“STEMming” the Swell of Absenteeism in the Middle Years: Impacts of an Urban District Summer Robotics Program

Abstract

This article reports findings from a quasi-experimental study of the impact of a summer robotics program for urban middle-grade students. The study focuses on student engagement, measured by school attendance rate the year following the program. Program students, who were nearly all low-income minority students, were matched to comparison students who did not attend summer school. After establishing baseline equivalence in attendance between the groups, the study found a statistically and educationally significant program effect on school attendance the following year, suggesting that high-interest hands-on educational activities can help maintain student engagement in school.

Keywords

middle school attendance engagement

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Ainley

(2012). Students’ interest and engagement in classroom activities. In Christenson

Reschly

Wylie

(Eds.), Handbook of research on student engagement (pp. 283-302). New York, NY: Springer.

Allensworth

Easton

(2007). What matters for staying on-track and graduating in Chicago public high schools. Chicago, IL: Consortium on Chicago School Research.

Balfanz

(2009). Putting middle grades students on the graduation path. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Everyone Graduates Center.

Balfanz

Byrnes

(2012). The importance of being in school: A report on absenteeism in the nation’s public schools. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University School of Education Everyone Graduates Center.

Balfanz

Byrnes

(2013). Meeting the challenge of combating chronic absenteeism: Impact of the NYC Mayor’s Interagency Task Force on Chronic Absenteeism and School Attendance and its implications for other cities. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University School of Education Everyone Graduates Center.

Balfanz

Herzog

Mac Iver

D. J.

(2007). Preventing student disengagement and keeping students on the graduation path in urban middle-grades schools: Early identification and effective interventions. Educational Psychologist, 42, 223-235.

Beer

Chiel

Drushel

(1999). Using autonomous robotics to teach science and engineering. Communications of the ACM, 42, 85-92.

Benitti

(2012). Exploring the educational potential of robotics in schools: A systematic review. Computers & Education, 58, 978-988.

Bloom

Thompson

S. L.

Unterman

(2010). Transforming the high school experience: How New York City’s new small schools are boosting student achievement and graduation rates. New York, NY: MDRC.

10.

Bloom

Unterman

(2013). Sustained progress: New findings about the effectiveness and operation of small public high schools of choice in New York City. New York, NY: MDRC.

11.

Chang

H. N.

Romero

(2008). Present, engaged, and accounted for: The critical importance of addressing chronic absence in the early grades. New York, NY: National Center for Children in Poverty.

12.

Clement

Gwynne

Younkin

(2001). Attendance waivers evaluation report. Fort Lauderdale, FL: School Board of Broward County.

13.

Connolly

Olson

L. S.

(2012). Early elementary performance and attendance in Baltimore City Schools’ pre-kindergarten and kindergarten. Baltimore, MD: Baltimore Education Research Consortium.

14.

Cooper

Charlton

Valentine

J. C.

Muhlenbruck

(2000). Making the most of summer school: A meta-analytic and narrative review. Monographs of the Society for Research in Child Development, 65(Serial No. 260), 1-118.

15.

Corville-Smith

Ryan

B. A.

Adams

G. R.

Dalicandro

(1998). Distinguishing absentee students from regular attenders: The combined influence of personal, family, and school factors. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 27, 629-640.

16.

Coxon

(2012). The malleability of spatial ability under FIRST LEGO league-based robotics simulation. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 35, 291-316.

17.

Credé

Roch

S. G.

Kieszczynka

U. M.

(2010). Class attendance in college: A meta-analytic review of the relationship of class attendance with grades and student characteristics. Review of Educational Research, 80, 272-295.

18.

Deci

E. L.

(1998). The relation of interest to motivation and human needs: The self-determination theory viewpoint. In Hoffman

Krapp

Renninger

K. A.

Baumert

(Eds.), Interest and learning (pp. 146-162). Kiel, Germany: Institute for Science Education.

19.

DiPrete

Buchmann

(2013). The rise of women: The growing gender gap in education and what it means for American schools. New York, NY: Russell Sage.

20.

Dong

Maynard

R. A.

(2013). PowerUp!: A tool for calculating minimum detectable effect sizes and sample size requirements for experimental and quasi-experimental designs. Journal of Research on Educational Effectiveness, 6, 24-67.

21.

Dynarski

James-Burdumy

Moore

Rosenberg

Deke

Mansfield

(2004). When schools stay open late: The national evaluation of the 21st Century Community Learning Centers Program—New findings. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Evaluation and Regional Assistance.

22.

