Study Shows that Nearly Half California Blacks and Hispanics do not graduate

Parents Forum
21

<p>What I have found shocking about the graduation rate (or non-grad rate) at our local high school is not the non-grad rate of minority students but the non-graduation of white, middle-class kids who grow up with parents who value education. I mean, these kids have NO reason not to graduate. All of them have been male. They do not put up the minimum (and I do mean minimum) effort it takes to graduate from our high school. What can a parent do with a kid who just doesn't care?</p>

<p>In each case, although the parents value education, they either never went to college or went but never graduated. The girls in these same families finish high school without a problem and some have gone on to college. Is it the desire to go to college what keeps them on the road to graduation?</p>

22

<p>Ellem, my understanding is that most high-paying jobs, including the predominately female occupations such as teaching and nursing, require a college degree or some form of training. Many women, who grew up in predominately female households, understand the burdens their mothers and relatives had to face, especially if they didn't have the skills or education or had many setbacks in life. Many women do not want to suffer this same legacy. Also, women tend to form networking groups that can keep them alive through high school and college through personal, academic and extracurricular activities. Most of these networks do not involve misbehavior, drugs, gangs or violence. </p>

<p>As one quote said, "Mothers raise their daughters, but love their sons." We must change how we parent our daughters and sons and that includes having the father be a part of that child's life.</p>

23

<p>One of the answers is definitely smaller high schools. My kids attended a Catholic high school of 380 students - but it's not your typical Catholic school. The school population has many non-Catholic students and nearly 40% are African American or Hispanic. It's located in an upper middle class suburb but kids attend from the central city, from rural areas, the suburbs and changing city areas. Nearly one third come from single parent families. The tution is $6,700 a year but only 35% pay the full tuition. The cost of education is nearly $2000 per student less than the suburban public school and the facilties are adequate but aging and definitely in need of updating. The teachers are paid at 75% of the public school but value the conditions under which they teach - small class sizes (most between 18 and 20) their freedom to affect change in the school, develop curriculum, exercise discipline and expect very high standards. </p>

<p>The results are impressive. The graduation rate of ALL students is 95% and 93% go on to four year colleges after graduation. There is virtually no difference between the races in this statistic. A large proportion of the minority students are first generation to go to college and many the first to graduate high school. The ACT/SAT scores of minority students are far above the national average. Last year's graduating class of 92 students received $3.5 million in academic and talent scholarships. The school has been tracking college graduation over the past ten years and 85% gratuate from college within six years of matriculation.</p>

<p>I believe the difference is the personal attention each child gets. Not all kids have supportive parents. Sometimes the students were referred to the school through 8th grade teachers or counselors and the school finds them the financial aid to attend. There is incredible individualized support for kids coming in below reading and math levels, including a summer school program between 8th and 9th grade. Absences are not tolerated, parents,or guardians contacted the minute a student doesn't show up for a class. Almost 100% of the students are in EC's. EC's have high expectations too - the basketball team just won its second staright state championship, the fall musical was chosen as the showcase for the state theater festival, the literary magazine won national recognition for 12 years in a row, etc. Kids will rise to the levels of expectation set for them - especially when there are so many hands helping them along the way and the are known by name by virtually every adult in the school.</p>

<p>That's why it's so sad that the school struggles financially. They have to raise over $1.2 million a year just to keep the doors open much less make capital improvements. Luckily, many in the community recognize the need for schools like this and there has been a lot of support. But the future is never certain and another plunge in the market like after 9/11 could be the last straw.</p>

24

<p>Ellen F--the students we're talking about never make it to U of MI . . . (we are talking about the kids that don't make it through high school, right?)</p>

25

<p>Baymom, unfortunately Catholic schools across the country, especially in the Midwest, are shutting their doors in June. In Chicago, the Archdiocese had to close 23 schools. In Detroit, 18 schools will be shut down and most are in the inner-city and inner suburbs. These schools today educate 100-200 kids per school but that is considered low enrollment. The parents and students were very angry when they heard this news. Some Catholic schools had rich legacies in the communities for decades and high graduation rates/college enrollment. Many do not want to attend the local high schools with much higher (and overcrowding) enrollment. This is a sad day.</p>

26

<p>Tenisghs - you are so right! This is a sad day. Catholic schools have had a tradition of successfully educating immigrants since the 1800s and many will cease to exist soon. We need to get more enlightened about vouchers - students and their parents should have the right to choose. The "Freedom from religion" crowd has gone way overboard much to the detriment of educational choices. Remember - it's freedom OF religion. I'm no zealot but we should invest in what's working.</p>

