Below are the first 10 and last 10 pages of uncorrected machine-read text (when available) of this chapter, followed by the top 30 algorithmically extracted key phrases from the chapter as a whole.
Intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text on the opening pages of each chapter.
Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.
Do not use for reproduction, copying, pasting, or reading; exclusively for search engines.
OCR for page 13
l
Student Engagement and Disengagement
in Urban High Schools
We can require adolescents to attend school, but learning requires
conscious and purposeful effort, which cannot be legislated. This volume is
about motivating adolescents to be engaged cognitively, behaviorally, and
emotionally in their coursework and in the broader array of school-based
activities. Motivation Is essential to learning at all ages (Finn and Rock,
1997; lessor, Turbin, and Costa, 1998; National Research Council, 2000),
but it becomes pivotal during adolescence as youth approach the threshold
to adulthood. Younger children who become mentally and emotionally
disengaged generally are compliant enough to attend school, or they do not
have the means to avoid it. But adolescents who are bored, distracted,
emotionally troubled, or do not see the value of schooling have the means
to drop out of school altogether.
Even if they do not drop out of school, adolescents have many alterna-
tive activities to occupy their time and attention, including working for pay,
sports, video games, social activities, and for some, less socially sanctioned
activities. A national survey of more than 2,000 youth in grades 7 through
12 found that about 40 percent of the students worked a median of 3 hours
on an average school day, and spent 2 hours "hanging out with friends."
The median number of hours worked by Black students was 4 hours. The
average adolescent watches nearly 3 hours of television a day, and adoles-
cents of color watch more on average (The Kaiser Family Foundation,
1999~. Schools, therefore, have considerable competition for the attention
of their clients. It is not surprising that homework does not necessarily have
13
OCR for page 14
4
ENGAGING SCHOOLS
a high priority, despite its apparent contribution to learning (Cooper, Lind-
say, Nye, and Greathouse, 1998).
Research on motivation and engagement is essential to understanding
some of the most fundamental and vexing challenges of school reform.
Improving meaningful learning depends on the ability of educators to en-
gage the imaginations of students to involve them in new realms of knowI-
edge, building on what they already know and believe, what they care
about now, and what they hope for in the future (National Research Coun-
cil, 20001. At the very least, increasing students' academic achievement
requires improvements in attendance, attention, and completion of school-
work.
Increasing motivation and engagement is unlikely to be accomplished
by simple policy prescriptions, such as raising standards, promoting ac-
countability, or increasing school funding although these may be helpful
in the right set of circumstances. The fundamental challenge is to create a
set of circumstances in which students take pleasure in learning and come
to believe that the information and skills they are being asked to learn are
important or meaningful for them and worth their effort, and that they can
reasonably expect to be able to learn the material.
As this volume makes clear, there are no silver bullets. Some students
are motivated even under adverse circumstances, but for many students
their engagement and motivation to learn depend on a confluence of sup-
ports, none of which is sufficient on its own. These supports include
· a challenging but individualized curriculum that is focused on un-
derstanding;
· knowledgeable, skilled, and caring teachers;
· a school culture that is centered on learning;
· a school community that engenders a sense of support and belong-
ing, with opportunities to interact with academically engaged peers;
· strong ties linking the school with students' families and commu-
. .
nltles;
· an organizational structure and services that address students' non-
academic needs; and
· opportunities to learn the value of schoolwork for future educa-
tional and career prospects.
Motivation to be actively engaged is essential to learning, whether
students are in schools that are located in urban, suburban, or rural com-
munities. The focus of this volume, however, is on what urban high schools
can do to more effectively engage students especially low-income students
and students of color who are disproportionately concentrated in these
schools. Although the core principles involved in making schools more
OCR for page 15
STUDENT ENGA GEMENT AND DISENGA GEMENT
15
engaging apply to all schools, we chose to focus on high-poverty urban high
schools because students there are more likely than others to become clisaf-
fecteci and drop out, and the social and economic consequences of clisen-
gagement for them are severe.
A great clear is known about the needs of adolescents and about the
conclitions that motivate them to learn and stay in school. We know how to
clo a better job of engaging high school students in learning activities that
will help them achieve the kinds of postseconciary educational and career
opportunities they desire. We also know of urban schools serving low-
income students and students of color that have substantially clecreaseci
dropout rates, increased attendance, and improved achievement and the
educational and career prospects of their graduates.
We have seen youth consiclereci at risk of school failure fighting to be
heard in an English class discussion on Shakespeare and insisting on finish-
ing a science experiment long after the bell has rung students who experi-
ence the joy of learning and take great pricle in their accomplishments.
Although far too rare, such success stories undermine the credibility of
. .
pessimists anc naysayers.
