August 18, 2010 in City

School dropout study urges early intervention

Tailor existing programs to needs, report says

• Print
• Email
• Share

A Gonzaga University study focused on dropout prevention starting in middle school suggests an early warning system for identifying potential dropouts, a bigger variety of academic opportunities and more rigor and additional funding for community-based social support programs.

Some of the programs are already in place or in the works but need to grow, while others will take significant resources to establish, according to the report released this month.

“This is a document that adds weight to the efforts of many in the area, so it can take all these nonconvergent efforts and put them together in a comprehensible way,” said Ben Stuckart, director of Communities in Schools and spokesman for the Children’s Investment Fund, which is sponsoring a $5 million annual levy on the November ballot to support Spokane’s children.

A review of several studies showed that failing math and English, behavioral problems and less than 80 percent attendance in the sixth grade are key indicators of students who may drop out, according to the Gonzaga study.

Some of the study’s prevention or intervention suggestions included extended learning opportunities, such as summer and after-school programs; career and technical education opportunities, which give students a chance to do something they are interested in while earning a diploma; and individual instruction or tutoring.

The grant-funded study was prompted by Priority Spokane, a group of civic leaders who determined education is the best way to improve the Lilac City. Gonzaga was selected to conduct the study after the group reviewed several proposals.

The goal of the three-phase research project was to find ways to improve the middle school experience in and out of the classroom in order to reduce Spokane Public Schools’ 29 percent dropout rate.

The issue has become a major concern for educators, community leaders and child advocates throughout the area, but efforts have been somewhat disjointed.

“This is our foundational document,” Stuckart said. “This is what everybody in the area should be following to decrease the dropout rate, whether it’s funding mechanisms or the programs that should be funded or the areas that need focus.”

The study’s first recommendation is one that leaders agree is needed, but it will first take research and money.

Early intervention is critical and highly recommended. “Some of the most credible data cites the importance and targeting of intervention in the sixth grade,” because recent research shows that some problems can begin as early as elementary school, the study states.

“An early warning system is something that really makes a lot of sense. It’s just that we need to have some longitudinal study specific to the school district first,” said Spokane Public Schools Superintendent Nancy Stowell. “Then we need to set up a system to track the students, a data management system and the interventions.”

Spokane Public Schools started a program this summer that offers tutoring for math, which is where most students struggle academically, officials said. Jump Start is for soon-to-be seventh-, eighth- and ninth-graders.

The district also is continuing with a social and academic support program for incoming freshmen at Lewis and Clark and Rogers high schools, which pairs struggling students with mentors who help throughout the year.

“You have to be really careful that whatever the intervention is, it aligns specifically to what the student needs,” Stowell said. “It’s almost individualized. That’s why we need to be really careful about what programs we use.”

Community-school collaboration and outside social support are the final piece for keeping kids in school.

These include mentoring, school-parent communication, making sure kids feel safe in school as well as at home, identifying students who need help, and connecting with outside agencies.

“I think there is a convergence of thinking about seeing where the kids are and putting them with the appropriate service,” Stuckart said.

The study listed the Children’s Investment Fund as one possible source for funding, as well as Communities in Schools, Empire Health Foundation, the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, Inland Northwest Community Foundation, Spokane Public Schools Foundation and United Way of Spokane County.

Many of the programs that the study suggests already exist in the community and in the school district, Stuckart said. “They just need to grow.”

10 comments on this story so far. Add yours!

• 

  austindepaolo on August 18 at 1:10 a.m.

  Here’s a link to the study:http://news.gonzaga.edu/archives/3859

• 

  oneanddone on August 18 at 5:13 a.m.

  ncgrad - you are the man.

  And for all you schleps who think education is the bad guy here, you’re a moron. The “problem” is ENTIRELY the family. If you have parents who care about the education their kids are getting the system will work for you. Blaming teachers is just like Obama who never took responsibility for anything that goes sour in his life. It’s ALWAYS the fault of someone else. Be your child’s advocate - a) the system will work and b) your child will realize that their education is important.

• 

  lewis8457 on August 18 at 8:30 a.m.

  Pouring more and more money into the drop out problem is wasteful to say the least.

  I dropped out of school because my home life was bad i had to get out. It had nothing to do with the school.

  There are so many kids in our society that raise themselves. All they can think of is getting out. And school has no importance to them because they are not cared for their either they are just shuffled through like cattle.

