School Dropouts: New Data May Provide Elusive Clues

Outwardly, Kennedy and Monroe high schools seem much alike. Both are in the Los Angeles Unified School District, in the San Fernando Valley, and have roughly the same size enrollments and ethnic mix of students.

But, as the two schools prepare to begin classes Tuesday, one glaring difference stands out: 43% of Monroe’s students became dropouts between 1985 and 1988, more than twice as many as at Kennedy, where 16% left.

The disparity between Kennedy and Monroe underscores one of the most debated and intractable problems in public education. The reasons why some schools succeed, where others fail, in helping most students finish high school still tend to elude educators, with experts reporting particularly dismal progress in large urban systems such as New York, Los Angeles and Chicago, where dropout rates range between 40% and 50%.

In an attempt to focus attention on the problem, the California Department of Education for the first time has issued three-year dropout rates, broken down by racial and ethnic group for every public high school in the state. Compared to one-year figures, which show how many students drop out in the course of one year, the three-year rate is more comprehensive, showing what proportion of a class dropped out between the 10th grade and graduation three years later.

State education officials hope these new figures will spur more intensive self-analysis in local districts, providing them with the information to pinpoint the schools and the types of students most in need of dropout-prevention strate gies. Educators say smaller classes, more counselors, on-campus child care, greater parent involvement and more bilingual education are among the solutions.

Although Los Angeles district officials say their dropout problem is complicated by large numbers of poor, limited-English-speaking students, some critics contend that district policies and practices contribute to the high rate, which averages 39.2% districtwide. This year, for instance, the district expects to bus more than 20,000 students to other district schools because of overcrowding at their home school. High dropout rates at some schools that receive such students have raised suspicions among educators and community activists that busing causes hardships that encourage students to leave school.

“It’s hard enough for some kids to go across the street to school, but going across town, there are no advantages,” said Sal Castro, a dropout prevention counselor at Belmont High School, near downtown Los Angeles, which buses its overflow of students to schools in the San Fernando Valley. “I’m not saying our dropout statistic is any better. We’re losing them, too. But it’s a little easier to lose them over there.”

South-Central Schools

The new three-year figures confirm what many had believed, based on the earlier, less comprehensive data: The dropout problem is most severe in South-Central Los Angeles high schools.

But some schools in the Valley, in East Los Angeles and on the Westside show staggering losses as well. At 19 of the district’s 49 regular high schools, including Fairfax and Grant in Van Nuys, more than 40% of the Class of 1988 dropped out. Westchester High near Playa del Rey had the lowest dropout rate, 11%, while Locke High in South-Central Los Angeles had the highest, 79%.

Districtwide, American Indian students drop out at the steepest rate--57.3%--followed by blacks at 46%, Filipinos at 43.7%, Latinos at 40.1%, Anglos at 33.8% and Asians at 26.6%. Latinos, who make up nearly 60% of the district’s nearly 600,000 students, dropped out in the largest numbers. According to the state report, 10,579 Latinos in the Los Angeles district who should have graduated with the Class of 1988 never did because they dropped out. Blacks, with 5,778 dropouts, were the second-largest group.

For many students, school cannot compete with the lure of the streets. Said Larry, 15, who dropped out of Belmont last year but has since returned: “I felt I didn’t need school. None of my friends went to school. Some of them were selling drugs, making $1,000 a week. They don’t feel like they need school.”

‘Wanted to Have Fun’

August, 16, ditched school at Belmont so often that he nearly became a dropout. Last year, he said, he missed 64 days of school, more than a third of the school year. “I was interested (in school) but my friends wanted to have fun,” going to movies and “seeing girls,” he said. He felt his teachers didn’t care about him. “They’d make fun of you (and say) ‘Oh, look, August came to school.’ That doesn’t help.”

August said he decided to stay in school because his father was angry and he was getting bored.

Pete Martinez, who coordinates the district’s $3.6-million dropout-prevention program, said he could not think of one district high school that has appreciably reduced its dropout rate. But he said small inroads are being made, by individual teachers and counselors working with individual students.