Eccles

J. S.

(June, 2008). Can middle school reform increase high school graduation rates? (California Dropout Research Policy Brief 12). Santa Barbara: University of California, Santa Barbara.

23.

Eccles

J. S.

Midgley

(1989). Stage-environment fit: Developmentally appropriate classrooms for young adolescents. Research on Motivation in Education, 3, 139-186.

24.

Farrington

C. A.

Roderick

Allensworth

Nagaoka

Keyes

T. S.

Johnson

D. W.

Beechum

N. O.

(2012). Teaching adolescents to become learners: The role of noncognitive factors in shaping school performance. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Consortium on Chicago School Research.

25.

Fine

(1991). Framing dropouts: Notes on the politics of an urban public high school. Albany: State University of New York Press.

26.

Finn

J. D.

(1989). Withdrawing from school. Review of Educational Research, 59, 117-142.

27.

Fredricks

J. A.

Blumenfeld

P. C.

Paris

A. H.

(2004). School engagement: Potential of the concept, state of the evidence. Review of Educational Research, 74, 59-109.

28.

Gottfredson

Cross

A. B.

Wilson

Rorie

Connell

(2010). Effects of participation in after-school programs for middle school students: A randomized trial. Journal of Research on Educational Effectiveness, 3, 282-313.

29.

Gottfried

M. A.

(2010). Evaluating the relationship between student attendance and achievement in urban elementary and middle schools: An instrumental variables approach. American Educational Research Journal, 47, 434-465.

30.

Gottfried

M. A.

(2011a). The detrimental effects of missing school: Evidence from urban siblings. American Journal of Education, 117, 147-182.

31.

Gottfried

M. A.

(2011b). Absent peers in elementary years: The negative classroom effects of unexcused absences on standardized testing outcomes. Teachers College Record, 113, 1597-1632.

32.

Gottfried

M. A.

(2013). Quantifying the consequences of missing school: Linking school nurses to student absences to standardized achievement. Teachers College Record, 115, 1-30.

33.

Grubbs

(2013). Robotics intrigue middle school students and build STEM skills. Technology and Engineering Teacher, 72, 12-16.

34.

Hayes

(2006). A primer on multilevel modeling. Human Communication Research, 32, 385-410.

35.

Hidi

Harackiewicz

J. M.

(2000). Motivating the academically unmotivated: A critical issue for the 21st century. Review of Educational Research, 70, 151-179.

36.

Holzman

(2010). Yes we can: The Schott 50 state report on public education and black males. Cambridge, MA: Schott Foundation for Public Education.

37.

Hug

Krajcik

Marx

(2005). Using innovative learning technologies to promote learning and engagement in an urban science classroom. Urban Education, 40, 446-472.

38.

Jacob

B. A.

(2002). Where the boys aren’t: Noncognitive skills, returns to school and the gender gap in higher education. Economics of Education Review, 21, 589-598.

39.

Lan

Lanthier

(2003). Changes in students’ academic performance and perceptions of school and self before dropping out of schools. Journal of Education for Students Placed at Risk, 8, 309-332.

40.

Lauer

Akiba

Wilkerson

Apthorp

Snow

Martin-Glenn

(2006). Out-of-school-time programs: A meta-analysis of effects for at-risk students. Review of Educational Research, 76, 275-313.

41.

Lauver

S. C.

(2002). Assessing the benefits of an after-school program for urban youth: An impact and process evaluation. Dissertations available from ProQuest. (Paper AAI3043903). Retrieved from http://repository.upenn.edu/dissertations/AAI3043903

42.

Lawson

(2013). New conceptual frameworks for student engagement research, policy and practice. Review of Educational Research, 83, 432-479.

43.

Lewin

(2012, March 6). Black students face more discipline, data suggests. New York Times. Retrieved from http://www.nytimes.com/2012/03/06/education/black-students-face-more-harsh-discipline-data-shows.html?_r=0

44.

Lewis

Simon

Uzzell

Horwitz

Casserly

(2010). A call for change: The social and educational factors contributing to the outcomes of black males in urban schools. Washington, DC: Council of the Great City Schools.

45.

Mac Iver

. (2007). What reform left behind: A decade of change at one urban high school. Education and Urban Society, 40, 3-35.

46.

Mac Iver

. (2011). The challenge of improving urban high school graduation outcomes: Findings from a randomized study of dropout prevention efforts. Journal of Education for Students Placed at Risk, 16, 167-184.

47.

