Educational Success in the Face of Adversity as Measured by High School Graduation

1. Educational Success in the Face of Adversity as Measured by High School Graduation Presented by: Bolgen Vargas, Ed.D.

2. The Urban Challenge Like many urban cities that have children impacted by adverse circumstances, the Rochester City School District has a low high school graduation rate.

3. Goals of the Study Explore what factors help students in the Class of 2009 overcome multiple adversities and achieve educational success, as measured by the graduation rate Understand why some students with similar characteristics in the Rochester City School District graduate while others do not Identify solutions which can improve graduation rates in the Rochester City School District among students who face multiple adversities

4. Conceptual Framework

5. Theoretical Framework • Resilience as a dynamic process allows individuals to show positive adaptation in the face of significant adversity. • Further, it requires the satisfaction of two conditions. First, exposure to significant levels of adversity must exist in the students’ lives. Second, achievement is demonstrated despite the presence of multiple adversities by high school graduation. • Resilience, as such, is a relational process which takes place in a variety of contexts such as homes, communities, schools, peers, and the individual.

6. Mixed Method Study: Quantitative and Qualitative 660 graduating seniors completed surveys 102 drop outs completed surveys 408 graduating seniors completed written response about the challenges they faced while in high school 77 drop outs completed written response about the challenges they faced in high school 10 graduating seniors interviewed 5 drop outs interviewed

7. Demographics of Study Participants • Graduates: 57% African American; 18% Hispanic; 8% White; 2% Asian; 1% American Indian; 10% Multi-racial; 3% Other • Drop Outs: 65% African American; 24% Hispanic; 4% White; 4.9% Multi-racial; 3% Other

8. Demographics • Graduates: 43% Male; 57% Female • Drop Outs: 45% Male; 55% Female

9. Living With… • Graduates: 32% mother and father; 42% mother; 6% father; 6% grandparents; 2% siblings; 2% extended family; 10% other (foster care, friends, alone) • Drop-outs: 15% mother and father; 43% mother; 1% father; 12% grandparents; 2% siblings; 4% extended family; 23% other (foster care, friends, alone)

10. Family Educational Background • Graduate: 20% parent/guardian did not graduate from high school • Drop-out: 41% of parent/guardian did not graduate from high school

11. Free and Reduced Lunch • Graduates: 70% • Drop-outs: 86%

12. English as First Language • Graduates: 86% • Drop-outs: 78%

13. IEP • Graduates: 11% • Drop-outs: 23%

14. Moved in Last Three Years • Graduates: 42% • Drop-outs: 55%

16. Interviews: Qualitative Feedback • The participants in this study provided us with a rich look at their life experiences in multiple contexts (home, school, neighborhood, etc.) • Provided perspectives and evidence essential to informing reform aimed at increasing graduation rates for students facing multiple risk factors.

17. Analysis of At Risk Students • In the analysis, dropouts were compared to at risk graduates. • The graduates used in the analysis consisted of those: • receiving free and reduced lunch, • non-white and • not living with both parents.

18. Students with all Three Risk Factors

19. Findings & Observations • The main lesson of this study is that the students who graduated had similar internal assets as those who did not. Example of internal assets include personal goals, self-advocacy, empathy, problem-solving, self-awareness.

20. Findings & Observations • Those who graduated had a more robust external support system such as caring relationships in multiple places, meaningful participation and high expectations of many adults at school and in the community.

21. Findings & Observations • The term “gateway protective factors” emerged from the study to describe protective factors that open pathways to further mitigating factors • How did the graduates beat the odds while the drop-outs did not? According to this study, this occurred through gateway protective factors that work synergistically in the students’ lives. (see conceptual framework in executive summary)

22. Findings & Observations • The primary differences between the two groups was the inadequate response on the part of families, communities, schools and peers to build resilience to mitigate the challenge in adverse circumstances.

23. Findings & Observations • This study has documented how important it is for school districts and community organizations to measure the various adverse conditions individual students face • Districts must also evaluate what assetsor protective factors exist for them so that the focus is not placed solely on deficits or adversity.

24. Findings & Observations • This study has demonstrated that students who face multiple adversities must have multiple protective factors present in their lives if there are to mitigate that risk and succeed • What must be present to help them do so is a gateway to success that is paved with protection

25. Recommendations • Eradicate the self-fulfilling prophecy of low expectations in homes, schools, and communities • Attend to Internal and External Assets • Adopt Actionable Surveys • Roll Out District-Sponsored Advocacy • Provide Teacher & Administrator Training • Open Avenues to Meaningful Participation • Employ Three or More Integrated Intervention Approaches

26. Implication for Future Research and Practice This study supports future research that attempts to utilize a resiliency framework to explain the factors that contribute to student success in spite of multiple adversity. The study identifies the need to look at multiple risk and protective factors in multiple contexts which allow students to achieve academically in urban settings.

27. Questions & Answers