We focus on what schools can clo, recognizing that many of the reasons
for a young person's disengagement from school lie far beyond school. We
are also mindful of the difficulty of increasing adolescents' motivation and
engagement in schoolwork in urban neighborhoods where joblessness and
poverty are endemic, violence and homelessness are common, and access to
resources and opportunities are scarce. The effects of poverty on child and
adolescent outcomes, regardless of the schools they attend, have been well
clocumenteci (see, for example, Duncan and Brooks-Gunn, 19971. Urban
schools, however, clo not usually take advantage of the resources their
communities offer. Paradoxically, although many of the most troubled
neighborhoods are located in metropolitan centers of great wealth and
resources, access to the alluring educational and career resources of the city
has been all but blocked for most students in high-poverty, urban high
schools.
Poverty conclitions affect chilciren's opportunities to learn in elemen-
tary and micicile school as well, and many urban high schools are challenged
by a large proportion of students who have very poor skills, have experi-
enceci failure for many years in school, and as a result have become seri-
ously alienated from academic work. It is not easy to promote enthusiasm
in students who enter with low motivation and have a long way to go to
master a high school curriculum.
The obstacles created by poverty and the legacy of racism are profound
and need to be aciciresseci in any truly comprehensive approach to improv-
ing urban adolescents' engagement and motivation to learn. As a society,
we should not tolerate the ways in which chilciren's opportunities are lim-
OCR for page 16
16
ENGAGING SCHOOLS
ited by the circumstances of their birth, and as we work to improve schools,
we must also work for better conditions in our communities and a fairer
and more equitable society.
Despite limitations in what can be accomplished in high schools alone,
we believe we have a responsibility to use what we know to better engage
adolescents in learning and prepare them for future opportunities and the
adult roles and responsibilities they are about to assume. With sufficient
societal will and the knowledge that now exists, we can make a measurable
difference.
HIGH STANDARDS AND DEMOCRATIC VALUES
Nearly half a century ago, educational philosopher John Dewey and
others claimed that if schools were to succeed in preparing the great major-
ity of young people, not just a select few, to be responsible and productive
citizens, they would have to do a much better job of motivating and engag-
ing the broad spectrum of students in learning (Cremin, 1961; Dewey,
1956; Hall, 19691. The history of high schools in the United States never-
theless shows alternating emphases on academic rigor associated with the
need to prepare some students for college, and the democratizing function
of schools having schools address the needs and engage the interests of all
students, including those who traditionally have not been college bound
(Powell, Farrar, and Cohen, 19851.
In the past half-century, the emphasis on academic standards of the
1950s gave way to a concern for equity in the 1960s, and then back to high
standards and basic academic skills in the early and mid-1980s. Since then,
there has been some wavering, but the dominant policy emphasis that has
emerged at the start of the 21st century has been to hold all students
accountable for achieving high educational standards (National Research
Council, 2002a; U.S. Department of Education, 2002), focusing especially
on reading and math. For this to occur, a much broader range of students
must become engaged in learning the kinds of curricula that, until recently,
only students bound for 4-year colleges were expected to master.
Some education analysts have expressed concern that raising standards
for students who are performing poorly will increase their alienation or
disengagement from school rather than motivate them to exert more effort
(e.g., Futrell and Rotberg, 2002; Sheldon and Biddle, 1998), or that the
concentration on English and math only will impoverish the curriculum. If
imposing higher standards is the only intervention, these are likely out-
comes. But the research discussed in Chapters 2 and 4 of this volume
indicates that under the right circumstances, challenging students to learn
more demanding curricula increases their motivation and engagement.
Unfortunately, few high schools to date have provided the context or
OCR for page 17
STUDENT ENGA GEMENT AND DISENGA GEMENT
17
supports that enable most students to achieve high standards. Significant
reforms will be needed to motivate all students to be sufficiently engaged in
their schoolwork to meet more demanding expectations.]
IMPORTANCE OF SOCIAL RELATIONSHIPS
Although learning involves cognitive processes that take place within
and between the individuals, motivation to learn depends on a student's
involvement in a web of social relationships. The likelihood that students
will be motivated and engaged in learning is increased to the extent that
their teachers, family, and friends, as well as others who shape the instruc-
tional process, effectively support their purposeful involvement in learning
(Cohen and Ball, 19991. Thus the focus on motivation and engagement
calls attention to the interface between the learner and the social context in
which learning takes place.
The notion that the personal value of our lives is determined largely by
the social relations that take place in the communities to which we belong
reflects a classic Aristotelian perspective on human nature (Lee, Bryk, and
Smith, 1993; see also MacIntyre, 1981; Newmann and Oliver, 19671. It is
also a perspective that is very much consistent with the views of John
Dewey. For Dewey, building an engaging school community is not just a
strategy to improve academic outcomes; it is essential to education itself
(see Lee et al., 1993, p. 2261.
