DROPPED OUT:

FACTORS THAT CAUSE STUDENTS TO LEAVE BEFORE GRADUATION

A Dissertation

Presented to

The Faculty of the Education Department

Carson-Newman University

In Partial Fulfillment

Of the

Requirements for the Degree

Doctor of Education

By

Andrea K. P. Moore

March 2017

1
Copyright © 2017 Andrea Kathlene Parton Moore

All Right Reserved.

2
3
 Abstract

In the United States of America where every person has the right to a free education from

grades Kindergarten through 12th grade, one in three students does not graduate. In fact, more

than 7,000 students drop out each school day. This national crisis has been an educational

nightmare for the past few decades. This study examines the factors that cause students to leave

before graduation, and seeks information about preventative methods to keep students from

quitting. The study consisted of 15 respondents from an adult high school in East Tennessee.

The study utilized the qualitative research methodology by using a one-on-one interview guide,

follow-up phone call interviews, and observations. These research questions were examined:

What factors cause students to leave school before graduation? Are there any preventative

measures that educators can do to keep students in school until after graduation? After the

completion of the interviews, responses were transcribed and coded in order to identify emergent

themes within the data. Significant outcomes of the research showed: (a) a lack of credits and

falling behind was the most common reason why students quit; (b) moving, being bullied,

language barriers, and a combination of the factors were also listed as recurrent reasons students

dropped out; (c) respondents felt like monitoring progress, providing academic support, and

creating a safe and inviting learning environment could prevent students from leaving prior to

graduation. The conclusions of this study could assist educators in decreasing the dropout rate,

as well as creating more supportive learning environments for everyone. This study may also

assist educators in understanding what truly motivates and engages students in the classroom.

Lastly, information from the study could shed light on how to better support at-risk students.

4
 Acknowledgements and Dedication

There were so many people who helped me along the way that it would take volumes to

thank them all. However, I would like to begin by acknowledging Jesus Christ because it is only

through him that we can do all things. I would like to thank my husband, Rashid for all his help,

patience and support over the last few years. Without him I would not have been able to finish.

I would also like to thank my co-worker Emily Weals for all the classes she covered for me

during the last two years while I worked on my degree. I would like to thank Dr. Brenda Dean;

she has been invaluable throughout the dissertation process. All the support and encouragement

that she has shown me throughout the last year has been essential to the completion of my

dissertation. Dr. Shon was wise, patient, and kind while working with me on the methodology of

my study. A huge thanks to Dr. Sandy Enloe because she has been a wonderful encourager

throughout the process, always providing helpful hints on how to balance the project and life

simultaneously. I would like to thank my mother, father, and sister for the unconditional love

and support they showed to me throughout the last few years while I was completing the

doctorate program. I would also like to thank Dr. David Freeman for his diligence and patience

as my reader. Lastly, I would like to acknowledge the Sevier County School System for

allowing me to work and study in one of the greatest places on earth.

I would like to dedicate this dissertation to my baby boy to whom I will give birth to very

soon. Rashid Jamahl Moore II has been with me throughout the entire dissertation process, and

he has patiently waited for me to finish this project before making his appearance into this world.

5
 Table of Contents

Abstract ........................................................................................................................................... 4

Acknowledgements and Dedication ............................................................................................... 5

Table of Figures ............................................................................................................................ 11

Chapter I ....................................................................................................................................... 13

Introduction ............................................................................................................................... 13

Statement of Problem ................................................................................................................ 14

The Value of a High School Education ................................................................................ 14

The Reasons Students are Leaving ....................................................................................... 15

Economical Link ................................................................................................................... 16

Incarceration Link ................................................................................................................. 17

Race and Gender Link .......................................................................................................... 17

Purpose of Study ....................................................................................................................... 18

Research Questions ................................................................................................................... 19

Overview of Methodology ........................................................................................................ 19

Limitations of the Study............................................................................................................ 20

