GothamSchools — daily independent reporting on NYC public schools

Study says...

Graduation rates vary widely at schools serving similar students

CFE found that eighth-grade attendance was more closely associated with graduation rates than any other variable.

CFE found that eighth-grade attendance was more closely associated with graduation rates than any other variable.

City high schools that serve similar students graduate their students at wildly different rates, according to a report to be released today.

Among schools with the neediest students, one school graduated 90 percent of students in four years. Another graduated just 34 percent, the report found.

The report confirms that the city’s highest-performing schools overwhelmingly enroll students who already had high test scores and attendance rates. But it also shows that even among schools serving the highest-need students, some do a much better job graduating students than others.

The report was prepared by the Campaign for Fiscal Equity, the group that successfully fought for an extra $5.4 billion in 2004 for the city’s neediest schools.

The study looked at ninth graders who entered high school in 2004.  It separated high schools into peer groups based on the demographics and eighth-grade academic performances of that class.  (Read the full report here.)

Some of the report’s conclusions will not come as a surprise. Schools whose students had higher eighth-grade test scores had higher graduation rates, for example. And eighth grade attendance was the strongest predictor of a high school’s graduation rates, the report found.

Because high achievement and high attendance were strongly correlated with high graduation rates, selective schools and zoned schools in high-achieving districts performed much better than others. But even within school peer group, there were wide gaps in graduation rates.

The report reiterates concerns that impending higher graduation standards could have an outsized impact on city students. Just over 60 percent of the cohort that began school in 2004 graduated four years later. But only 42 percent earned a Regents diploma, the more rigorous of the state’s diploma levels that will soon become the standard for most students. And among schools serving the highest-needs students, the rate of students earning Regents diplomas ranged from zero to 83 percent.

City officials said that the report’s findings validate its move toward replacing large, struggling high schools with small ones. “This report confirms what a landmark study found in June—that, by creating hundreds of new, high quality options, our small school strategy is improving outcomes for our neediest students,” said DOE spokesman Matt Mittenthal, referring to an MDRC study that found that the city’s small, non-selective high schools boost needy students’ chances of graduating.

The report did find that among schools with the lowest-achieving incoming ninth-graders, schools with high graduation rates did tend to be smaller than schools with low rates. But many small schools posted low rates and many large schools posted high ones, prompting the study’s authors to tentatively conclude that other factors like instructional strategy are critical to a school’s success, whatever its size.

Figuring out exactly what those factors are will be the focus of CFE’s next report, said Helaine Doran, the group’s deputy director. By studying the schools with high-risk students that also posted high graduation rates, CFE hopes to identify best practices. ”How do you share these practices that clearly some are figuring out?” Doran said.

CFE argues that schools that serve large numbers of needy students should receive a greater share of the funding won in the 2004 Contracts for Excellence settlement. But determining how schools should spend that money is equally important, Doran said.

“The resources have to be spent right,” she said. “And as budgets are getting tighter, we have to disseminate best practices.”

  • Molly

    “But many small schools posted low rates and many large schools posted high ones, prompting the study’s authors to tentatively conclude that other factors like instructional strategy are critical to a school’s success, whatever its size.”

    Isn’t this what they are always trying to figure out. Doesn’t seem like such surprising results.

  • http://ednotesonline.blogspot.com/ norm

    Did they look into factors like credit recovery, push-outs into GED programs, pressure on teachers to pass kids so they graduate? Without examining these issues grad rates don’t mean much. My advice – take a close look at these issues and best practices will not be as important is indicated.

  • Chris

    if they use the race to the top funds to create a formula that rates the effectiveness of a teacher i sincerely hope that they use the students’ attendance in said formula…but i doubt it…just as i doubted that race to the top funding would actually go to the classroom

  • Peter

    The current, ongoing Measures of Efftctive Teaching study within the DOE may answer the questions raised by the CFE study … schools with similiar kids and widely varying results.

    We praise, offer bonuses, propose merit pay, and, conversely threaten/actually close schools, transfer principal and teachers, deny tenure, again, what is the difference within the schools? Principal/teacher experience, education, age, gender, race, length of periods, type of instruction, time for collaboration, teaching strategies, we speculate … we don’t know … to ignore the process and look look at the product is a fruitless exercise.

  • philip nobile

    Let’s not kid ourselves. Norm is right. There are no miracle turnarounds without cheating of one kind or another. Sure, some Principals are smarter than others and strict discipline can tweak grad rates by reducing classroom chaos that retards learning. In addition to looking at best practices, schools with unexpectedly high grad rates should be investigated for tampering.

  • I noticed that…

    I would like to concur with Norm and Phillip.

    Credit Recovery (CR) is only prevalent and rampant at the high school level especially at the small high schools. It has become the “dirty little secret” that principals have used to give away diplomas and pump up the graduation rate. The CR has become an unregulated method of cooking the books.

    If the DoE wants to base graduation rate on certain factors (attendance, peer group, etc), then a survey must be conducted in every high school to determine the correlation between the graduation rate and the various credit recovery programs utilized at the school vs graduation rate and the attendance rate of each graduating cohort. Of course, the outcome would not surprise anyone except it may bright to light the fact that the graduation rate is one of the most unreliable tool used to close many schools. It may also question the 34 NYC high schools on the SURR list. Here’s where the union should do it’s own study based on this correlation.

    As for the attendance rate, this is also very difficult to determine since the official attendance is only taken during one period. If the official attendance period is 4th period and a student only starts the school day at that period but skips period 1-3, then the student has a 100% attendance for school-purpose only, but the student is truant(cutting) in periods 1-3. Moreover, if a student comes in 2-3 periods in a school day, but misses the official attendance period, the attendance is reversed so as to show that the student was in school but not necessarily for the entire day. The attendance rate goes up, the school looks good, but at what cost. Who’s gaining and losing with respect to NCLB?

    So how do you really determine what the graduation rate truly hinges on if any other method used is questionable?

Tips, questions, feedback?

Contact us at .

Word from Our Sponsor

Follow GothamSchools

RSS
Subscribe to the daily email digest:

Chalk It Up

Recent Comments

6 comments so far today

Archives

May 2013
M T W T F S S
« Apr  
 12345
6789101112
13141516171819
20212223242526
2728293031