This study examines whether community-level social disorganization and community engagement initiatives are associated with public high school performance. Analyzing data from the National Center for Education Statistics (NCES) School Attendance Boundary Survey (SABS), a latent variable measuring community-level social disorganization is examined within a structural equation model for 302 traditional public high schools in Florida. The study finds a statistically significant and large negative association between community-level social disorganization and a latent variable representing Florida Department of Education performance metrics. Correspondingly, the recognition of receiving the Florida Five Star School award for satisfying recommended community engagement criteria is positively associated with high school performance with social disorganization factors simultaneously considered. This research hopes to further provide an emphasis for recognizing and engaging community within the context of addressing disparities in public education performance.
AmatoP. R.KeithB. (1991). Parental divorce and the well-being of children: A meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 110(1), 26–46.
2.
Amrein-BeardsleyA. (2009). The unintended, pernicious consequences of “staying the course” on the United States’ No Child Left Behind policy. International Journal of Education Policy & Leadership, 4(6), 1–13.
3.
ArkesJ. (2015). The temporal effects of divorces and separations on children’s academic achievement and problem behavior. Journal of Divorce & Remarriage, 56(1), 25–42. https://doi.org/10.1080/10502556.2014.972204
4.
AstoneN. M.McLanahanS. S. (1991). Family structure, parental practices and high school completion. American Sociological Review, 56(3), 309–320.
5.
AstoneN. M.McLanahanS. S. (1994). Family structure, residential mobility, and school dropout: A research note. Demography, 31(4), 575–584.
6.
BakerS. R. (2000). Community social disorganization theory applied to adolescent academic achievement. Old Dominion University.
7.
BoginA.Nguyen-HoangP. (2014). Property left behind: An unintended consequence of a No Child Left behind “failing” school designation. Journal of Regional Science, 54(5), 788–805.
8.
BowenN. K.BowenG. L.WareW. B. (2002). Neighborhood social disorganization, families, and the educational behavior of adolescents. Journal of Adolescent Research, 17(5), 468–490. https://doi.org/10.1177/0743558402175003
9.
BowerH.GriffinD. (2011). Can the Epstein model of parental involvement work in a High-Minority, high-poverty elementary school? A case study. Professional School Counseling, 15(2), 77–87.
10.
CastroM.Expósito-CasasE.López-MartínE.LizasoainL.Navarro-AsencioE.GaviriaJ. L. (2015). Parental involvement on student academic achievement: A meta-analysis. Review of Educational Research, 14, 33–46.
11.
ChakrabartiR.SchwartzN. (2013). Unintended consequences of school accountability policies: Evidence from Florida and implications for New York. Economic Policy Review, 19(1), 19–43.
12.
CheadleJ. E.AmatoP. R. (2011). A quantitative assessment of Lareau’s qualitative conclusions about class, race, and parenting. Journal of Family Issues, 32(5), 679–706.
Davis-KeanP. E. (2005). The influence of parent education and family income on child achievement: The indirect role of parental expectations and the home environment. Journal of Family Psychology, 19(2), 294–304.
15.
de CarvalhoM. E. (2000). Rethinking family-school relations: A critique of parental involvement in schooling. Routledge.
16.
EpsteinJ. L.SandersM. G.SheldonS. B.SimonB. S.SalinasK. C.JansornN. R.MartinC. S.ThomasB. G.GreenfeldM.HutchinsD. J.WilliamsK. J. (2019). School, family, and community partnerships: Your handbook for action (4th ed.). Corwin, A SAGE Publishing Company.
17.
ESSA. (2015). Every Student Succeeds Act of 2015, Pub. L. No. 114-95 § 114 Stat. 1177 (2015-2016).
18.
FinneyS. J.DiStefanoC. (2013). Nonnormal and categorical data in structural equation modeling. In HancockG. R.MuellerR. O.HancockG. R.MuellerR. O. (Eds.), Structural equation modeling: A second course (2nd ed., pp. 439–492). IAP Information Age Publishing.
GreenT. L. (2018). School as community, community as school: Examining principal leadership for urban school reform and community development. Education and Urban Society, 50(2), 111–135.
25.
GreenwaldR.HedgesL. V.LaineR. D. (1996). The effect of school resources on student achievement. Review of Educational Research, 66(3), 361–396.
26.
HancockG. R. (2003). Fortune cookies, measurement error, and experimental design. Journal of Modern Applied Statistical Methods, 2(2), 293–305.
27.
HeiligJ. V.Darling-HammondL. (2008). Accountability Texas-style: The progress and learning of urban minority students in a high-stakes testing context. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 30(2), 75–110.
28.
HendersonA. T.MappK. L. (2002). A new wave of evidence: The impact of school, family, and community connections on student achievement. Annual synthesis. National Center for Family and Community Connections with Schools, Southwest Educational Development Laboratory. http://www.sedl.org/connections/resources/evidence.pdf
29.
JeynesW. (2012). A meta-analysis of the efficacy of different types of parental involvement programs for urban students. Urban Education, 47(4), 706–742.
30.
JeynesW. H. (2007). The relationship between parental involvement and urban secondary school student academic achievement: A meta-analysis. Urban Education, 42(1), 82–110.
31.
JeynesW. H. (2017). A meta-analysis: The relationship between parental involvement and Latino student outcomes. Education and Urban Society, 49(1), 4–28.
32.
JohnsonO. (2012). A systematic review of neighborhood and institutional relationships related to education. Education and Urban Society, 44(4), 477–511.
33.
KaylenM. T.PridemoreW. A. (2013). Social disorganization and crime in rural communities: The first direct test of the systemic model. The British Journal of Criminology, 53(5), 905–923.
34.