Significance of the Study .......................................................................................................... 21

Definition of Terms................................................................................................................... 22

Summary ................................................................................................................................... 22

Chapter II ...................................................................................................................................... 24

6
Literature Review...................................................................................................................... 24

Factors That Influence Students to Drop Out ........................................................................... 28

Student-Related Indicators .................................................................................................... 28

School-Related Indicators ..................................................................................................... 31

Family-Related Indicators ..................................................................................................... 34

Community-Related Indicators ............................................................................................. 37

Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs .................................................................................................. 41

Motivation and Engagement ..................................................................................................... 42

Motivation Theory ................................................................................................................ 42

Student Engagement ............................................................................................................. 47

Behavioral Engagement ........................................................................................................ 48

Academic Engagement ......................................................................................................... 49

Psychological Disengagement .............................................................................................. 50

Social Engagement................................................................................................................ 52

Successful Programs for At-Risk Students ............................................................................... 54

Shopping Mall School........................................................................................................... 54

Technology Focused Alternative Schools TFAS .................................................................. 58

Programs with Academic Supports ....................................................................................... 59

Programs Using Early Warning Indicators and School Transition ....................................... 61

Community Programs ........................................................................................................... 63

7
 Summary ................................................................................................................................... 65

Chapter III ..................................................................................................................................... 67

Methodology ............................................................................................................................. 67

Research Questions ................................................................................................................... 68

Research Design........................................................................................................................ 69

Research Context ...................................................................................................................... 72

Demographics of School District .......................................................................................... 72

Demographics of the adult high school ................................................................................ 73

Instrumentation ......................................................................................................................... 74

Population ................................................................................................................................. 75

Participants ................................................................................................................................ 75

Data Collection ......................................................................................................................... 76

Data Analysis ............................................................................................................................ 77

Role of Researcher .................................................................................................................... 78

Ethical Issues ............................................................................................................................ 78

Limitations ................................................................................................................................ 79

Chapter IV..................................................................................................................................... 81

Research Findings ..................................................................................................................... 81

The Respondents ................................................................................................................... 85

What Factors Cause Students to Leave School before Graduation ...................................... 86

8
 Are There Any Preventative Measures to Keep Students in School .................................... 89

Guiding Questions Analyzed Using Emergent Themes ........................................................... 91

Summary ................................................................................................................................... 97

Chapter V ...................................................................................................................................... 99

Findings, Implications, and Recommendations ........................................................................ 99

Summary of the Study .............................................................................................................. 99

Research Questions ............................................................................................................. 100

Findings................................................................................................................................... 101

Findings Related to Research.................................................................................................. 102

Student-Related Indicators .................................................................................................. 102

School-Related Indicators ................................................................................................... 103

Family-Related Indicators ................................................................................................... 106

Community-Related Indicators ........................................................................................... 107

Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs ............................................................................................ 109

Motivational and Engagement Theory................................................................................ 111

Conclusions ............................................................................................................................. 113

Monitor School Progress and Identify At-Risk Students .................................................... 114

Provide Academic Support to At-Risk Students................................................................. 114

Create a Safe and Inviting Learning Environment ............................................................. 115

Limitations .............................................................................................................................. 116

9
 Recommendation for Future Research.................................................................................... 116

Summary ................................................................................................................................. 117

References ................................................................................................................................... 119

Appendices.................................................................................................................................. 125

Appendix A: Interview Guide ................................................................................................. 126

Appendix B: Participant’s Letter of Consent .......................................................................... 128

Appendix C: Director of School’s Letter of Consent ............................................................. 130

10
 Table of Figures

Figure 4. 1 presents overall percentages of the ages of the respondents in the study ................... 85

Figure 4. 2 presents the percentages of the overall ages of the respondents when they dropped out

of high school ................................................................................................................................ 85

Figure 4. 3 presents the overall percentage of the last grades attended by the respondents ......... 86