At Kennedy High, former Principal James Ball said the key to Kennedy’s lower dropout rate is “the way teachers treat children. It’s the environment (of the school) and the emotional attitude of teachers.”

Kennedy, for instance, runs an alternative “school-within-a-school” that emphasizes smaller classes and flexible scheduling, which makes it easier for students who have to work to hold down a job while keeping up in school. Four teachers teach most of the classes, which include all courses required for graduation. “Students get a real sense of family within our program,” said teacher Ed Kohn.

At Monroe, Principal Joan Elam said reducing the dropout rate is one of this year’s top goals. Teachers and administrators acknowledge that one of the changes needed in the school is improving the quality of “one-to-one” contacts between students and staff.

“We’re trying to create an environment and opportunities so that kids will want to be here,” said Monroe math teacher Jennifer Marple. Starting this fall, for instance, each staff member will be asked to “adopt” four or five students for special attention.

Monday Mornings Set Aside

Homeroom teachers also will reserve Monday mornings from 8 to 8:45 to meet with students who need to make up class assignments. Students who do not need the help will not have to come to school until 8:45, she said.

The school is going to try to increase one-on-one relationships “in every direction we can,” Elam said.

But some differences between Monroe and Kennedy may be harder to erase.

Monroe, for instance, draws more students from low-income families; in the 1987-88 school year, 9.9% of its students came from families that received welfare, compared to 3.9% at Kennedy, according to district records. Experts say that students who need to work and have other problems associated with poverty tend to drop out at a higher rate than more affluent students.

In addition, Monroe serves a less stable population. Only 64.6% of Monroe’s students attended school regularly over the course of the 1987-88 school year, compared to 77% at Kennedy. Monroe also has more transient students--those who tend to leave and re-enter school for short periods--which suggest that many come from families who have to move frequently for economic or other reasons. Out of the 49 regular high schools, Monroe ranks 43rd in transiency, compared to Kennedy, which is 13th.

“That is a very critical factor,” Monroe’s Elam said. “If a class has a third or a quarter of its students coming and going throughout the year, it makes it more difficult for a teacher to . . . bring those students up to par without being redundant for the others. It creates a need for more individualized instruction,” difficult when the typical high school class has at least 35 students.

In the last few years, Monroe also received more students from overcrowded schools than did Kennedy. In 1987-88, for example, 165 students, mainly from the South Gate area, were bused to Monroe, which is in Sepulveda, a 45-minute bus ride away. In the same year, Kennedy, in Granada Hills, had only 10 such students, whom the district refers to as “CAP”--Capacity Adjustment Program--students.

Asked if such long bus rides discourage many students from attending school, South Gate High School Principal Raul Moreno said: “That is an accurate statement.” But he said he had no statistics to document the problem.

Bused Students

Administrators say the district so far has not conducted a study to determine if busing because of overcrowding may help push marginal students to become dropouts. Neither Elam nor Ball said they have seen evidence of bused students dropping out in significant numbers.

Board of Education member Leticia Quezada, who represents some of the most crowded schools in the district, said she intends to ask for a study. “I am convinced it (busing for overcrowding) is having a detrimental effect” on achievement as a whole, she said, citing other district studies that show CAP students with lower test scores than students who are allowed to remain in the neighborhood schools.

Students who travel long distances to attend district schools outside their own neighborhoods often encounter hardships that can discourage them from finishing school, some educators and parent activists say. Most of the students who are bused to schools away from home are Latino, black and Asian. Many have reported feeling lost at the schools to which they were bused and enduring racial taunting.

“Most of the kids were white. There were few Latino students. I just felt like I didn’t belong,” said Ivette Rodriguez, 17, a gifted student who voluntarily rode a bus from the Belmont area to Taft High in Woodland Hills for two years. She said she never considered dropping out, but she transferred to Belmont.

Others say the logistics of getting to school simply wore them down.

‘It Was Tough’

“I had problems getting to school,” said Ivette’s sister, Frances, 19, who also attended Taft. “It was tough. You had to get up super early and you’d get home super late. If you missed the bus, the bus would just leave you there.” She said she missed a day of school every few weeks and that she soon fell behind in class work.