27

<p>Small schools could help, having teams of teachers working with the same students for several years to create continuity and familiarity might help, some residential public schools might help others. We need to try a variety of programs to reach these kids and families. Having health insurance, affordable child care and a livable minimum wage might help keep some of these kids attending school. </p>

<p>Perhaps in some schools the answer is in converting classroom hours into home visit and family meeting time. </p>

<p>Things that won't help..forcing teachers through additional qualification hurdles without dramatically increasing their freedom to teach and a chance to own homes in their communities. I don't think it helps to blame it on bad parenting or anything else without developing a plan to fix the problem.</p>

<p>Crazy thoughts - prohibit cable tv to households with failing students - tax incentives or hourly wage reimbursements to parents, of reduced price or free meal eligible students, who attend school meetings.
Respite housing or dorm facilities for students who need to get some stability into their lives. (I had one student who was great and then disruptive depending on if she was living with grandma or with mom )when she was on parole). A dorm might have kept her out of a gang.</p>

<p>The cost of not educating these children or dealing with their problems will be paid eventually. The person who robs a store or steals from your house or car jacks you....is probably a drop out.</p>

28

<p>momof2inca:
You sound like not just an excellent, but an outstanding, teacher -- the kind I used to teach with. In theory, you should be correct (re: size). However, it would not explain the impressive graduation rates & college placements of the public high schools with 1,440 populations in well-heeled communities. They have "fed" from both superlative elem. educations & from home environments with education as the priority -- & (most importantly, i.m.o.) educated parents, who serve as additional teachers, consultants, tutors, planners, etc.</p>

29

<p>I have great respect for the Rand group because there work is always well researched. </p>

<p>But, sometimes asking the wrong question gives one the wrong answer....yes, on a state-level basis, Calif taxes are only middle of the pack (25th). But, if we are gonna address funding, we need to look at TOTAL taxes, and understand that Californians are the 14 highest taxed residents in the nation. The difference is that Calif is a donor state, so much of its tax base is given to the feds to distribute to receiver states (i.e., poorer states). Moreover, Calif ranks 45th in receiving federal funds back from the feds. In 1992, Calif recieved $0.92 back from the feds for every dollar sent to DC. In 2002-03, that return rate dropped to $0.76. </p>

<p>Therefore, it is difficult for Calif residents to support its own teachers properly in our high cost state as long as we continue to support services (and teachers!) in other states by the federal tax shift. </p>

<p>Other tax items: Prop 13 capped property taxes, but that only puts Calif property taxes in the middle of other states (so blaming Prop 13 is a canard). However, Calif has the one of the highest sales tax rates in the nation, has the highest corp income tax in the west, its tax on small business is one of the highest in the nation. Overall, it ranks ~40th as a place to do business, when taxes are taken into account.</p>

<p><a href="http://www.taxfoundation.org/statelocal03.html%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://www.taxfoundation.org/statelocal03.html&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p>

30

<p>OK...another politically incorrect analysis. </p>

<p>While all the items cited may be small parts of the problem. Tenisghs touched on what I feel to be the central piece of the puzzle. </p>

<p>That is fathers. Until fathers begin to take their place in the family by instilling a sense of responsibility and ethics into their sons, our social ills will continue to grow. For more than 50 years we have been focusing on everyone except fathers and men. Now we have huge populations of fatherless boys growing up and producing more fatherless boys with no sense of purpose in life other than to follow their baser instincts to fight and reproduce. </p>

<p>Our society as a whole needs to begin to value fathers and their role in the family and in society as a whole. We need to have a carrot/stick aproach to fatherhood. The father role is both a responsibility and a benefit. What is better as a father than seeing your son to grow up as a valued member of society. It is the father's job more than anyone else's to see that these boys graduate and become responsible men.</p>

31

<p>Epiphany wrote: </p>

<p>"In theory, you should be correct (re: size). However, it would not explain the impressive graduation rates & college placements of the public high schools with 1,440 populations in well-heeled communities. They have "fed" from both superlative elem. educations & from home environments with education as the priority -- & (most importantly, i.m.o.) educated parents, who serve as additional teachers, consultants, tutors, planners, etc."</p>

<p>Yes, the well-heeled communities do have impressive graduation rates even with large high schools. Why? Just as you stated. Because parents in these communities generally understand what is at stake if their kids do not graduate h.s. and attend college. These parents (and we all recognize ourselves here) mitigate the antiquated learning conditions at the large public high schools with everything that money can buy.</p>

<p>But this is not reality for a majority of parents in our state and the nation. </p>