Figure 4. 4 presents the overall percentages of the grade level when the respondents fell behind

....................................................................................................................................................... 86

Figure 4. 5 presents the overall percentages of the factors that caused students to dropout ........ 89

Figure 4. 6 shows the overall percentages of whether or not respondents regretted their decision

to quit school ................................................................................................................................. 89

Figure 4. 7 presents the overall percentages of responses given to answer what the school could

have done to keep them in school ................................................................................................. 91

Figure 4. 8 presents the percentages of the overall responses given to answer what would have

prevented the dropouts from quitting school ................................................................................ 91

Figure 4. 9 presents the percentages of the overall responses given to answer whether there was

an adult with whom they had a relationship and could discuss personal problems ...................... 93

Figure 4. 10 presents the overall percentages of responses to answer what family members of the

dropouts had also dropped out. ..................................................................................................... 95

Figure 4. 11 shows the overall percentages of the responses to answer what employment

opportunities are available for dropouts. ...................................................................................... 96

Figure 4. 12 shows the overall percentages of the respondents’ annual salaries. ......................... 96

Figure 5. 1 presents the overall percentages of responses given to answer what factors cause

them to leave school based on gender......................................................................................... 108

11
Figure 5. 2 presents the overall percentages of responses given to answer what factors cause

them to leave school based on race. ............................................................................................ 108

12
 Chapter I

Introduction

Albert Einstein was four before he could speak, seven before he could read, and by his

teen years had dropped out of high school. Although he did not complete school, he still

managed to be named the man of the twentieth century. Henry Ford, a self-made

multimillionaire, created Ford Motor Company and the auto assembly line, but he did not

graduate from high school. The co-founder of, Standard Oil Company, John D. Rockefeller Sr.

was the first billionaire recorded in history; he too was a high school dropout (Kerry, 2002). The

late anchorman for ABC news, Peter Jennings dropped out of school when he was in the tenth

grade, and he even failed to attain the equivalence of a GED, but Jennings went on to be

extremely prosperous financially (“Biography for Peter,” 2005).

All these men had a few things in common, they all were hard workers, extremely

successful, and they all quit school before graduating. In the eyes of many, dropping out of

school sounds ideal because those who leave do not have to attend school, and often think they

can still be successful. Unfortunately, life for most dropouts does not play out as well as it did

for Albert Einstein, Henry Ford, John D. Rockefeller Sr., or Peter Jennings. In reality, most

people that do not complete high school end up living just below the poverty line. Although

many preventative measures have been made to keep students in school, the dropout rate still lies

at a high rate (“Dropout and Truancy,” 2005).

13
 Statement of Problem

In our nation, one in three students leave before graduation, which means that more than

7,000 students decide to dropout every day. An astonishing 1.2 million students will more than

likely not graduate with their perspective class (C. Swanson, 2004). Although the U.S. was once

a world leader in high school completion, now America is ranked 17th in developed nations for

graduation rate. Among industrialized nations, this country is the only one where its students are

less likely to graduate from high school than their parents (“Organisation for economic,” 2007).

Dropouts are not just affecting their own lives, but they are costing our economy as well.

In fact, the Alliance for Excellent Education (2008) explained that if the dropouts in the class of

2008 had graduated, then more than 300 million dollars over their lifetime would have been

added to the nation’s economy. Moreover, if the graduation rate does not increase over the next

years, then more than 10 million students will become dropouts and cost our nation trillions of

dollars (Alliance for Excellent Education, 2008). These dropouts are costing the state and local

governments billions of dollars because of unemployment benefits, public assistance, and lost

revenue (Bridgeland, Dilulio, & Wulsin, 2008; Christle, Jolivette, & Nelson, 2007; National

Education Association, 2006; Orfield, Losen, Wald, & Swanson, 2004; Romberger, 1983;

Romberger, 1987).