Mac Iver

Messel

. (2012). Predicting high school outcomes in the Baltimore City Schools. Washington, DC: Council of the Great City Schools.

48.

Mac Iver

Plank

S. B.

Durham

Farley-Ripple

Balfanz

. (2008). The challenge of on-time arrival: The seven-year flight paths of Baltimore’s sixth graders of 1999-2000 (Research Report). Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University.

49.

Marks

H. M.

(2000). Student engagement in instructional activity: Patterns in the elementary, middle, and high school years. American Educational Research Journal, 37, 153-184.

50.

Marvul

(2012). If you build it, they will come: A successful truancy intervention program in a small high school. Urban Education, 47, 144-169.

51.

Maryland State Department of Education. (2015). 2015 Maryland Report Card. Baltimore City Attendance Rate. Retrieved from http://reportcard.msde.maryland.gov/AttendanceRate.aspx?PV=183:M:30:AAAA:1:N:0:13:1:1:0:1:1:1:3

52.

Mauch

(2001). Using technological innovation to improve the problem solving skills of middle school students: Educators’ experiences with the LEGO Mindstorms robotic invention system. The Clearing House, 74, 211-213.

53.

McCombs

Augustine

Schwartz

Bodilly

McInnis

Lichter

Cross

A. B.

(2011). Making summer count. RAND Corporation. Retrieved from http://www.rand.org/pubs/monographs/MG1120.html

54.

Meece

(2003). Applying learner-centered principles to middle school education. Theory Into Practice, 42, 109-116.

55.

Milner

H. R.

IV Lomotey

K. H. R.

(2014). Introduction. In Milner

H. R.

Lomotey

(Eds.), Handbook of urban education (pp. xv-xxiv). New York, NY: Routledge.

56.

Neild

R. C.

Balfanz

(2006a). An extreme degree of difficulty: The educational demographics of urban neighborhood high schools. Journal of Education for Students Placed at Risk, 11, 131-141.

57.

Neild

R. C.

Balfanz

(2006b). Unfulfilled promise: The dimensions and characteristics of Philadelphia’s dropout crisis, 2000-2005. Philadelphia, PA: Philadelphia Youth Transitions Collaborative.

58.

Newmann

F. M.

King

M. B.

Carmichael

D. L.

(2007). Authentic instruction and assessment: Common standards for rigor and relevance in teaching academic subjects. Des Moines: Iowa Department of Education.

59.

Newmann

F. M.

Wehlage

C. G.

Lamborn

S. D.

(1992). The significance and sources of student engagement. In Newmann

F. M.

(Ed.), Student engagement and achievement in American secondary schools (pp. 11-39). New York, NY: Teachers College Press.

60.

Noguera

P. A.

(2014). Urban schools and the black male “challenge.” In Milner IV

H. R.

Lomotey

(Eds.), Handbook of urban education (pp. 114-128). New York, NY: Routledge.

61.

Renninger

(2000). Individual interest and its implications for understanding intrinsic motivation. In Sansone

Harackiewicz

J. M.

(Eds.), Intrinsic and extrinsic motivation: The search for optimal motivation and performance (pp. 373-404). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.

62.

Roderick

Camburn

(1999). Risk and recovery from course failure in the early years of high school. American Educational Research Journal, 36, 303-344.

63.

Rubin

D. B.

Thomas

(2000). Combining propensity score matching with additional adjustments for prognostic covariates. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 95, 573-585.

64.

Sheldon

S. B.

Epstein

J. L.

(2002). Improving student behavior and school discipline with family and community involvement. Education and Urban Society, 35, 4-26.

65.

Sinclair

M. F.

Christenson

S. L.

Thurlow

M. L.

(2005). Promoting school completion of urban secondary youth with emotional or behavioral disabilities. Exceptional Children, 71, 465-482.

66.

Skinner

Pitzer

(2012). Developmental dynamics of students’ engagement, coping, and everyday resilience. In Christenson

Reschly

Wylie

(Eds.), Handbook of research on student engagement (pp. 21-44). New York, NY: Springer.

67.

Stormshak

E. A.

Connell

Dishion

T. J.

(2009). An adaptive approach to family-centered intervention in schools: Linking intervention engagement to academic outcomes in middle and high school. Prevention Science, 10, 221-235.

68.

Wagstaff

Combs

Jarvis

(2000). Solving high school attendance problems: A case study. Journal of At-Risk Issues, 7, 21-30.

69.

Welch

Huffman

(2011). The effect of robotics competitions on high school students’ attitudes towards science. School Science and Mathematics, 111, 416-424.