KlineR. B. (2010). Promise and pitfalls of structural equation modeling in gifted research. In ThompsonB.SubotnikR. F.ThompsonB.SubotnikR. F. (Eds.), Methodologies for conducting research on giftedness (pp. 147–169). American Psychological Association.
35.
LareauA. (2002). Invisible inequality: Social class and childrearing in black families and white families. American Sociological Review, 67, 747–776.
36.
LareauA. (2011). Unequal childhoods (2nd ed.): Class, race, and family life. University of California Press.
37.
LareauA.GoyetteK. (Eds.) (2014). Choosing homes, choosing schools. Russell SAGE Foundation.
38.
LareauA.WeiningerE. B. (2003). Cultural capital in educational research: A critical assessment. Theory and Society, 32(5-6), 567–606.
39.
LauenD. L.GaddisS. M. (2012). Shining a light or fumbling in the dark? The effects of NCLB’s subgroup-specific accountability on student achievement. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 34(2), 185–208.
40.
LaveryL.CarlsonD. (2015). Dynamic participation in interdistrict open enrollment. Educational Policy, 29(5), 746–779.
41.
LawJ.QuickM. (2013). Exploring links between juvenile offenders and social disorganization at a large map scale: AA Bayesian spatial modeling approach. Journal of Geographical Systems, 15(1), 89–113. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10109-012-0164-1
42.
LeFevreA. L.ShawT. V. (2012). Latino parent involvement and school success: Longitudinal effects of formal and informal support. Education and Urban Society, 44(6), 707–723.
43.
LowenkampC. T.CullenF. T.PrattT. C. (2003). Replicating Sampson and Groves’s test of social disorganization theory: Revisiting a criminological classic. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, 40(4), 351–373.
44.
MadyunN. I. H. (2011). Connecting social disorganization theory to African-American outcomes to explain the achievement gap. Educational Foundations, 25, 21–35.
45.
MarschallM. J.ShahP. R. (2020). Linking the process and outcomes of parent involvement policy to the parent involvement gap. Urban Education, 55, 699–729.
46.
MathisW. J.TrujilloT. M. (2016). Lessons from NCLB for the Every Student Succeeds Act. National Education Policy Center.
MoserM.RubensteinR. (2002). The equality of public school district funding in the United States: A national status report. Public Administration Review, 62(1), 63–72.
49.
National Center for Education Statistics. (2013). School Attendance Boundary Survey (SABS): 2009-2010. U.S. Department of Education. National Center for Education Statistics. http://nces.ed.gov/surveys/sdds/sabs/
50.
NCLB. (2002). No Child Left Behind Act of 2001, P.L. 107-110, 20 U.S.C. § 6319 (2002).
51.
OlivosE.MendozaM. (2009). Immigration and educational inequity: An examination of latino immigrant parents’ inclusion in the public school context. Journal of Latin American Studies, 3(3), 38–53.
52.
OsgoodD.ChambersJ. M. (2003). Community correlates of rural youth violence [electronic resource]/D. Wayne Osgood and Jeff M. Chambers. U.S. Dept. of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention, https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/ojjdp/193591.pdf
53.
OwensT.MaidenJ. (1999). A comparison of interschool and interdistrict funding equity in florida. Journal of Education Finance, 24(4), 503–518.
54.
PattersonE. B. (1991). Poverty, income inequality, and community crime rates. Criminology, 29(4), 755–776.
RosiekJ.KinslowK. (2015). Resegregation as curriculum: The meaning of the new racial segregation in US public schools. Routledge.
57.
SampsonR. J.GrovesW. B. (1989). Community structure and crime: Testing Social-disorganization theory. American Journal of Sociology, 94(4), 774–802.
58.
SchnellenbergS. J. (1998, April). Does it matter where poor kids live? A look at concentrated poverty and achievement [Paper presentation]. Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, San Diego, CA. http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED421573.pdf
59.
SirerM. I.MaroulisS.GuimeràR.WilenskyU.AmaralL. A. N. (2015). The currents beneath the “rising tide” of school choice: An analysis of student enrollment flows in the Chicago Public Schools. Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, 34(2), 358–377.
60.
SirinS. R. (2005). Socioeconomic status and academic achievement: A meta-analytic review of research. Review of Educational Research, 75(3), 417–453.
61.
SperaC. (2005). A review of the relationship among parenting practices, parenting styles, and adolescent school achievement. Educational Psychology Review, 17(2), 125–146.
62.
SteenbeekW.HippJ. R. (2011). A longitudinal test of social disorganization theory: Feedback effects among cohesion, social control, and disorder. Criminology, 49(3), 833–871.
63.
SunR.Van RyzinG. G. (2014). Are performance management practices associated with better outcomes? Empirical evidence from New York public schools. The American Review of Public Administration, 44(3), 324–338.
64.
TavakolM.DennickR. (2011). Making sense of Cronbach’s alpha. International Journal of Medical Education, 2, 53–55. https://doi.org/10.5116/ijme.4dfb.8dfd
WanT. T. H. (2002). Evidence-based health care management: Multivariate modeling approaches. Kluwer Academic Publishers.
68.
WeinbaumE. H.WeissM. J.BeaverJ. K. (2012). Learning from NCLB: School responses to accountability pressure and student subgroup performance. Policy brief. RB-54. Consortium For Policy Research In Education.
69.
WeiX. (2012). Are more stringent NCLB state accountability systems associated with better student outcomes? An analysis of NAEP results across states. Educational Policy, 26(2), 268–308.
70.
WhiteK. R. (1982). The relation between socioeconomic status and academic achievement. Psychological Bulletin, 91(3), 461–481. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.91.3.461
71.
WolfE. J.HarringtonK. M.ClarkS. L.MillerM. W. (2013). Sample size requirements for structural equation models: An evaluation of power, bias, and solution propriety. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 76, 913–934.