It is not coincidental that many of the qualities associated with engag-
ing schools also have been found to foster healthy youth development
(Eccles et al., 1993; Institute of Medicine, 1997; McNeely, Nonnemaker,
and Blum, 2002; National Research Council, 2002a; Rosenfeld, Richman,
and Bowen, 2000) and to confer resilience to individuals who otherwise
might be at risk for adverse psychological and social outcomes (Berand,
1992; Connell, Spencer, and Aber, 1994; Finn and Rock, 1997; lessor et
al., 1998; Rutter, 19851. High schools, like other programs for youth,
promote positive development in adolescents by addressing their needs for
safety, love and belonging, respect, power, and accomplishment. They do
this by establishing caring relationships with adults, maintaining positive
1'' High standards" is not defined in this volume as being able to pass a high-stakes test,
such as an exam required for a high school diploma, although that might be one indicator of
the standards of achievement that students are achieving. By "high standards" we mean that
high school graduates should have mastered the skills they need to succeed in a postsecondary
academic education program. Expectations for students on the path to meeting this ultimate
standard need to be individualized, so that all students are challenged by their instructional
program.
OCR for page 18
18
ENGAGING SCHOOLS
and high expectations, and providing students with opportunities to par-
ticipate and contribute (Berand, 1992, 19971.
THE STATUS QUO
Unfortunately, various studies have found that high schools are failing
to engage their students, thereby providing them with neither the kind of
social environment that fosters healthy psychosocial development (McNeely
et al., 2002; National Research Council and Institute of Medicine, 2002)
nor one that is conducive to learning (Finn and Rock, 1997; lessor et al.,
1998; National Research Council, 20001.
In 1974, Uric Bronfenbrenner described high schools as potent breed-
1ng grounds ot alienation, and recent studies provide some empirical sup-
port for this proposition. Some studies have found that 40 to 60 percent of
high school students are chronically disengaged; they are inattentive, exert
little effort, do not complete tasks, and claim to be bored. This figure does
not include those who already have dropped out (Marks, 2000; Sediak,
Wheeler, Pullin, and Cusick, 1986; Steinberg, Brown, and Dornbush, 19961.
Low motivation is not unique to urban schools. In a 3-year study of
students from nine high schools, Steinberg et al. (1996) found that fewer
than half of the students reported taking school or their studies seriously;
this was equally true of students in affluent suburban schools and those in
poor urban communities. Half of the students they surveyed considered
their classes to be boring. A national study of a representative sample of
high school seniors found that only 27 percent indicated that "knowing a
lot about intellectual matters" was of great importance for having "high
status" at their school (National Center for Education Statistics, 2001b,
p. 1411.
When students do exert effort, it is primarily to earn grades. A survey
of more than 100,000 7th through 11th graders in 15 ethnically mixed
school districts serving students at all economic levels asked students,
"When you work really hard in school, which of the following reasons are
most important to you?" The most frequently checked option, chosen by
about three-quarters of the students from all ethnic and socioeconomic
groups, was, "I need the grades to get into college." An ethnographic study
of students in a high school in an affluent community also revealed that
students considered their efforts to obtain good grades as the price of
. . . . ~ . . .
ac mission to a competitive co" ~ eye. Stun ents were strategic, even conniving,
focusing on "doing school" rather than on learning or mastering academic
material (Pope, 20001.
Poor motivation to learn is more serious at the high school level than in
earlier grades. Many studies show that as students progress from elemen-
tary to middle school and on to high school, motivation and academic
. . .. . . .. . .
OCR for page 19
STUDENT ENGA GEMENT AND DISENGA GEMENT
19
engagement steadily decline (Eccles and Wigfield, 1992; Eccles, Wigfield,
and Schiefele, 1998; Epstein and McPartland, 1976; Marks, 2000;
McDermott, Mordell, and Stolzful, 2001; National Center for Education
Statistics, 2000b; Stipek, 20021. Recent national data show that student
absenteeism (measured as cutting classes or skipping school for reasons
other than illness) increases substantially with grade level 11 percent of
8th graders, 17 percent of 10th graders, and 33 percent of 12th graders
reported skipping at least 1 day of school during a 4-week period (National
Center for Education Statistics, 20021.
Corresponding to the gradual decline in student engagement, interna-
tional comparisons reveal that the academic performance of U.S. students
in mathematics and science slips from near the top of the list of 48 countries
at the elementary level to near the bottom during the high school years
(National Center for Education Statistics, 1999a). The poor performance of
U.S. high school students is explained partly by the increasing disparities in
performance associated with race/ethnicity and socioeconomic status found
as students progress through school. But the academic achievement even of
the top-performing high school students from the United States compares
unfavorably with that of their counterparts in other nations (National Cen-
ter for Education Statistics, 1998b).
Explanations for the poor showing of American high school students
abound, but themes do emerge. Darling-Hammond (1997, p.15) notes that
several analyses of American education (cf. Boyer, 1983; Goodlad, 1984;
Sizer, 1984) have been remarkably similar in their critiques of a system that
has sought to "manage schooling simply and efficiently by setting up imper-
sonal relationships, superficial curricula, and routinized teaching." High
schools that are large, bureaucratized, and fragmented compound the prob-
lem of uninspired pedagogy. Unless students in these schools come with
their own intrinsic motivation to learn (or at least to get good grades), they
are likely to feel alienated from their teachers and coursework (Boston Plan
for Excellence in the Public Schools, 2001; Halperin, 1998; William T.
Grant Foundation, 1988).
