Alternative Education: Last best chance or dumping ground

1
Alternative Education Last best chance or
dumping ground?

• John W Gardner Center, Stanford University
• National Center for Urban School Transformation,
  San Diego State University
• March 24 2008

2
Organization of the session

• History of Alternative Education Policies in CA
  Devon Williamson
• System contexts Milbrey McLaughlin
• School contexts Jorge Ruiz-de-Velasco
• Student perspectives Lynne Perez
• Discussant Norman Fruchter

3
Research Goal

• Describe continuation high school policies and
  practices on the ground what they look like, how
  and why they vary, and consequences for students

4
Sample Strategy An Embedded Context Design

• We selected
• Counties that represented diverse CA economic
  demographic contexts 9 counties
• Within counties, districts that differed in size,
  metro status, and alternative education menu
  26 districts
• Within districts, continuation high schools that
  differed in size student outcomes 40 schools

5
Respondents

• Principals of both continuation traditional
  high schools
• Teachers and students
• District administrators
• County Office of Education administrators,
  Regional Opportunity Programs
• Representatives of various county community
  youth-serving agencies juvenile justice, mental
  health, child protective services, foster care

6
Legislative History of Alternative Education The
Policy Context of Continuation High Schools

• John W. Gardner Center for Youth and Their
  Communities
• Stanford University School of Education
• Devon Williamson
• Prepared for the AERA Annual
  Meeting, New York - March 24, 2008

7
Agenda

• Introduction
• Conceptual Framework
• Policy history 1917-present
• Implications

Introduction
Framework
Policy History
Implications
8
Agenda

• Introduction
• Conceptual Framework
• Policy history 1917-present
• Implications

Introduction
Framework
Policy History
Implications
9
Agenda

• Introduction
• Conceptual Framework
• Policy history 1917-present
• Implications

Policy History
Introduction
Framework
Implications
10
Agenda

• Introduction
• Conceptual Framework
• Policy history 1917-present
• Implications

Introduction
Framework
Policy History
Implications
11
Research Question

• How has continuation education evolved in
  response to Californias changing social,
  political, and economic demands?
• What does continuations status as a decoupled
  system at the intersection of social services,
  juvenile justice and public education mean for
  todays students?

12
Organizational Behavior

• Structural holes exist between diverse clusters
  of organizations serving the same population of
  at risk youth (Burt, 1992)
• Public education
• Social welfare system
• California youth authority
• Meyer Rowan, 1991
• Isomorphism, legitimacy, efficiency
• Decoupling

13
Decoupling Strategies

• Lack of managerial oversight
• Ambiguous, un-measurable goals
• Ceremonial evaluation
• Reliance on personal relationships to coordinate
  activities

14
Continuation Eras Types

• Four eras of CE (Kelly, 1993 Hwang, 2003)
• 1917-1930 Part-time school for young workers
• 1931-1944 Vocational ed to vocational guidance
• 1945-1964 Adjustment education
• 1965-present Dropout recovery
• Typology of current CHS
• Safety net, safety valve, cooling out (Kelly,
  1993)
• Student-centered, student reformed, dumping
  ground (Ruiz-De-Velasco, 2008)

15
Industry Assimilation1917-30

• 1917 Smith-Hughes Act
• 1919 Part-Time Education Act (PTE)
• 1923 CSBE Bulletin 23 on PTE
• 1926 CSBE Biennial report
• 1929 PTE Amendment

16
Truancy Guidance1931-44

• 1930 peak enrollment
• Great Depression - guidance focus
• 1937 California Journal of Secondary Ed.
• Burdened educator
• Student characteristics - the moron and the
  genius, the social misfit and the socially unfit
  (Trout)

17
Adjustment Education1945-64

• World War II increase in working students
• 1945 Continuation high schools
• 1947 Average daily attendance - 3 hours
• Adjustment education movement

18
Dropout Recovery1965-present

• 1965-67 long-term suspension legislation
• 1967 Elementary credentialed teachers
• 1980 Revenue Add-on
• 1987 Humanist goals
• 2001 Alternative Schools Accountability
  Model (ASAM)
• 2002 Categorical funding eligibility

19
Continuation Decoupled

• Designed outside mainstream education with
  indirect, local management in mind
• Ambiguous authorizing legislation goals
• Limited accountability via data blackout and ASAM
• Individual educators and administrators determine
  resources and opportunities

20
Implications

• Significant variation in the quality and quantity
  of opportunities available to continuation
  students by design
• Reliance on local decision makers to determine
  what continuation looks like, with little record
  keeping or accountability
• Lack of state and public oversight and no real
  advocates for continuation education

21
Alternative Education Options in CaliforniaA
view from counties and districts

• Milbrey McLaughlin, Grace Atukpawu,
• Devon Williamson
• Stanford University
• AERA March 24, 2008

22
Who attends CA continuation high schools?

• 117,000 students attend 520 CHS
• 52 were enrolled for 90 days or more
• Racial minorities 55 Hispanic 11 black 4
  Asian 27 white
• Students with behavioral challenges drug use,
  weapons, fighting,
• English Learnersgreater than statewide average
  EL enrollment

23
Overarching findingSignificant variation in
continuation high schools quality, mission and
student outcomes promising practices lost
opportunities and wasted resources
24
The system perspective

• What do continuation high school policies and
  practices look like at county and district
  levels? Sources of variation?