  Our society is badly broken.

• 

  Ninch on August 18 at 9:38 a.m.

  Studies show that students being ‘engaged’ in learning is the key component to not dropping out… and there are many reasons a student may not be engaged (academic issues, lack of interest in curriculum, family problems, etc.). Thus I am quite impressed with the statement: “You have to be really careful that whatever the intervention is, it aligns specifically to what the student needs,” Stowell said. “It’s almost individualized. That’s why we need to be really careful about what programs we use.”

  In the past, targeting for drop out prevention was based on general demographics: e.g. race, poverty level, gender… but recent studies show that targeting individual students is the key, which can be accomplished with research studies within the specific school district. This will show that one-size-does-not-fit-all and that some district schools have more effective programs/better outcomes than others. In other words, look within these large school district for problems and solutions.

  P.S. The $5 million annual levy on the November ballot to ‘support Spokane’s children’ is a bad idea because it just throws stuff at the wall and hope it sticks. This levy needs to be tied to research such as the Gonzaga dropout study recommending early intervention, then it would be a legitimate request for additional monies.

• 

  spokanada on August 18 at 4:13 p.m.

  So oneanddone,
  what do you recommend we do for students who come from broken families or have parents that just don’t give a sh##?

  It seems like all you do is whine and complaign without offering any real solutions.

  The 29% drop out rate is the problem. What is your solution?

• 

  NoDropouts on August 18 at 11:58 p.m.

  Thank you for this article, Jody.

  Lewis’ experience is very common. Research shows that most students who drop out don’t do so because of bad grades. They are usually confronting another life challenge: parenthood, poverty, poor-parental support, etc.
  
  It’s great to examine what can be done to prevent dropouts, but we must also acknowledge that reforms will not take hold overnight. As such, we should also focus our attention on how to help bring those who have already dropped out back into the educational fold.

  www.NoDropouts.org

• 

  gkambs on August 20 at 10:36 a.m.

  I am not sure who gave our fine friends at Gonzaga the budget information in their report: “Spokane Public School District has seen a budget decrease by nearly $54 million since 2002”.

  Well, not according to the OSPI the below numbers are actual district 81 revenues from all sources as published.

  1997-98 - 202,116,986 (thats 202 million)
  1998-99 - 209,473,987
  1999-00 - 225,780,975
  2000-01 - 238,525,165
  2001-02 - 250,898,105
  2002-03 - 261,631,642
  2003-04 - 257,687,365
  2004-05 - 258,685,433
  2005-06 - 269,637,475
  2006-07 - 279,056,483
  2007-08 - 293,121,275
  2008-09 - 308,207,350

  While enrollment went down -8.65% in the above time frame, 32,055 students in 1997 to 29,282 in the 2008-09 school year. Revenues increased 52.49% or 106 million
  http://www.k12.wa.us/safs/reports.asp

  According to the Spokesman Review:

  “Spokane Public Schools grants rose from $2.6 million during the 2008-09 to $17.3 million so far in 2009-10”

  So I think the “we don’t have the money for the kids” argument is kind of hard to rationlize. They have the money it just not get to the classroom according to the leaders of the Washington Policy Center. http://www.washingtonpolicy.org/sites/default/files/Ch5Education.pfd

• 

  gkambs on August 20 at 6:27 p.m.

  SPOKANADA, here could be two possible solutions.

  In the chart on page 20 of the Gonzaga report,
  “significant variables related to dropping out by group”
  only 2 of the 14 significant variables effected each group
  1. Being held back and 2. Number of times suspended.

  The research and data is very clear, when you hold a child back it has a significant affect on their self esteem and self worth, and they virtually never gain the grade back. The same with suspensions which has significantly more data to back up Gonzaga’s report and the direct link to suspensions and dropouts.

  District 81 leads the state in dropouts in virtually every category here’s two:

  2006-07 Total on time graduates 57.7% (#1)
  2006-07 Special Ed. on time graduates 36.5% (#1)

  2007-08 Total on time graduates 60.3% (#1)
  2007-08 Special Ed. on time graduates 43.9% (#1)

  2008-09 Total on time graduates 62.1% (#1)
  2008-09 Special Ed. on time graduates 35.8% (#1)

  As mentioned, a direct link to dropouts is suspensions. Unfortunately, School District 81 also leads or is positioned to lead the state in suspensions, in most categories.