The typically large, comprehensive high school offers a wide range of
courses intended to match students' diverse interests and skill levels. Al-
though the specialized topical courses of the "shopping mall high school"
(Powell et al., 1985) provide students with choices, such schools lack a
sense of community and the kind of unifying sense of purpose that the
research reviewed in this volume indicates is needed to effectively engage
students in what Hill, Foster, and Gendler (1990) call "high schools with
character," with distinctive purposes and identities. The "shopping mall
high school" is also not sharply focused on ensuring that all students ac-
quire the intellectual skills they need to be well prepared for adulthood.
The large, comprehensive high school, the predominant model in the
OCR for page 20
20
ENGAGING SCHOOLS
United States, is in serious need of reform. Too many students are falling
through the cracks physically dropping out and psychologically tuning
out. The steady decrease in school engagement and motivation to learn that
occurs as students progress from the early grades, through middle school,
and into high school, and corresponding drop in the ranking of U.S. stu-
dents relative to their international counterparts in standardized measures
of learning, strongly suggest that something is seriously wrong with Ameri-
can high schools. The current situation is aptly described in a summary of a
focus group conducted with Boston high school students:
In Boston's non-exam high schools, the profound alienation from school
of the majority of the students and their intense need for belonging cannot
be exaggerated. Though Boston has well-developed career pathways, the
bottom half of students is largely invisible and left out, leaving the major-
ity of students with no trajectory or sense of where school might get them.
Many of these students drop out before they enter grade ten (Boston Plan
for Excellence in the Public Schools, 2001~.
URBAN HIGH SCHOOLS
Some urban high schools have excellent records of equipping their
students with the skills they need to succeed in postsecondary education
and in the workplace. But as a group, they are failing to meet the needs of
too many of their students (Hill, Campbell, and Harvey, 2000; Lippman,
Burns, and McArthur, 1996~. Improving the quality of urban high schools
is critically important not only for the students who attend them, but also
for the future prosperity and quality of life of cities and the nation as a
whole (Hill et al., 2000~.
High schools do not exist in a vacuum. The environments students live
in before high school and those in which the school and its students are
enmeshed greatly shape what goes on in a school (Brooks-Gunn and
Duncan, 1997~. Although the growing complexity of life for children and
families across the socioeconomic spectrum has made school engagement a
challenge for all, the problem is greatest for schools in marginalized urban
communities with high concentrations of poverty (Balfanz, 2000; Neild and
Balfanz, 2001; Oriand, 1990~.
Despite facing greater challenges, resources are relatively poor in urban
schools (Augenblick, Myers, and Anderson, 1997; Parrish, Hikido, and
Fowler, 1998; Schwartz, 1999), which explains in part why urban schools
serving low-income children also have the least qualified teachers (Darling-
Hammond, 2002; Ferguson, 1998; Oakes, 1990) and the highest teacher
absenteeism and turnover (Lippman et al., 1996, pp. 88-97~. Inequities
exist even within urban districts, with the schools serving relatively more
affluent students spending more per student than schools serving very low-
OCR for page 21
STUDENT ENGA GEMENT AND DISENGA GEMENT
21
income students (Roza and Miles, 20021. Conditions in some urban schools
are deplorable, with students neither expected nor given much opportunity
to learn (see Fine, 1994; Kozol, 1992; Meier, 2002; Valenzuela, 19991. It is
commonplace for the weakest and least experienced teachers to be assigned
to the neediest students and for course offerings to preclude most students
from meeting college entry requirements. School buildings are frequently
dilapidated and nonfunctioning, and provide no opportunities for recre-
ation.
These conditions make it difficult to establish trust, respect for author-
ity, and the kinds of relationships in the school community among students,
teachers, staff, and parents that are needed for students to develop and
achieve their potential (Comer, 1980; Comer, Haynes, and Toyner, 19961.
It is not surprising that students in urban high schools claim to fee! less
socially connected to their schools than do students attending suburban
high schools (Anderman, 20021. Thus, students with the greatest needs
currently receive the least adequate resources.
Urban Students
The exact statistical profile of urban students depends on how "urban"
is defined. More than 28 percent of all students are enrolled in urban
schools when urban is defined to include all cities with a population of at
least 50,000 that are the core of a metropolitan statistical area (MSA) or
consolidated metropolitan statistical area (CMSA). Slightly more than 15
percent of all students attend urban schools using a more restrictive defini-
tion that includes only cities of at least 250,000 (National Center for Edu-
cation Statistics, 1998a). However "urban" is defined, urban students dis-
proportionately come from families with incomes below the poverty line,
attend schools where a high percentage of students are poor, live in socially
and economically distressed neighborhoods, and are from a racial or ethnic
. .
minority group.
Nearly a third (30.5 percent) of children ages 5 to 17 living in the 100
largest cities are living in poverty, compared to 22 percent in midsize cities,
13.3 percentin suburbs, and 19.3 percentin towns end ruralareas (Council
of Great City Schools, 20001. The concentration of poverty in urban areas
is growing. Between 1970 and 1990, the percent of U.S. children who
resided in distressed neighborhoods in the 50 largest cities rose from 3 to 17
percent (Annie E. Casey Foundation, 19971.
