used mainly in Australia and school systems that have implemented the methods of restorative justice have seen a 100% drop in their suspension rates. I know that many of you are already thinking that this wouldn't work in Baltimore City, but at this point, what do we have to lose?

Restorative justice can be "led" be teachers, uses many practices that are similar to counseling, and has had phenomenal success rates in the past. If you are at all interested in learning more, check out the book "Real Justice" by Ted Wachtel. We ARE the "movers and shakers" in the city and we have to do something before the situation gets worse, because our kids deserve better.

Will Violence Bring About Change?

This morning I received my copy of the Baltimore Sun and was confronted with the headline, “Attack Highlights Chronic Problem.” Two years ago I would have been shocked by the recent news report of Jolita Berry and the drama at Lewis and other high schools. While I still am outraged at the issues of the system we work in, I feel numbed to the accounts of violence and under education that are highlighted daily in the news. On Friday, my students and I discussed this recent media onslaught on Baltimore city schools during Socratic Circle. Without my provocation one student said, “This makes us look so bad. We know this stuff happens, but I mean now everyone is gonna think I am that girl.” I completely agree with her. Yet again, our school community is portrayed as teachers as soldiers and students as attackers.
Instead of being discouraged by yet another negative spin on our system, I looked into the opportunities for change the article highlighted. I feel that for the past few months Dr. Alonso has been painted as the savior of our system and this article was no different. To quell the violence we face, Alonso explained that by giving principals autonomy, better systems could be put in place to stop the violence. Principals can use their money to create in school suspension and remediation programs. Once these magical budgets come out, I am curious to see how principals will manage their inadequate funds – will a principal really want to take his/her precious dollars and pay someone to babysit kids during in school suspension? Alonso also threatened to simply replace principals who are not doing a good job. This might actually help stop violence in some schools – if the NEW principal can create an environment where violence is not tolerated.
The idea of community governing boards was suggested as well, which is not a bad idea – but I wonder with all this negative press, who will want to be a part of these boards? As we discussed in class, there are some students that do not seem to fit in traditional high schools. The alternative high school options we have in Baltimore are not enough to service our students’ vast needs. I do believe that rethinking options for students with records of offenses, overage students and students with emotional needs is the key for systemic change. I am eager to see what CHANGE will come about not that we have this national media push to force us to CHANGE or continue to be portrayed as a place with no hope.

Low Expectations: The Wide-Spread Educational Virus

I sometimes marvel at how our class discussions directly mirror our lives as teachers in Baltimore City. More often than not, I leave our class feeling down-hearted, hopeless. After all, how can we, a handful of dedicated teachers, change the entire system? Almost always, those negative feelings morph into more motivational ones as I realize that, in a system that is so twisted and flawed, our students need our efforts more than we can possibly know.

We have repeatedly discussed the importance of strong, dedicated teachers to have a successful school community. As I have applied to new schools for next year, I have noted the vast difference between the interview procedures between my present possibilities and my first interview in Baltimore city, for my current school. Two years ago, I walked up to a table at the hiring fair, the assistant principal saw that I was with Teach for America, and she signed me with her school before she knew anything about me. In the past few months, I have gone through interviews, observations, video tapings, phone conversations, and more, simply to be considered at the schools.

As I contemplate these differences, I can’t help but think about the not-so-subtle implications of each hiring process. With the first, nothing was expected of me. I simply had to show up and I was officially a teacher. With the latter, my lesson plans, resume, cover letters, discussions, and observations have to fit the mold of the school in question. At an interview today, after reading an article by Alfie Kohn, the interviewee asked us, “If Baltimore City already knows what we need to improve each school, why don’t they do so?” Hmm, if nothing is expected of us at the start, what instant impression does that give? And what sort of support will an administration give if they have such low expectations for their teachers?

Driven teachers can challenge themselves and their students, holding the students to high standards. But, it is an uphill battle in each direction. This is one main reason why teachers either burn out and quit, or they remain in their jobs as miserable beings, going about their daily lives. These incessant low expectations affect everyone in the education equation: administrators, teachers, parents, and, most importantly, the students. Students in this environment have the biggest challenges to overcome- to stay motivated and to demand a bright future for themselves.

All of this shows how important it is for us to stay engaged in our students, in all of our students. Despite the means by which we got our jobs, all of us have stayed here for our kids. While it is difficult to remember this at times (like when our most difficult students are driving us crazy), it is this care that will carry us through and keep our expectations high.