The Value of a High School Education

Many students who drop out have personal problems that cause them to leave school,

others have financial problems, and some just thought school was just a waste of time. However,

the number of people who do not complete high school is significantly correlated with income

levels, incarceration numbers, race, and gender (Hale, 1998). Although it seems apparent to

most, an education or high school diploma is vital to living a successful life. Education is

14
important in the global marketplace. In today’s society if people want to have middle to upper

class incomes then most of them must have post-secondary education? The problem that keeps

occurring in the United States is that students are quitting before they finish high school. Most

students are leaving between their ninth and tenth grade year, thus leaving the students not well

prepared for jobs or responsibilities that adults encounter everyday (“Confronting the

Graduation,” 2005).

When students leave from high school to begin working, it is hard for them to find jobs

because they have no resume and no defined skill. According to the statement in The New York

Times, “high school dropouts, on average, earn $9,245 less per year than high school graduates”

(Herbert, 2005, p. 2). A dropouts’ desirability in the job market, and the chance of a college

degree all but vanishes when they decide to quit school (Patterson, Hale, & Stressman, 2007). It

is essential for a student to finish high school in order to enter into the playing field of careers.

High school graduates are at an advantage because “dropouts are more likely to be unemployed,

less likely to vote, and more likely to be imprisoned” (Herbert, 2005, p. 2).

The Reasons Students are Leaving

The significant amount of dropouts from high school is an ongoing dilemma and a silent

epidemic that has become a national crisis. Although preventative measures are being used,

students are still dropping out. The question educators continue to ask themselves is, “what is

making students leave school?” Although there is no single reason why students are leaving,

research presents various reasons mentioned by dropouts. Many students quit school before

graduation because the students thought that high school had nothing to offer them. Students felt

that they could do better without the education that was being provided to them. Other students

said the exact opposite, that school was too difficult, and that they could not succeed. In an

15
article about a student from Oakland High School, it stated, “that the school is so poorly run that

students would make good grades even if they did not do their work” (Lagto, 2005, p. 1). It

further explained that poor classroom management led to arguments, fights, and classroom

disruptions during instruction time, which made it difficult to learn (Lagto, 2005). Poor

administration and teacher leadership are both issues that can be improved and changed in order

to keep students in school. However, sometimes the factors are out of the education systems’

control. The students who leave in order to work to help pay bills for their families, those that

choose to leave to start a family, or those students that lack interest and desire to attend school

can sometimes not be reached by the system (“Youth Who Drop,” 2000). Although these

students make the decision to leave, do they realize what they are giving up when they choose to

drop out?

Economical Link

There are some students who break the family tradition of dropping out, but most do not

and are likely to fall in the footsteps of their parents who dropped out (Gallagher, 2002). Hence,

that their parents’ beliefs and emphasis on education has a huge role on that of the student that is

at-risk for leaving. This cycle of dropouts leaves these families incapable of making enough

money to provide the essentials for their families. Moreover, making dropouts more likely to

come from low-income families instead of those of higher income families. In fact, the average

income in 2000 for a high school dropout was $12,400. This falls drastically below the average

income of a high school graduate in 2000, which was $21,000 (Christle, Jolievette, & Nelson,

2007).

Even though there are many faces to the composition of a family, the family structure can

impact the decision of the student wanting to leave. Having more than one parent in the home

16
allows parents to have more time to be involved in the student’s education, and to provide

economically for the family’s needs. Many times families that fall just below the poverty level

are made up of single parent homes where the parent involvement in the student’s education is

almost non-existent. The lack of involvement usually comes from the parent not being present

due to work or other reasons, leaving the student to care for themselves as well as complete

homework assignments and take care of the home. This responsibility sometimes leaves students

with no option but to leave school.