Given the large proportion of urban children who live in poverty, it is
not surprising that children living in large urban areas are most likely to
attend schools with substantial concentrations of economically disadvan-
taged students. One national sample of elementary, middle, and high school
students showed that 40 percent of urban students attend high-poverty
OCR for page 22
22
ENGAGING SCHOOLS
TABLE 1-1 Percentage of Urban Elementary and Secondary Students by
Race/Ethnicity
Asian/
Pacific
White Islander Black Hispanic Total
Big city 24.8 7.3 35.5 31.7 99.3
Medium city 53.7 3.6 24.3 16.6 98.2
All schools 61.4 4.0 16.9 16.0 98.3
NOTE: Nationally, Native Americans are 1.4 percent of all students. Data are unavailable for
urban locations.
SOURCE: National Center for Education Statistics (2000a).
schools (defined as schools where the poverty concentration is at least 40
percent), compared to only 10 percent of suburban students and 26 percent
of rural students (Lippman et al., 1996~.
Black and Hispanic students are far more likely than Asian and white
students to attend urban schools in general, and high-poverty urban schools
in particular (Lippman et al., 1996, p. lo).2 Furthermore, urban schools
have a disproportionate number of students of color (see Table 1-11. In a
report documenting a trend toward the growing segregation of low-income
students of color in poorly performing urban schools, Orfield (2002) has
found that in schools where 50 to 60 percent of the students are Black or
Hispanic, on average at least 60 percent of the students are poor. In schools
where at least 80 percent of the students are Black or Hispanic, an average
of 80 to 90 percent of the students are poor.
All of the demographic characteristics of urban school students are
statistically associated with poorer educational outcomes (Halpern-Felsher
et al., 1997; Tencks and Phillips, 1998; National Research Council, 2002c),
although the causal mechanisms that produce these outcomes are not well
understood (Cornell, Halpern-Felsher, and Brooks-Gunn, 1997~. Concen-
trated poverty in the neighborhoods where students live is also associated
with lower school achievement (Abt Associates, 1993; Catsambis and
Beveridge, 2001; National Research Council, 1990; Orfield, 1999; U.S.
Department of Education, 2000~. Furthermore, an analysis of data from the
National Longitudinal Survey of Youth (Guo, 1998) found that poverty in
adolescence, or concurrent poverty, has a greater influence on adolescent
achievement in school than poverty earlier in life. Schellenberg (1999, p.l30)
concludes from his review of four interlocking studies he conducted in the
St. Paul, MN, public schools " . . . the degree to which poor children are
2Information on Native Americans was not given in most of the demographic data found.
OCR for page 23
STUDENT ENGA GEMENT AND DISENGA GEMENT
23
surrounded by other poor children both in their neighborhood and at
school has as strong an effect on their achievement as their own poverty.
Concentration of poverty in the neighborhood and the school affects all
children, poor and non-poor." Lippman et al. (1996) examined whether
differences in measures of engagement and achievement persisted after con-
trolling for the effects of school poverty concentration. They found that
after the greater concentration of poverty in urban schools was statistically
controlled, differences between groups of students on virtually all indica-
tors of engagement and achievement either disappeared or were greatly
diminished.
Variables associated with neighborhood poverty (e.g., violence, insta-
n~ty In living arrangements) can nave an ettect on academic achievement
as well. For example, McLanahan (1985) found that among white single-
parent households, poverty and the stress associated with family disruption
accounted for nearly all of the negative effects of family structure on
children's educational attainment (i.e., dropping out from high school); for
Black households, the results were more mixed. In households of all ethnic
groups, young adolescents living in poverty received fewer opportunities
for learning stimulation and spent less time with their parents, especially
their fathers (Bradley, Corwyn, McAdoo, and Coll, 20011.
Research by Brooks-Gunn and Duncan (1997) explores the ways in
which neighborhood conditions create "pathways" or mechanisms through
which family income operates to affect indicators of children's well-being.
These indicators include school achievement (e.g., grade repetition, expul-
sion or suspension, dropping out of school), cognitive outcomes (e.g., diffi-
culty in learning to read), emotional outcomes (e.g., being treated for an
emotional problem), and physical health outcomes (e.g., lead poisoning,
chronic asthma). The mechanisms are complex, and there is still much to
learn. What is clear is that the deck is stacked against children who live in
large urban communities with a high concentration of families living in
. ... . .. . . . ~ ~ .
poverty.
Making matters worse, as the percentage of students at a school who
are living in poverty rises, the school conditions needed to enable those
students to succeed (e.g., sufficient resources, teacher quality, educator
stability, small school size) decline (see Darling-Hammond, 1990; Lippman
et al., 1996; National Research Council, 20023; Rebell, 2002; Wasley et
al., 20001. Hochschild (in press) calls these conditions "nested inequalities."