  According to the OSPI, “70 to 80% of challenging behaviors have a communicative function and the early use of PBS systems (Positive Behavior Supports) can result in a reduction of 80 to 90% of challenging behaviors.” To find out the communicative function of the behavior, schools perform an FBA (Functional Behavior Assessment) but district 81 has a policy (perhaps to save money) that they don’t consider using FBA’s until a student has been suspended for more than 10 days in a school year. Unfortunately they can easily break a students spirt with multiple 1 to 2 day suspensions well before arriving at ten days. To use a law enforcement analogy, you call in the SWAT team instead of the hostage negotiator. If you knew that 70-80% of challenging behaviors have a communicative function, why would you first call the SWAT team and not the hostage negotiator? (school psychologist)

  Clearly suspensions are an over used negative intervention that is largely responsible for the above statistics, and there is no data that shows it has been even remotely effective in District 81 or elsewhere.

  Ms. Stowell commented that we need “more study first.” I wonder how long that will take? In watching PBS the other day the station (we) school District 81 owns and operates, one of their programs indicated our government looks at second grade data to help them figure out how many prisons to build. Last time I drove to Seattle I noticed we were still building more prisons. How much more data do we need to tell us what were doing is not working. How much more time do we spend on “more study” to tell us what we already know?

  SO SPOKANADA, we either need “more study” so we can analyze this problem further or we can consider implementing two of the hundreds and hundreds of already published “best practices” by performing FBA’s and implementing PBS’s in lieu of suspensions. This should be done at the onset of behavioral problems, preschool, kindergarten, first grade. I am sure someone could argue how hard this would be to implement, we don’t have the resources, we shouldn’t jump into changing our established policies, etc, etc. Well thank goodness, all the data has been collected, the scientific results are conclusive and the step by step instructions are posted on the OSPI’s website just waiting to be printed. Do we need “more study”? I don’t think so, but certainly not in lieu of taking the simple step of replacing negative suspensions with positive early interventions such as FBA’s and PBS’s which have significant proven results.

  The Gonzaga report quotes another study,
  “It seems that sixth graders who develop academic and
   behavioral problems do not self correct.” (Ya think?)

• 

  eagleproducer on September 26 at 8:39 a.m.

  gkambs: Holding the possibility of not advancing with their classmates provides a very positive incentive for students to get their acts together.

  I’ve been a teacher long enough to realize the single largest determinant of a student’s chances for success is their attitude toward learning and a willingness to take ownership of it. Very few sixth graders will self-correct. When they have the real possibility of being held back they often do. In addition, I don’t see a problem with bruising the self-esteem of an adolescent so that they’ll have something to be proud of in their adults lives: Literacy. I had a friend who was held back in second grade, a decision arrived at between the school and his parents, and it turned out to be the best move they made while raising him. People don’t develop physically, emotionally, socially and mentally at the same rates and the practice of holding students back accepts that reality.

• 

  gkambs on October 02 at 11:25 a.m.

  Spoketucky: I agree attitude is everything, but if our kids don’t get positive reinforcement from the home setting, or the school setting where will they get it? Recently there was a wonderful free parenting seminar put on by Teen-Aid, it had a dismal turn out (which I am not surprised) but one of the things that really stuck in my head was a statistic (which you know I love the numbers) anyway, she told everyone 90% of poverty is psychological. I believe it, virtually all my roadblocks in life have been psychological. That’s why I am for positive behavior supports, their numbers and results speak for themselves. “Bruising the self-esteem” may work in rare cases like your friends, but I know it didn’t work for me growing up fatherless to an alcoholic mother on welfare in the West Broadway neighborhood. I know our kids get enough negative reinforcement naturally from the environment in which we live. I don’t disagree with very many of your posts, but on holding back, the numbers I found don’t support your expertise in this case. If you ever get a chance to read “lost at school” no other book helped me understand (I am very sympathetic to your cause) what you teachers go through on a daily basis, it also reinforces the school counselors and Psychologists vital role in helping teachers with problem students & ultimately changing those kids attitudes and their future in our society. You have been in District 81 long enough to know that’s not what (Nancy Stole my child’s education) uses school psychs for, and counselors are spread so thin they have very little effectiveness (in their words). So good luck out there it seems you won’t get much support from this school board or administration.