Incarceration Link

Individuals with high school diplomas tend to have a more successful life than those

students that dropout. Not only are they further qualified for jobs, but also the person is less

likely to be imprisoned (Herbert, 2005). The United States is the number one leader in prison

incarceration (Carroll, 2008). Those that choose to leave before graduation, and are unemployed

are six to ten times more likely to be involved activities that break the law (Kranick & Hargis,

1998). A high school dropout is eight times as likely to be involved in criminal activities, end up

in jail, or on probation (Jimerson, Egeland, Stoufe, & Carlson, 2000; Schoenlien, 2004). One of

the main reasons these dropouts find themselves incarcerated is because they are unable to

provide for their families and have to turn to criminal activities in order to do so. Moreover,

these dropouts find themselves in a revolving door that keeps them going in and out of the justice

system.

Race and Gender Link

Students that are minorities encompass the characteristics that correlate with dropping out

(Davalos, Chavez, & Guardiola, 1999). Inner city schools have higher dropout rates than those

in suburban areas (“Youth who drop,” 2000). Even though many people think that inner city

17
schools are predominately filled with Black American students, the Hispanic population has

increased tremendously in these schools, and currently represents the highest rate for dropouts

followed by Black Americans then White Americans (Weis, Ferarr, & Petire, 1989). Ginsberg

and Miller-Cribbs (2000) explained that students who have different languages spoken in the

home other than the primary language of the school have a higher rate of dropping out before

graduation. According to Carpenter and Ramirez (2007), other factors that where shared among

White and Hispanic students that left before graduation were gender, family composition, and

time doing homework. Additionally, men are more likely to leave school then women, and

furthermore those males from a single-parent home were found to leave more frequently within

both the White and Hispanic ethnicities (Carpenter & Ramirez, 2007; Weis, Ferrar, & Petrie,

1989).

Purpose of Study

Even though the dropout rate has slightly decreased, America still has one of the highest

numbers of high school dropouts in the industrialized countries (Herbert, 2005). In fact, the

United States has placed tenth in the world for the number of students that have left school

(“Youth who drop,” 2000). Education is important in the aspect that once you receive it, it is

yours and no one can take it away. Americans have the right to a free education until the 12th

grade, so why are young adults not taking advantage of the incredible deal? Why are students

dropping out? What would cause someone to give up a free education? Why can educators

across America not keep their students in school? Are public schools too hard for students to be

successful, or are the students too lazy and unmotivated to complete the coursework for 12 years

of school? Are the students leaving because they have no parent involvement in their education

18
or decision to leave? The purpose of this study is to address some of these questions, and answer

the research questions of the study.

Research Questions

1. What factors cause students to leave school before graduation?

2. Are there any preventative measures that educators can do to keep students in school until

after graduation?

Overview of Methodology

Although much research is available on the dropout crisis and prevention, the graduation

rate has not increased much at all over the last few decades. Researchers have completed

quantitative, qualitative, and mixed methods research in order to pinpoint characteristics, factors,

and preventative measures for the silent epidemic of dropouts. Action research and empirical

studies have been done to test for self-motivation among students and student engagement in

order to get a closer look at why these young students are choosing to leave school. Most of the

studies show research that analyzes themes of dropouts and factors such as; socio-economic

status, family makeup, grades, test scores, completion of grade levels, attendance, discipline, and

behavioral problems. Even with all the research and studies that show the advantages of those

who graduate, and the struggles of those that do not finish school, students are still choosing to

leave before graduation.

Not only is the knowledge of why students leaving important, knowing how to prevent

them from leaving is vital to not only the students’ success, but economically, it is essential for

these students to finish high school. Preventative research and studies that predict factors of at-

risk students will aid educators in keeping students in school and will help policies better meet

the needs of every student. According to Green and Winters (2005), creative solutions usually

19
originate from qualitative methods or research. Creswell (2003) explained the use of qualitative

studies not only give results that are more detailed and in depth than others, but they also

persuade researchers to explore the underlying issues of the problem. Further, he expressed that

it is important to search more than just the “what” factor in qualitative studies, but he stated that

the “why” factor needs to be answered as well (2003).