The very students who need the most resources receive the fewest, and in
the end, pay the biggest price in terms of school performance and nonschoo!
outcomes (Darling-Hammond, 1990, 20021.
This demographic profile of urban students and communities high-
lights the challenges faced by urban high schools. Equally important, but
less studied, are the cultural richness and strengths for teaching and learn-
OCR for page 24
24
ENGAGING SCHOOLS
ing of many urban communities (Delpit, 1995; Irvine, 19901. What is usu-
ally conceived of as a problem, such as a large population of English-
language learners or new immigrants, is also an asset and a resource. Immi-
grants bring a wealth of opportunities for all students to be exposed directly
to political issues, social and cultural issues, art, music, language, customs,
religions, and trades that they might otherwise have to read about in text-
books. The harsh realities and challenges cannot be ignored, but greater
attention to the opportunities that urban centers provide for education is
essential to improving the schools in those communities. Engaging students
who are growing up in areas of concentrated poverty will require exploiting
the many strengths and opportunities available in most culturally diverse
urban communities as well as addressing the challenges.
DROPPING OUT: THE ULTIMATE IN DISENGAGEMENT
Dropping out of high school is for many students the last step in a long
process through which students become disengaged from school. Indeed,
many urban schools plan on substantial attrition in the number of courses
they offer at the 11th and 12th grade levels (Fine, 19941. Graduation rates
vary by ethnicity. Green (2001) calculated graduation rates3 nationwide
and for major school districts. At the national level, the graduation rate in
1998 was 74 percent. Differences were found among ethnic groups, with
white students substantially more likely to graduate than Black and Latino
students. Students in big city high schools were found to be substantially
less likely to graduate from high school than their counterparts in suburban
and rural schools. Both the overall dropout rate and the degree of disparity
among ethnic groups varied across cities (see Table 1-21.
Although some cities have only a few problem high schools, in other
cities they are the norm (Balfanz, 20011. Balfanz and Legters (2001) identi-
fied approximately 250 urban U.S. high schools in which fewer than half of
the entering freshmen advance to the 12th grade with their classmates.
These failing schools enroll approximately 60 percent of all students of
color in the 35 large urban school districts that were examined.
High dropout rates are not inevitable in urban schools, however. Even
3The graduation rate was calculated by dividing the number of regular diplomas awarded
in 1998 by the number of 8th-grade students enrolled in 1993, multiplied by 100. Calcula-
tions of graduation rates for school districts were adjusted for changes in total and racial/
ethnic subgroup enrollment in those districts in the 5-year period between 1993 and 1998.
Greens calculations yield graduation rates that are much lower than NCES High School
Completion Rates. This difference is largely explained by the inclusion of GED recipients in
the NCES calculations. Other technical differences are discussed by Green (2001 pp. 8-g).
OCR for page 25
STUDENT ENGA GEMENT AND DISENGA GEMENT
TABLE 1-2 Graduation Rates (percent) for Selected Urban School
Districts, 1998
25
General Black Latino White
Graduation Graduation Graduation Graduation
District Rate Rate Rate Rate
New York City 54 42 45 80
Los Angeles USD 56 56 48 81
Chicago District 299 47 45 43 59
Philadelphia 70 65 53 91
Houston ISD 52 55 42 84
Baltimore City 54 55 NA 48
Cleveland 28 29 26 23
Detroit 57 57 49 43
Memphis 42 39 NA 50
Milwaukee 43 34 42 74
San Diego USD 62 54 43 79
Dallas ISD 52 60 39 72
U.S. Total 74 56 54 78
NOTE: Selected cities correspond to "Big city" classification in Table 1-1. NA means not
available.
SOURCE: Green (2001).
controlling for a student's family background, the school a student attends
has a strong effect on whether that student persists or drops out. Rumberger
and Thomas (2000) estimated 10th-grade dropout rates from 1990 to 1992
for a sample of 247 urban and suburban high schools in 1990. Only about
half of the variation in school dropout rates could be attributed to the
background characteristics of the students who attended them. Another
study found that only 20 percent of the variability in mean school atten-
dance rates could be explained by the background characteristics of stu-
dents (Bryk and Thum, 19891. Some of the remaining variance presumably
was explained by qualities of the schools, such as school size, quality of the
teachers, and the social and academic climate. The variation in dropout
rates among high schools that serve predominantly low-income students of
color suggests that reforms could increase schools' holding power.
OUTCOMES AFTER HIGH SCHOOL
Dropping out has serious consequences for students. The manufactur-
ing jobs with good wages that used to be available to unskilled workers are
rapidly disappearing (Drucker, 19961. National Youth Employment Coali-
tion (1999) estimates show that only about 15 percent of jobs available in
1999 could be filled by unskilled workers, compared to approximately 60
percent in 1950. Furthermore, the Coalition's estimates show that nearly
OCR for page 26
26
ENGAGING SCHOOLS
half of all young people ages 17 to 24 who have not completed high school
are unemployed or hold jobs paying less than $300 per week. The median
annual earnings of men ages 25 to 34 who dropped out of high school
plummeted from $30,346 in 1970 to $18,582 in 1999.4 Although the
average income of women ages 25 to 34 who dropped out of high school
increased slightly between 1970 and 1999, the average annual income of
female dropouts in 1999 was only $10,174 far lower than that of male
dropouts and not a living wage (National Center for Education Statistics,
2001b, p. 1371.