<p>A little history on large schools: (I've got the day off today :) )</p>

<p>Large high schools with teacher subject "specialists" (i.e. math teacher, English teacher, science teacher) were created around the early part of last century as a way to efficiently and cost-effectively deliver standardized instruction. Before the 1900s, schools across the country were mostly small and varied wildly in their acacemic expectations and resources. As the US became more industrialized, so did the schools. Layer after layer of management was added to the typical high school district. Those on the front lines (teachers and principals) were given less control over basic decisions such as books, supplies, how many kids should be in a class, how big a school should become, how many minutes should be spent on a subject, how a lesson should be taught, etc... Just like in a factory. The emphasis was on efficiency and quality of product. About 20 percent of the kids were tracked and trained for a life of management and thinking jobs (after college). The remaining 80%, if they graduated (in 1920s the dropout rate was around 75% and in the 1950s in was around 50%), were well-prepared for the non-thinking jobs in factories, etc... these kids had learned to respond to bells, shift between tasks, follow orders of 5-6 different "bosses/teachers" each day, and not question authority or try to think independently.</p>

<p>That model actually worked really well preparing kids for life in the industrial age. And, because families were generally intact in those years, with a mom at home and dad in a stable, steady job for life, the kids in these big schools did okay. Teachers still had some authority and respect out of the classroom and, really, the academic expectations weren't all that high for those 80% of kids so there wasn't the homework battles, the pressure on testing and performance, etc...</p>

<p>The problem is we aren't in the industrial age anymore, but our schools are still operating as if we are. We don't have a majority of intact families with one parent at home, but our schools are still structured as if this is the case (heavy teaching and counselor loads). We should be preparing 100 percent of our kids to find a lifetime of work (notice I didn't say a job, since they will need to be able to find many, many jobs in the future) as "independent thinking multi-taskers," but our schools are not set up to do that yet (i.e. my largest class this year is 36 kids... in 45 minutes a day how much independent thinking and multi-tasking can I get in?) </p>

<p>The factory jobs are mostly gone... many of the service jobs that you and I grew up with are disappearing overseas. Today's workers need to be able to think for themselves and solve problems in creative new ways in order to tap into the economic opportunities that the information age and rapid technology advances are offering. They need to be able to work well in teams/groups (aka The Apprentice), adjust their work effort to crunch random deadlines and then be able to coast a bit in order to mentally and physically recover while not totally falling off track. They need to be independent contractors and be able to analyze and compete on so many different levels (aka Survivor). </p>

<p>Few public schools are set up to do this (my son and daughter's small new high school is an exception, thank goodness). And I think the kids are subconciously seething. They are being prepared for jobs and a life that no longer exists and at some level, starting with middle school, they understand this. Those that are supported by strong parents and grandparents with high expectations find a way to slog through the disconnected days, score well on their exams, finish their homework and bide their time till 3:00 when the real day of sports and ECs begins. Those without the support just slip away to a myriad of alternatives (drugs, promiscuity, consumerism, low-end minimum-wage jobs, homelessness, jail, etc...). </p>

<p>Small, flexible learning communities (400-600 students) where every student is KNOWN and cared about from K-12 combined with progressive teaching methods (interdisciplinary classes, looping, extended time with kids) and empowered teachers and principals would help these kids plug back in and find meaning in school.</p>

32

<p>bluebayouYour point about Ca tax dollars being sucked out of the state to pay for highways in Alabama and Georgia is right on the money. We should be getting more of that back in aid.</p>

<p>On the other hand, Prop 13 is a disaster and hopefully somebody will realize it is a barrier to interstate commerce because it protects the old money Californians while putting the burden on people moving in and buying today. It coincides with the decline of California's education programs, but it isn't just a coincidence.</p>

<p>Jvd - Parenting is a problem - a lot of dads are missing or ineffective - values are not in line with an education - If you go to most of my student's homes any time of the day or night I would bet you that at least one and probably two televisions will be on and loud. Ask my students who has a book shelf with ten or more books in it in their bedroom, vs. who has a tv hooked up to cable (legally or otherwise) Tv hook ups win out 5 to 1 or greater.</p>

<p>Ask my students if they ever got a book for a present and they think you are out of your mind. "What kinda present is that?" I get the same look when I tell them that I never relied on spankings or beatings to raise my kids. They don't understand there is another way. And if you talk about it you run the risk of having an administrator tell you to keep to the standards.</p>

<p>There are some basic societal changes that need to occur including educating some students to become more effective parents and for at least one generation to operate succesfully without full adult relative support (some parents are lost for ever to prison, drugs...)</p>