Although she transferred back to Belmont in the middle of her senior year, she dropped out soon afterward because she was so far behind in credits that she would have had to repeat the 11th grade. “I was mad,” Rodriguez said, “but my counselor said he couldn’t do anything about it.” But now, she says, after marriage and a baby, she’s ready to try school again.

DROPOUT RATES BY ETHNIC GROUP

Here are the three-year dropout rates by ethnic group for the 49 regular high schools in the Los Angeles Unified School District. The dropout rate shows what proportion of the Class of 1988 dropped out between the 10th and 12th grades. The California State Department of Education calculates the figures based on information supplied by the district. The figures for Asians include Filipinos and Pacific Islanders, and American Indian figures include Alaskan Natives. The state counts 10th grade enrollment. Because some students enroll later and subsequently dropout, some dropout figures are larger than enrollment figures.

KEY: A Enrollment B Students who dropped out C Dropout rate (%)

AMERICAN HIGHSCHOOL KEY INDIANS ASIANS LATINOS BLACKS ANGLOS TOTAL Banning A 10 112 881 462 133 1598 B 0 26 242 98 51 417 C% .0 23.2 27.5 21.2 38.3 26.1 Bell A 1 29 804 10 76 920 B 0 5 225 2 27 259 C% .0 17.2 28 20 35.5 28.2 Belmont A 0 268 972 22 21 1283 B 1 106 439 14 15 575 C% .0 39.5 45.2 63.6 71.4 44.8 Birmingham A 2 40 163 94 544 843 B 2 11 70 42 103 229 C% 100 27.5 42.9 44.7 18.9 27.2 Canoga Park A 1 63 164 61 336 625 B 0 13 59 16 93 181 C% .0 20.6 36 26.2 27.7 29 Carson A 10 284 353 291 176 1114 B 2 52 84 73 47 258 C% 20 18.3 23.8 25.1 26.7 23.2 Chatsworth A 4 108 260 150 798 1320 B 2 41 75 44 200 362 C% 50 38 28.8 29.3 25.1 27.4 Cleveland A 6 117 223 169 405 920 B 2 59 93 104 146 404 C% 33.3 50.4 41.7 61.5 36 43.9 Crenshaw A 0 0 36 815 1 852 B 5 2 43 563 1 614 C% .0 0 119.4 69.1 100 72.1 Dorsey A 1 12 61 688 0 762 B 0 3 99 437 3 542 C% .0 25 162.3 63.5 0 71.1 Eagle Rock A 1 110 218 5 137 471 B 0 26 93 5 50 174 C% .0 23.6 42.7 100 36.5 36.9 El Camino Real A 3 58 87 103 519 770 B 0 8 23 26 81 138 C% .0 13.8 26.4 25.2 15.6 17.9 Fairfax A 8 176 259 288 334 1065 B 1 55 145 150 149 500 C% 12.5 31.2 56 52.1 44.6 46.9 Francis Poly A 6 96 621 75 334 1132 B 6 21 174 17 99 317 C% 100 21.9 28 22.7 29.6 28 Franklin A 3 152 1031 13 127 1326 B 3 27 383 7 70 490 C% 100 17.7 37.1 53.8 55.1 37 Fremont A 0 0 628 690 1 1319 B 18 2 364 427 15 826 C% .0 .0 58 61.9 1500 62.6 Gardena A 3 214 313 532 141 1203 B 0 23 42 106 17 188 C% .0 10.7 13.4 19.9 12.1 15.6 Garfield A 2 19 1665 12 9 1707 B 1 5 445 2 5 458 C% 50 26.3 26.7 16.7 55.6 26.8 Granada Hills A 1 145 248 159 543 1096 B 3 84 