During the same period, the average earnings for high school graduates
without postsecondary education decreased by 27 percent for men, and
rose only slightly for women. For both men and women, obtaining the kind
of solid educational foundation during high school that would prepare one
for postsecondary education has become indispensable for access to ad-
equately remunerated employment.
Although finishing high school is indeed an asset for job security after
graduation, even students who complete urban high schools in disadvan-
taged communities do not necessarily leave with the skills they need to be
gainfully employed. In the 35 largest central cities in the country, more than
half of entering high school students read at the sixth-grade level or below
(Grosso de Leon, 2002), and many of these students make little progress
while they are in high school (Campbell, Hombo, and Mazzeo, 2000;
Dreeben and Gamoran, 1986; Education Trust, 1999; Guiton and Oakes,
19951. The problem is acute for low-income students of color. On average,
African-American and Latino 17-year-olds taking the National Assessment
of Educational Progress (NAEP) read about as well as white 13-year-olds.
The findings in math are equally distressing. In 2000, 40 percent of 12th
graders in central cities scored "below basic" on the NAEP (National Cen-
ter for Education Statistics, 2001a), compared to 32 percent in urban fringe
(suburban) and large towns, and 35 percent in rural and small towns. An
important point to remember is that although the differences between ur-
ban and suburban 12th graders are not great, the picture is actually worse
than these data suggest. Because the proportion of students who have
dropped out by the 12th grade is much higher in urban than suburban
schools, the urban 12th graders assessed in these data can be considered the
high achievers in their class "survivors" of the central city schools.
Attending a failing high school, and thereby being placed "at risk" of
dropping out or being undereducated, also places youth at risk of involve-
ment with the criminal justice system (Fine et al., 2001; Poe-Yamagata and
4In constant 2000 dollars.
OCR for page 27
STUDENT ENGA GEMENT AND DISENGA GEMENT
27
Tones, 20001. A full 54 percent of inmates in New York State facilities enter
the system as dropouts, with neither a GED nor a high school diploma
(Gang), Schiraldi, and Ziedenberg, 1998; New York State Senate Demo-
cratic Task Force on Criminal Justice Reform, 20001. Using data from the
National Longitudinal Survey of Youth and U.S. census microleve! data on
state prisoners and local jail inmates, a recent study found evidence that
high school students attending high school in a state in which educational
resources are relatively low have a much higher probability of ending up in
jails and prisons as adults (Arum and LaFree, submitted). High student/
teacher ratios in high school also have been linked to higher adult incar-
ceration rates (Arum and Beattie, 19991. Attending a poorly resourced high
school or leaving high school without graduating does not necessarily lead
youth to the prison door, but it is a well-worn path, particularly for low-
income students of color.
This sad litany of statistics highlights the importance of the topic of this
volume. For the sake of the youth involved and for the sake of society, we
cannot ignore a pervasive problem with such serious consequences. The
data we have just summarized should strengthen our resolve to do what is
necessary to make high schools more inviting and engaging for their stu-
dents.
THE POTENTIAL OF SCHOOL REFORM
Nearly all cities have at least some high-performing high schools that
serve economically disadvantaged students (Terald, 20011. In 2001, The
Education Trust (Terald, 2001) published a list of more than 4,000 high-
performing schools that serve primarily low-income students or students
from historically disadvantaged racial/ethnic minority groups.5 Although
the great majority of these schools were at the elementary level, the pres-
ence of even a smattering of urban high schools on the list gives reason to
hope that outcomes can be improved in critically underperforming urban
high schools.
School reform efforts to date, however, have not improved outcomes
for urban high school students on a large scale (National Research Council,
2002a; Puma et al., 19971. Evaluations of whole-school reform efforts over
the past decade have been mixed at best (e.g., Berends, Chun, Schuyler,
56`High-performing,, schools were those serving students with reading and/or math perfor-
mance in the top third among all schools in the state at the same grade level; schools ``serving
disadvantaged students" were those with at least 50 percent low-income students and at least
50 percent African-American and Hispanic students.
OCR for page 28
28
ENGAGING SCHOOLS
Stockly, and Briggs, 2002; Berends, Heilbrunn, McKelvey, and Sullivan,
1999).
Admittedly, a few success stories often involving a highly select group
of teachers and administrators and more resources than are available to
most schools do not give us total confidence that large-scale improvement
is within our grasp. But now we also have promising models for high school
reform (American Federation of Teachers, 1998; American Youth Policy
Forum, 2000; George and McEwin, 1999; see Chapters 7 and 8, this vol-
ume) and a fair amount of knowledge about educational policies and prac-
tices that produce high levels of engagement and learning for even the most
disadvantaged students (National Research Council, 2002a; Stringfield et
al., 1997; see also Chapter 51. Although the powerful effects of students'
demographic and social circumstances on their educational attainment and
achievement should not be underestimated (Coleman et al., 1966; National
Research Council, 2002c; National Center for Education Statistics, 2000a,
2001a), educational policies and support services can mitigate the effects of
such circumstances (see Chapter 6, this volume). It is too soon to know
whether these reform approaches can be successful on a large scale, but it is
also too soon to become discouraged.