<p>Money for counselors, social workers, librarians, school nurses, health care and a host of other things is needed. Funding is a major problem.... but some sleep better pretending it is more important that they have their second skiing vacation than it is that a kid have a school nurse. </p>

<p>Before I left my corner office, valet parking, perks to become a teacher, I thought the problem was with teachers. After a dozen years, I can tell you that schools are underfunded, administration wastes money and creates bureaucratic nightmares, and that we need to let teachers teach, provide health care and social assistance to families until we get a generation on track. </p>

<p>We cannot have a successful democracy without a great public school system.</p>

33

<p>1,500 students high schools are not that large. Some time ago, I heard of a k-8 school in my state that had 7,000 students. There were 21 7th grade teachers trying to coordinate with one another AND with 21 6th and 21 8th grade teachers. Our k-8 school had 350 students (with 3 combined 7/8 grade teachers), our hs has 1800. Although I would have been happy to have the high school split into two schools of 900-1000, the current size does not seem excessive to me.
Besides sheer school size, we need to consider class size, class make- up, and general student demographics. It's very different teaching 22 students from teaching 32 or 42. It's very different teaching 22 students who all read on more or less the same level from teaching 22 students who read anywhere from 3rd grade to college level. It's very different teaching students who all have had a good breakfast from teaching students who are homeless (apparently there are some in our high school). Suburban school districts mostly do not have to deal with issues stemming from SES disparities and limited English. And perhaps, their class sizes are not excessively large.</p>

34

<p>The father problem is huge. I taught/was guidance counselor in an inner city Catholic high school (almost no Catholic kids - 95% African American) for nine years. Probably 25% of the kids had fathers at home. In addition, many had no mothers active in their lives - they were living with and being raised by grandma (who also often had no husband). I would make rounds in the morning to go pick up kids who didn't show up for school. I would find the kids watching younger siblings because mom didn't come home last night or was passed out and in no shape to care for the kids. Or I'd find them still in bed because they were up half the night because of a gunfight in the neighborhood. We had kids over at our house constantly for good meals because they never got them at home. The school was really considering adding a dorm but we couldn't get the money together to do it. It would have been the best thing for a lot of the kids.</p>

35

<p>Mr B</p>

<p>On many levels I do agree with you. I am an ex teacher who left the system and while I agree that the public school system is underfunded and that in general, teachers are not the problem I am very cynical about the possibility of fixing it.</p>

<p>We need major societal changes in order to fix it. Giving more money to the schools will not in itself fix anything. The schools in general do not know how to spend the money. Each school and each school district is made up of groups of competing fiefdoms scratching for their piece of the pie. Ask any school official how much more money do you need? They really don't know how much money is needed...all they know is that they always need more. Of course they always need more, don't we all?</p>

<p>We need to teach people, (not just students), that they need to be responsible for themselves regardless of how much money they have. Sometimes that means that we will never get the breaks the rich kids get, but we can still live a productive, fulfilling life. We need to show that the rewards of life consist of loving, fulfilling, responsible relationships, not cars, houses, and jets. We need to give dignity to a working class life, and dignity does not come from handouts, it comes from a life lived responsibly. </p>

<p>We have for so long valued education as a way to get ahead in life, as a way to get more money in life that we have devalued the life of the working class people who live honestly and work hard. Those are the people we should look up to...not the Donald Trumps of this world. </p>

<p>We need to value education and we know that it is ever more important as we move to a more technical society, but we need to teach real values as part of the system. It needs to be built in to the curriculum at all levels. These would be the basic values of integrity, and responsibilty that are needed to hold a society together. </p>

<p>If we do not have a basic sense of shared values, and if we can't agree that the schools need to make those a major part of the curriculum, perhaps we don't have a society worth saving. If we continue to give a bye to absent fathers and say that the schools need to make up for fatherless families, we have given up. It is time for us to put the responsibility where it lies...mostly on fathers more than anyone else. Everyone else is left holding the bag while playboy fathers mess up other children's lives. Lets speak the truth and stop it.</p>

36

<p>momof2,
I think you're addressing 2 diff. issues here, because even the small (even tiny) <em>private</em> high school may not be the model for the entrepreneurial & flexible & collaborative employment era you allude to. I wish the CA school administrators & teachers together were interested in tackling both size & style, but it seems that the public who does not want the current system is merely voting with their feet -- into homeschooling models of learning & private schooling.</p>

<p>And while this thread is focused on quality of ed. & grad. rates, it's interesting to wonder about what the effect on college admissions would be if more public schools would be more successful. My point being, of course, no, educational failure does not profit a society in whole or in part. Merely that it sheds perspective on the level of difficulty in admissions, with a portion of the high school population already effectively left <em>out</em> of the loop of viable college candidates, as it is.</p>

