Local schools are doing a much better job of keeping teens in school than the state average, according to data released by the California Department of Education last week.

In 2006-07 school year, 67.6% of public school students in California graduated, but nearly a quarter (24.2%) dropped out, with the remaining 8.2% who completed or withdrew from school, such as students who transferred to a private school, left the state, or earned a General Education Degree (GED).

Exeter (0.6%), Lindsay (20.2%), Farmersville (13.4%), Woodlake (11.7%) and Strathmore (7.8%) high schools were all well below the state average for dropouts.

Most of the students who were reported as drop outs were categorized as socioeconomically disadvantaged.

The numbers used in the report were up from those reported by school districts because it was the first report compiled using student-level data. However, school districts can continue to review the dropout and graduation data over the next month and make corrections. Updated data will be posted by CDE in September.

State Superintendent of Public Instruction Jack OíConnell said the Statewide Student Identifier (SSID) provides each student a unique identification number and allows for much more accurate information about how many students are or are not completing their education.

ìFor too long, we had to rely on complicated formulas to make educated guesses about how many students were graduating and how many were leaving school without a diploma,î OíConnell said. ìArguments over differing approaches to this calculation often resulted in confusing and distracting conversations. Now, using student-level data, we can improve the accuracy of our count of how many students drop out, increase accountability, and focus on preventing dropouts.

ìTwenty-four percent of students dropping out is not good news. In fact, any student dropping out of school is one too many, and the data reveal a disturbingly high dropout rate for Latinos and African Americans. But, the dropout rate itself is only part of the story. Now, using the new student-level data we will have a much clearer picture of why students drop out. This is data-rich information that will be a powerful tool to better target resources, assistance, and interventions to keep students in school and on track.î

Senate Bill 1453, authored by former state Senator Dede Alpert, was signed into law in September 2002 to require the assignment of SSIDs. Local educational agencies have assigned all California kindergarten through grade twelve public school students a SSID that is unique, yet non-personally identifiable. The dropout data for the 2006-07 school year were calculated by the California Department of Educationís (CDE) Data Management Division using information generated by the SSIDs.

It is important to note that it would be a mistake to simply compare this yearís dropout numbers to last yearís rate, which was 13 percent, because the numbers are based on different information. Before SSIDs, dropout rates were derived using only aggregate data of enrollment and dropouts collected annually through the California Basic Educational Data System (CBEDS).

Now, individual student-level data allow districts and the state to collect and report what becomes of students who leave school. Each student withdrawing from a school is assigned one of 28 ìwithdrawal codes,î indicating, for example, whether that student graduated, dropped out, withdrew, left the state or country, or completed their education in other ways.

In the past, if a parent told a school that a student was transferring to a different school, the school would mark that student as having transferred to another public school. With SSIDs, the state can determine whether students marked as transfers indeed did enroll in another California public school. If the student does not show up at another California public school, thereís reason for schools to try and find out what happened to the student.

ìThis will help ensure students in our education system donít fall through the cracks,î OíConnell said.

SSIDs also make possible more accurate reporting about how many students neither graduated nor dropped out. Some of these students are referred as ìcompletersî because they received a certificate of attendance or other credential in lieu of a diploma. Examples would be students who passed the GED exam or special education students who receive certificates of completion.

Dropout rate calculations are not posted for schools that are operated by county offices of education because of constraints in interpreting these calculations with high-mobility schools. Caution also must be used when calculating or analyzing dropout rates for other schools with high mobility including alternative schools or schools eligible or participating in the Alternative Schools Accountability Model (ASAM). These schools with high-student mobility are designed for students who are already at risk of not graduating because they are deficient in credit or have poor attendance, and should not be compared to regular comprehensive high schools. By design, alternative schools may serve many students over the course of a school year. In many cases, alternative schools serve only those students who are already at the greatest risk of dropping out of school because of their prior academic challenges. Students may stay in these schools for short periods of time with the intent of returning to their local comprehensive high schools.

The dropout rate calculations posted on the CDE Web site compare the counts of dropouts over the entire school year with a single day enrollment count on the CBEDS Information Day (first Wednesday of October). Calculating dropout rates for schools with a high volume of short-term students may result in overstated rates in excess of 100% because the point-in-time enrollment count will significantly understate the actual enrollment over time.

ìI want to commend the teachers and administrators at alternative schools for all their hard work in helping at-risk students continue their education,î said OíConnell. ìBecause of the way dropout data is reported ñ using as a baseline a schoolís enrollment on one day in the fall ñ schools with large numbers of students transferring in and out each year are likely to have misleadingly high dropout rates even if they are doing a good job serving their student population.îÝÝ

SSIDs will eventually be tracked through the California Longitudinal Pupil Achievement Data System, or CALPADS, which will maintain longitudinal, individual student-level data including student demographics, program participation, grade level, enrollment, course enrollment and completion, discipline, state assessment, teacher assignment, and other data required to meet state and federal reporting requirements. CALPADS is scheduled to be fully implemented with all districts in the 2009-10 school year.

Until student-identifier data are collected over four years, CDE will still be reporting an estimated four-year graduation rate and a derived four-year dropout rate.

ìThe more accurate the information we receive, the more accurate our statewide reporting of graduation and dropout rates will be,î OíConnell said. ìThis requires hard work at the local school and district level to ensure that student-level data is accurately entered. I continue to urge the Governor and the Legislature to approve funding for our local educational agencies on how to report Statewide Student Identifiers accurately. This training is critical to preserve the integrity of the information that will be the foundation of our education data system.î

To download state, county, district, and school-level dropout data, go to CDEís DataQuest website at http://dq.cde.ca.gov/dataquest.

Print this story

Email this story

Return to Index