What would be required to increase students' motivation to succeed
and their engagement in learning? After a thorough review of the evidence,
the committee finds merit in the succinct answer provided by Newmann,
Wehlage, and Lamborn (1992, p. 191: "If students are to invest themselves
in the forms of mastery required by schools, they must perceive the general
enterprise of schooling as legitimate, deserving of their committed effort,
and honoring them as respected members." High schools must make stu-
dents believe and feel that they are respected and that they belong, that they
can learn what they are being required to learn, and that the lessons of
school "make sense" within the context of their own lives. All this, of
course, is much easier to prescribe than to do especially in high-poverty,
urban school communities.
We do not believe that a universal formula to accomplish these goals
exists, or that one is likely to be discovered. But we do believe that the
general principles that we have learned about motivation and engagement
can be applied and adapted to improve the way that schools carry out their
core activities, and thus the engagement and investment of their students in
learning.
This volume summarizes evidence that can be used to guide efforts to
improve adolescents' engagement in school. Because research at the high
school level is sparse compared to that at the elementary and middle school
levels, the committee was broad and flexible in its search. We examined
tightly controlled experiments, program evaluations, surveys, and case stud-
ies. We refer occasionally to well-informed but still untested theories and
OCR for page 29
STUDENT ENGA GEMENT AND DISENGA GEMENT
29
conjectures. But we make recommendations only when the accumulated
evidence points us clearly in a particular direction, and we are careful to be
clear about the source and nature of the evidence clescribeci to allow reaclers
to draw their own conclusions.
Again and again the evidence reveals the complexity and interconnec-
tions among practices. Most of the reforms we suggest are necessary; none
is sufficient. Furthermore, all of them need to be aciapteci to the particular
circumstances of incliviclual communities and schools.
ORGANIZATION OF THE REPORT
In Chapter 2, we discuss general principles of achievement motivation
and summarize research on the effects of eclucational practices on stuclent
motivation and engagement. The research reviewed in this chapter inclucles
many experimental as well as classroom-baseci studies. Chapter 3 discusses
how these principles of engagement can inform classroom teaching, focus-
ing on literacy and mathematics. It also discusses the importance of sup-
porting teacher learning and provides examples of strategies for promoting
teacher collaboration and clevelopment. Moving from the classroom to the
school, Chapter 4 focuses on the larger school context, especially the im-
portance of an intense focus on learning within a supportive school com-
munity. Research on organizational features of schools, such as tracking,
and on the stuclent population and size of schools is also reviewed.
Chapter 5 moves beyond the school by discussing strategies for con-
necting schools better to their communities and to students' families. It also
summarizes research on peer effects on high school stuclent engagement,
and suggests strategies for maximizing positive and minimizing negative
peer effects. Creating connections with the community is cliscusseci in Chap-
ter 6 as one among several strategies for aciciressing nonacademic needs
(e.g., health, mental health, family problems, pregnancy, and neighborhood
violence) that can interfere with students' ability to engage in academic
work. This chapter discusses what high schools can clo to meet students'
nonacademic needs without becoming overly clistracteci from their core
acac emlc mission.
The next two chapters move to the issue of scaling up the clevelopment
of intellectually engaging high schools by reviewing current approaches to
high school reform. Chapter 7 discusses theme-baseci schools, especially
those that emphasize eclucation for occupations as a strategy for engaging
students' interest and giving them instruction and experiences in the com-
munity that strengthen their commitment to school. Chapter 8 reviews
recent efforts at designing and implementing comprehensive reform ap-
proaches in urban high schools, and the challenges of scaling up.
The volume ends with Chapter 9, which presents conclusions and rec-
OCR for page 30
30
ENGAGING SCHOOLS
ommendations for aspects of high school policies and practices and for
future research.
For each of the topics addressed in this volume, the discussion focuses
on what the evidence suggests intellectually engaging high schools should
look like and the factors that appear to support and undermine engaging
educational policies and practices. Less is said about the process of school
reform how these practices get implemented on a large scale although a
chapter is devoted to the qualities of some of the major current reform
models. In brief, this volume focuses more on where we want to go than on
how we get there.
Although the focus is primarily on what can be done in high schools,
the policies and practices described in this volume have important implica-
tions for many issues beyond its scope including, for example, policies
that affect who is attracted into the field of teaching, preservice teacher and
leadership training and credentialing policies, state and federal testing poli-
cies, graduation requirements, and school funding and resource allocation.
References are occasionally made to these policies, but they are not dis-
cussed in detail.
Representative terms from entire chapter:
education statistics