<p>It's interesting that in countries where the proficiency of h.s. graduates is worlds apart from the US (much better!), that those countries do NOT have significant problems with competition for college spots, overall, given that there is not the expectation/assumption that all graduates are meant for or interested in higher education -- often opting for technical training, etc. vs. upper academia.</p>

37

<p>
[quote]
Isn't it ironic that a University of Michigan researcher wrote that schools with a population of 600-900 learned best? Do students suddenly change their learning habits when they attend the 25,000 +/- U of MI? Of course not.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>There is nothing ironic about that at all. It is pretty spurious to extrapolate findings about k-12 education to higher education. Higher ed is not compulsory, the students are older, the teaching methods and aims are different, and the student populations are entirely different.</p>

<p>You cannot assume that her findings also suggest that college students learn the most at colleges with 600-900 students.</p>

38

<p>Epiphany,
I think that the parents are voting with their feet (into homeschooling and private schools) because they have not been offered viable, exciting alternatives from the public high/middle school system. When alternatives ARE created, they stampede right back. </p>

<p>My kids' high school was created 5 years ago as a small (<900 kids), technology/medical magnet with block scheduling and a partnership with the community college across the street. The very first people to respond and sign up their kids were the homeschooling and private school parents. They came in droves. The small, cutting-edge environment, where their children would be known well by staff, was exactly what they had wanted as an alternative to the two 2,000-plus student traditional high schools. Now, there is a waiting list each year of more than 200 would-be freshmen (students are chosen by lottery) for this school. For the past two years, the school has achieved a 10/10 Academic Performance Index (API) in the state, the highest possible score. It is ranked the number one academically performing high school in our county, even though there are areas of the county with much higher socio-economics. </p>

<p>The irony is this: it is very difficult to convince the parents of those kids who would benefit most from this school (families in poverty, single-parent families, etc...) to fill out the form that would get their kid in the lottery. They can't be bothered and don't see the value of "choosing" a school, as if one school would be any different or better than the next. They just don't have a consumer mentality when it comes to their kids' schooling. </p>

<p>But if we could take our two big high schools and break them up into 8 small learning communities, and basically force a choice, the kids of apathetic parents would benefit greatly.</p>

39

<p>Okay, I'm going to add a slightly controversial thought to this all. In addition to all the factors mentioned here (peer group, poverty, instability, school size, social problems), maybe the curriculum is not relevent enough! And (dare I say it?), maybe not every kid is interested/motivated/capable of handling the current curriculum! And maybe the expected level of performance is too high!! (I'm questioning this for all kids, not any one racial/ethnic group)
Here in Texas, I have smart, wonderful kinder kids with parent in jail, on probation, working 3 jobs, single parenting, in poverty, highly mobile etc. The kids come to me inexperienced with language and text - as in, never having been read to or owned a book or been to a library. I am supposed to follow district approved lesson plans that are practically scripted (breath in, turn the page, breath out, read page 2, breath in, etc.) I work very, very hard and so do the kids, in a very non-child-develpmentally appropriate way. No naps, only 20 minutes of recess. Why? Because they are supposed to be reading at a DRA level 3 before they leave kindergarten. We test two times a year, two different tests each time. I am so proud of my wonderful smart kids - but when will it end? My kinder curriculum is definitely first-grade work. Each year they raise the state standards, make the test harder, make the score to pass higher. The president loudly proclaims, "We're raising the bar, and leaving no child left behind." At what point is the bar too high?? Is there not some limit to how high and fast you can push kids? Have we not already reached that? I strongly believe that if we would slow down the testing and spend more time growing a community in the classroom, allowing learning to flower at a relaxed pace, the children would learn more thoroughly and the learning would be more self-directed and relevent...hence more engagement, ownership and ultimately better results. Okay, I've ranted for so long now I no longer remember what I started out with...</p>

40

<p>I am not surprised when Catholic and other schools have high success rates, they often have two advantages, one, someone had to care enough to do something for the kid without the threat of a court order, and two, kids that don't work out can be kicked out with ease and because the kids and parents know that they tend to pay closer attention to the rules. </p>

<p>I don't think that throwing money is an answer but that doesn't mean we don't need to spend more money on the answer. I would start with a counselor for every 100 kids that can shepard them through elementary and middle school so they are prepared for high school. Many of the drop outs are in serious need of a long term relationship with a responsible adult beside the vice-principal in charge of discipline.</p>