136 83 353 659 C% 300 57.9 54.8 52.2 65 60.1 Grant A 4 148 575 62 598 1387 B 1 52 291 18 258 620 C% 25 35.1 50.6 29 43.1 44.7 Hamilton A 1 36 142 361 111 651 B 0 18 82 143 36 279 C% .0 50 57.7 39.6 32.4 42.9 Hollywood A 3 112 591 93 343 1142 B 2 53 287 61 140 543 C% 66.7 47.3 48.6 65.6 40.8 47.5 Huntington A 3 9 969 20 19 1020 Park B 3 4 285 18 12 322 C% 100 44.4 29.4 90 63.2 31.6 Jefferson A 10 7 1017 421 1 1456 B 0 4 610 310 2 926 C% .0 57.1 60 73.6 200 63.6 Jordan A 5 9 239 393 8 654 B 4 3 165 217 1 390 C% 80 33.3 69 55.2 12.5 59.6 Kennedy A 0 101 353 173 472 1099 B 3 14 78 20 63 178 C% 0 13.9 22.1 11.6 13.3 16.2 Lincoln A 2 189 822 19 9 1041 B 1 30 243 6 5 285 C% 50 15.9 29.6 31.6 55.6 27.4 Locke A 0 4 122 735 0 861 B 3 7 154 504 15 683 C% .0 175 126.2 68.6 .0 79.3 Los Angeles A 2 212 969 441 30 1654 B 4 79 327 222 19 651 C% 200 37.3 33.7 50.3 63.3 39.4 Manual Arts A 0 12 583 698 0 1293 B 2 4 294 515 44 859 C% .0 33.3 50.4 73.8 .0 66.4 Marshall A 2 375 804 32 266 1479 B 3 83 245 14 94 439 C% 150 22.1 30.5 43.5 35.3 29.7 Monroe A 2 95 377 232 513 1219 B 6 36 203 94 191 530 C% 300 37.9 53.8 40.5 37.2 43.5 Narbonne A 1 157 371 157 404 1090 B 0 41 135 49 143 368 C% .0 26.1 36.4 31.2 35.4 33.8 North A 14 83 570 97 487 1251 Hollywood B 1 23 161 24 167 376 C% 7.1 27.7 28.2 24.7 34.3 30.1 Palisades A 0 63 77 341 322 803 B 1 21 38 78 87 225 C% .0 33.3 49.4 22.9 27 28 Reseda A 1 30 127 134 366 658 B 0 8 45 65 81 199 C% .0 26.6 35.4 48.5 22.1 30.2 Roosevelt A 0 14 1964 24 5 2007 B 0 10 844 16 16 886 C% .0 71.4 43 66.7 320 44.1 San Fernando A 1 12 1298 170 57 1538 B 3 31 738 90 81 943 C% 300 258.3 56.9 52.9 142.1 61.3 San Pedro A 5 63 390 194 478 1130 B 0 26 116 66 101 309 C% .0 41.2 29.7 34 21.1 27.3 South Gate A 1 13 752 16 70 852 B 0 1 293 6 21 321 C% .0 7.70 39 37.5 30 37.7 Sylmar A 3 21 424 38 255 741 B 1 9 212 30 91 343 C% 33.3 42.8 50 78.9 35.7 46.3 Taft A 4 86 140 203 488 921 B 0 8 49 79 124 260 C% .0 9.30 35 38.9 25.4 28.2 University A 2 146 177 265 474 1064 B 0 17 49 50 89 205 C% .0 11.6 27.7 18.9 18.8 19.3 Van Nuys A 5 124 371 88 384 972 B 4 55 190 57 178 484 C% 80 44.3 51.2 64.8 46.4 49.8 Venice A 11 98 467 136 402 1114 B 0 17 169 43 106 335 C% .0 17.3 36.2 31.6 26.4 30.1 Verdugo Hills A 8 141 352 19 480 1000 B 2 30 166 8 148 354 C% 25 21.2 47.2 42.1 30.8 35.4 Washington A 0 2 130 940 1 1073 B 1 2 57 353 4 417 C% .0 100 43.8 37.6 400 38.9 Westchester A 0 18 36 340 189 583 B 1 3 8 32 21 65 C% .0 16.6 22.2 9.4 11.1 11.1 Wilson A 0 71 1046 10 26 1153 B 1 15 443 14 41 514 C% .0 21.1 42.4 140 157.7 44.6 TOTALS A 171 4569 26361 12552 12778 56431 B 98 1317 10579 5778 4325 22097 C% 57.3 28.8 40.1 46.0 33.8 39.2

Research by Tracy Thomas