The focus is on strategies used by 10 urban districts to reduce school dropouts. Thirty-eight strategies for dropout prevention were identified. Although the majority identified dropout prevention strategies, only two districts referred to “recovery programs.” If district spokespersons mentioned their CEOs using a systems approach in reducing dropouts, the program plans were more specific and recovery programs more active. A surprise was the silence about instructional initiatives for early grade intervention and dropout prevention. The most common prevention strategy was punitive measures involving the criminal justice system, that is, police departments, district attorneys. Thus, it is not surprising that the dropout rate in several of these cities remains unabated during the past 5 years.
Amrein, A., & Berliner, D. (2002). High-stakes testing, uncertainty, and student learning. Education Policy Archives, 10(18), 1-70.
2.
Björk, L., & Lindle, J. (2001). Superintendents and interest groups. Educational Policy, 15(1), 76-91.
3.
Brauchi, C. (2003). Rod Paige and successful schools: Lying about the numbers. Buffalo Report. Retrieved September 24, 2003, from http://search.netscape.com/ns/boomframe.jsp?query-public+school+drop+outs+in+the+U.S.A.&page=18
4.
CompuServe. (2004). Economic impact due to dropouts. Available at www.dropoutprevention.org
5.
Duffrin, E. (2003). Freshmen who fail usually dropout. Consortium on Chicago school research. Catalyst: Chicago Public Schools. Chicago: Chicago Public Schools.
6.
Fry, R. (2003, December, 1-2). High school dropout rates for Latino youth. New York: ERIC Clearinghouse on Urban Education. (EDO-UD-03-12, [193])
7.
Fuller, E., & Johnson, F. (2001). Can state accountability systems drive improvements in school performance for children of color and children from low-income families?Education and Urban Society, 33(3), 260-283.
8.
Glass, T., Björk, L., & Brunner, C. (2000). The 2000 study of the American school superintendency: A look at the superintendent of education in the new millennium. Arlington, VA: American Association of School Administrators.
9.
Goldberg, M. (2005). Test mess 2: Are we doing better a year later?Phi Delta Kappan, 86(5), 389-395.
10.
Green, J. (2001). High school graduation rates in the United States. Center for Civic Innovation at the Manhattan Institute. Retrieved January 12, 2002, from www.manhattaninstitute.org/html/cr%255fbaeo.htm
11.
Hanushek, E. (1989). The impact of differential expenditures on school performance. Educational Researcher, 18, 45-51, 62-62.
12.
Hedges, L., Laine, R., & Greenwald, R. (1994). Does money matter? A meta-analysis of studies of the effects of differential school inputs on school outcomes. Educational Researcher, 23, 5-14.
13.
Heubert, J., & Hauser, R. (Eds.). (1999). High stakes: Testing for tracking, promotion, and graduation. Washington DC: National Academy Press.
14.
Honawar, V. (2004, March 3). Report: Higher Hispanic dropout rate persists. Education Week, 24(12), p. 6-6.
15.
Hoyle, J. (1993). Our children: Dropouts, pushouts, and burnouts. People and Education, 1(1), 26-41.
16.
Hoyle, J., Björk, L., Collier, V., & Glass, T. (2005). The superintendent as CEO: Standards-based performance. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.
17.
Jenlink, K. (2001). Beyond the knowledge base controversy: Advancing ideas of scholar-practitioner leadership. In T. Kowalski & G. Perrault (Eds.), 21st century challenge for school administrators (Eighth Yearbook of the National Council of Professors of Educational Administration, pp. 65-88). Lanham, MD: Scarecrow.
18.
Johnson, R. (2004). Texas school holding power—but progress is slow. IDRA Newsletter, 30(9), 1-1.
19.
Kaufman, P., Kwon, J., Klein, S., & Chapman, C. (1999). Dropout rates in the United States: 1998. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education.
20.
Kirsch, I., Jungeblut, A., Jenkins, L., & Kolstad, A. (1998). Adult literacy in America: Another look at the results of the national adult literacy survey. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.
21.
Lunenburg, F. (2002). Improving student achievement: Some structural incompatibilities. In G. Perreault & F. Lunenburg (Eds.), The changing world of school administration (Ninth Yearbook of the National Council of Professors of School Administration, pp. 5-27). Lanham, MD: Scarecrow.
22.
McCarthy, M. (2002). The changing environment for school leaders; Market forces. In G. Perreault & F. Lunenburg (Eds.), The changing world of school administration (Ninth Yearbook of the National Council of Professors of Educational Administration, pp. 91-109). Lanham, MD: Scarecrow.
23.
McNeal, R. (1997). Are students being pulled out of high school? The effect of adolescent employment on dropping out. Sociology of Education, 70, 206-220.
24.
McNeil, L. (2000). Contradictions of school reform: Educational costs of standardized testing. New York: Routledge.
25.
National Center for Educational Statistics. (2002). Digest of educational statistics, 2001. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.
26.
National Education Goals Panel. (1999). National education goals report: Building a nation of learners, 1999. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.
27.
Ormrod, J. (1995). Educational psychology. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Merrill (an imprint of Prentice Hall).
28.
Popham, J. (2003). Trouble with testing: Why standards-based assessment doesn’t measure up. American School Board Journal, 190(2), 3-8.
29.
Rapp, D. (2002). National board-certified teachers in Ohio give state education policy, classroom climate, and high-stakes testing a grade of F. Phi Delta Kappan, 84(3), 215-218.
30.
Rumberger, R. (1995). Dropping out of middle school: A multi-level analysis of students and schools. American Education Research Journal, 32, 583-625.
31.
Rumberger, R. (2001, January). Why students drop out of school and what can be done. Paper presented at Dropouts in America: How Severe Is the Problem? What We Know About Intervention and Prevention conference, Cambridge, MA, Harvard University.
32.
Rumberger, R., & Lamb, S. (1998). The early employment and further education experiences of high school dropouts: A comparative study of the United States and Australia. Washington, DC: Organization for Economic Co-Operation and Development.
33.
Rumberger, R., & Thomas, S. (2000). The distribution of dropout and turnover rates among urban and suburban high schools. Sociology of Education, 73(1), 39-67.
34.
Scheurich, J., & Skrla, L. (2003). Leadership for equity and excellence. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.
35.
Skrla, L., Scheurich, J., & Johnson, J. (2001). Toward a new consensus of high academic achievement for all children. Education and Urban Society, 33(3), 227-234.
36.
Spring, J. (2002). American education. Boston: McGraw-Hill.
37.
Temple, J., & Reynolds, A. (1997, April). Predictors and consequences of school mobility for urban black children from low-income families. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, San Francisco.
38.
Thomas, J. (2005). Calling a cab for Oregon students. Phi Delta Kappan, 86(5), 385-388.
39.
U.S. Census Bureau. (October 2002). Child trends’ calculations of U.S. Census Bureau: School enrollment—social and economic characteristics of students. Washington, DC: Author.
40.
U.S. Department of Labor. (2000). Employment and earnings. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.
41.
Wood, G. (2001). Reducing the dropout rate. School improvement series: Research you can use. Northwest Regional Educational Laboratory. Available at www.nwrel.org/scpd/sirs/9/c017.html
42.
Wood, L. (1994). An unintended impact of one grading practice. Urban Education, 29(2), 188-201.