25
Diverse County Contexts for Continuation High
Schools

• Balkanized county-level youth services extent
  of coordination
• Variable capacity of broad youth-serving
  infrastructure
• Different views of CHS youth population
• Problem to be managed
• Active youth-development stancecollaboration
  across agencies to support comprehensive view of
  youth services

26
Different district contexts for CHS

• Benign neglect 10 acceptable loss kids
• Struggling episodic support for CHS programs-
  traditional high schools receive priority
• Intentional youth development stance commitment
  to CHS goals and studentsparity, political
  support for alternative education

27
How county contexts mattered for districts
schools

• Relationships with/operation of Community Day
  Schools and Community Schools
• Relationships with foster care, mental health,
  juvenile justice other youth-serving agencies
• Level of resources and services available to CHS
  programs and students
• Coherence and articulation of resources and
  opportunities available to CHS

28
How district contexts mattered for continuation
schools

• Staffing strategies dumping ground or committed,
  qualified staff
• Equity in resource allocation educational
  supplies, professional services, facilities,
  number of CHS seats
• Different CHS menus, missions and student
  assignment policies
• Attention to articulation of/support for student
  pathways

29
Factors affecting county district contexts
resources supports

• Local economy
• Personal networks relationships
• Leadership political support for CHS mission
  and students
• History of collaboration
• Express commitment to a youth development stance
  and continuum of care

30
Factors affecting district contexts for
continuation high schools

• Differences in local contextsdistrict size,
  local demographics and economy
• Presence of district school-level leadership
  and proactive commitment to alternative education
• Personal networks and relationships to support
  CHS programs and students

31
Alternative Education in Continuation High
SchoolsMeeting the Needs of Over-aged,
Under-credited Youth

• Jorge Ruiz-de-Velasco
• University of California, Berkeley
• AERA March 24, 2008

32
Accountability Issues

• Goal Ambiguity
• Formal State Goals/Local Enacted Goals
• Weak School-Level Accountability
• Reflects ambiguity about goals what/how to
  properly assess these alternative schools
• Increasing Student-level Accountability

33
Resource Issues(State Constraints on Local
Action)

• California has among the most highly centralized
  school finance systems among the states.
• Continuation High Schools conceived as small
  versions of comprehensive schools within the
  finance system
• Staffed similarly to other schools of similar
  size
• Staffing formulas driven by state per-pupil
  allocation
• Teachers
• Pupil Services (e.g., Counselors, Nurses, etc)
• Classified Staff (e.g., Teacher Aides,
  Librarians)

34
Major Question What accounts for success
despite supra-local constraints?

• We over-samples for schools that
• Were state-designated as Model Schools
• Were making AYP and other progress markers
• Where made them different?

35
Role of District Leaders and Boards

• Providing additional Resources Support
  (Priority)
• Empowering the School Staff
• ESP Enabling control over identification
  placement
• Enabling collaboration between sending schools
  and CHS

36
Role of School Leaders

• Principals
• Training Experience
• Beliefs and Values
• Teachers
• Individual Beliefs and Inititative central in a
  weak accountability environment

37
Role of School Partnerships

• Links to Regional Occupation Programs
• Links to Employers CBOs
• Links to Community Colleges
• Productive Links to County Agencies (Law
  Enforcement, Parks Recreation, Mental Health)
• AGAIN Linked to individual leadership in
  absence of strong accountability system that
  makes these relationships systematic.

38
Continuation High Schools An Inside Look at
Californias Primary Dropout Intervention Program

• Lynne G. Perez and Joseph F. Johnson
• National Center for Urban School Transformation
• San Diego State University
• Misty M. Kirby
• The College of William and Mary

39
An inside look

• What is the mission of continuation high school?
• Who are the students?
• How do students come to continuation education?
• What is the student experience?
• What emerge as critical system elements?

40
What is the mission of continuation high school?

• Provide diploma programs that reconnect students
  to learning
• Attend to students academic and interpersonal
  needs
• Develop students civic responsibility
• Create pathways to post-secondary education or
  training

41
Who are the students?

• Credit deficient, chronically absent, disengaged
  from school
• Younger and older than 16-18 years of age
• Lacking fundamental literacy skills
• Gifted
• Poor interpersonal/organizational skills
• Range of personal and family issues

42
How do students come to continuation education?

• By referral
• Voluntarily and involuntarily
• Through a formal process, or an informal
  negotiation between schools
• As needed year-round, or at specific intervals

43
What is the student experience?
44
What is the school environment?

• Smaller with fewer distractions
• Climate of acceptance, support, school as family
• Clear consequences, stability
• Strong student/adult relationships
• 3 to over 6 hours of instructional time
• Class size varies from _at_ 20 over 30

45
What is the curriculum?

• Core subjects, aligned with state standards
• High school exit exam preparation courses
• Some literacy intervention programs
• Parenting/life skills
• Career/post-secondary coursework
• Few electives

46
How is the curriculum delivered?

• Independent study (self-paced)
• Direct instruction
• Mixed methods
• Project based, portfolios
• Units of study, looping the curriculum
• Questions of rigor

47
What support systems are available to students?

• Overall, uneven access
• Teachers/staff as counselors
• A few have substantial counseling programs
• Some advisory programs
• Pregnant/parenting teen programs

48
How do continuation schools help prepare students
for the next step?

• Verbal encouragement
• Help with applications, exams, speakers
• Scholarships
• Work experience/internships
• ROP, some vocational technical/career education
• Joint diploma/middle college

49
What emerge as critical system elements?

• A more explicit purpose
• More extensive data-collection systems
• Intake, curriculum, instruction, program design,
  and services aligned to student needs and program
  purpose
• Supportive relationships

50
Alternative Education Last best chance or
dumping ground?

• John W Gardner Center, Stanford University
• National Center for Urban School Transformation,
  San Diego State University
• March 24 2008