How to Decrease the Number of Dropouts in Schools

John R. Hrevnack

The dropout problem in the United States has reached crisis proportions. Every 26 seconds one high school student quits school, which translates to 1.2 million dropouts every year. Many organizations have been formed to study the situation and make recommendations to deal with it. According to the Alliance for Excellent Education, there are approximately 19,000 high school dropouts from the class of 2008 in the state of New Jersey alone. The Alliance estimates that if these students had finished high school, New Jersey's economy would have an additional $4.8 billion over the lifetime of these students. A 5 percent decrease in the male dropout rate would translate to combined savings and revenue of almost $189 million. And this is just one state out of 50. The problem of dropouts has major implications not only for those who drop out, but also for the economic health of our nation.

So what causes dropouts? Risk factors that contribute to students dropping out of high school include frequent absenteeism, poor performance on graded material, behavior issues, and a lack of self-esteem. Additionally, a number of factors that are school-caused and contribute to students dropping out include poor discipline; ineffective types of punishment, such as suspension; and an irrelevant curriculum (Schargel, Thacker, & Bell, 2007). Dealing with students in these ways can cause more harm than good, but there are ways to fix these issues and get kids engaged in what they are learning. By examining the elements we can control in our schools, I believe that all districts can implement certain sound pedagogical practices that will help reduce the dropout rate. 

Make Homework Grading Flexible

Alfie Kohn (2006), in Education Week, noted that research indicates that "Homework continues to be assigned—in ever greater quantities—despite the absence of evidence that it’s necessary or even helpful in most cases." As a practitioner who has worked in urban and suburban venues, I can attest to the ferocity of the homework debate. There is one practice related to homework that I believe all schools and teachers need to eliminate: giving students zeros for not completing homework.

By giving zeros for assignments, even if students know the subject matter, students' grades have little if anything to do with their knowledge of subject matter or their ability to understand and apply it. Instead, the grade is based on handing in a given assignment on time.

Another homework tradition that needs to be eliminated is the practice of dropping a student's work a grade for every day that the assignment is late. This is a prescription for failure. I believe that when a teacher assigns homework—and is going to grade it—if a student doesn't complete it, then the school or teacher needs to develop a plan to ensure that the student finishes the task under the teacher's direction. This approach provides a viable framework for success rather than perpetuating failure.

Rethink Suspensions

One survey points to the ineffectiveness of out-of-school suspensions and their possible negative effects on students (Costenbader & Markson, 1994). The literature also suggests that excessive absences are a factor in dropping out of school. Thus we should try to keep students in school. Nevertheless, many schools maintain the practice of suspending students from school for being late a certain number of times, a practice adopted ostensibly to efficiently deal with lateness. However, students suspended for tardiness can easily amass many absences. A more effective solution would be to have the student make up the time after school by doing work in the subject or subjects missed. This practice also shows that the school is committed to providing the student with an education.

Another common system that needs to be changed is that of suspending a student from school for a predetermined number of days because the student has been sent to the office a certain number of times. There are two weaknesses to this approach: First, many teachers do not send students to the office for disruptive behavior because they are aware that students would be suspended and therefore not receive an education. Teachers will tolerate misbehavior in the hope that students will learn some of the material. Although well-meaning, this approach detracts from the other students' educational experience. Second, when students are suspended, they miss school, and missing school becomes a habit. Students may, in fact, disrupt class so they will be suspended from school. It does not make sense to keep a student out of school who is having difficulties. I believe we should do all we reasonably can to keep students in school and provide them with the best education possible.

A more sound pedagogical approach, one that focuses on educating rather than punishing students, would be to develop an in-school suspension program where students do not go to class but to a room where they are supervised by a teacher and do assigned work they would have done in their class. If these changes were adopted, it would reduce the number of student absences due to suspensions; demonstrate to students that the school has expectations that all students can learn; and, I believe, raise students' self-esteem.

These approaches, though not revolutionary, are rooted in sound pedagogy. Implementing these practices will cost school districts little, yet pay great dividends by reducing absences; allow teachers to more accurately assess student learning; increase students' self-esteem; and, in the final analysis, contribute to lowering the dropout rate. A few simple changes can make all the difference.

References

Alliance for Excellent Education. (2008, June.) Potential economic impacts of improved education on New Jersey. Retrieved from www.all4ed.org/files/NewJersey_econ.pdf.

Costenbader, V. K., & Markson, S. (1994). School suspension: A survey of policies and practices. NASSP Bulletin, 78(564), 103–107.

Kohn, A. (2006, September 6.) The truth about homework. Education Week, 26(2), 44–52. Retrieved from www.edweek.org/ew/articles/2006/09/06/02kohn.h26.html.

Schargel, F. P., Thacker, T., & Bell, J. S. (2007). From at-risk to academic excellence: What successful leaders do. Larchmont, NY: Eye on Education.

John R. Hrevnack is an assistant professor and coordinator of the middle school program at Kean University in Union, N.J. He has served as a superintendent of schools, principal, basic skills supervisor, and assistant principal and has taught various subjects in grades 3–8.