This study was conducted in an adult high school that provides various programs for

students that left high school. The programs are for students who lack only a few credits to

graduate, who are English language learners, or those students who are seeking an alternative

diploma. This school was equipped to service and guide the adults who attend the school down

whichever path they choose to complete. The adult high school is a safe and respectable learning

environment where the teachers, administrators, and students are all striving for the same goal of

obtaining the diploma.

Throughout the study, the researcher interviewed a sample of students who attended the

adult high school to complete a qualitative study of why the students dropped out, and to

determine, what actions or interventions could have prevented them from becoming a dropout?

The results were categorized within themes and subthemes in Chapter IV.

Limitations of the Study

The limitations of this study are as follows:

1. The sample of students that were interviewed was comprised of students who decided to

return to high school. No dropout who had not returned to school was interviewed which

could change the findings of the study.

20
 2. The sample was composed of those students who were in attendance on the day of the

interview. The same of sample students may not be a clear representative of the entire

population of the students at the adult school.

3. Data obtained from the interviews are students’ opinions, perspectives, and beliefs, and

they are subjective.

4. The students interviewed were comprised of a small number of participants from a rural

area in east Tennessee. This caused a limitation in the diversity of gender and race

among those being interviewed. The lack of diversity does not show a broad scope of

factors of why the students left before graduations due to the lack of diversity.

Significance of the Study

The research of this study is important to educators at the local, state, and national levels

because they are seeking to increase graduation rates among our systems across the nation. The

Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA) determines each high school’s Adequate Yearly Progress

(AYP) by the graduation rate of the school. In order for these high schools to close gaps and

show improvement in the AYP status, schools must find ways to keep students in school and on

track to graduate. The input from students that left and completed a program through the adult

high school could give administrators the information they need to prevent at-risk students from

becoming unengaged, uninterested, or ultimately dropping out. If all educational stakeholders

could communicate and organize preventative programs for at-risk students, then the graduation

rate could increase while economic deficiencies and incarceration numbers decrease.

21
 Definition of Terms

Adult school: are schools that designed for those over the age of 16 who did not complete high

school. Adult schools have programs that provide classes for test preparation, career training,

language skills, and continuing education (“What is An Adult,” 2016).

Alternative diploma: are diplomas that require less vigorous course of study than that of a

standard high school diploma. Examples of alternative diplomas are Certificate of

Completion/Attendance, Certificate of Achievement, IEP/Special Education Diploma, or

Occupational diploma (“Graduation Requirements and Diploma,” 2009).

At-risk student: are students who exhibit low self-esteem and low academic performance. These

students are not experiencing any success in school and are potential dropouts (Donnelly, 1987).

Community: A social group of any size that often has the same historical heritage and common

culture that reside in a specific area and share government (Community, n.d.).

Dropout: a person who rejects conventional society and/or quits or abandons a course of study

(Dropout definition, n.d.).

Family: a basic social unit consisting of one or more parent or adult and their children dwelling

together or not (Family, n.d.).

Graduate: a person who has completed a course of study and has earned a degree or diploma

from a school, university, or college (Graduate, n.d.).

Summary

This chapter provided the introduction of the study on dropouts. It addressed the crisis of

the dropout rate within the United States. This crisis not only affects those who dropout by

increasing the likeliness of incarceration and living below the poverty line, but it also cost the

nation millions of dollars because of the programs and aid that has to be provided to those who

22
qualify for it. This chapter also explained the obstacles that dropouts have to overcome that

many times those with a high school diploma do not. The value of a diploma, reasons students

were leaving, and the significance of the study was briefly introduced in this chapter.

In this chapter the qualitative method was justified for the study. Using interviews and

looking at the qualitative data is the best approach based off other theories that have looked at

studies completed on dropouts. The methodologies for the study are one-on-one interviews with

participants and follow-up interviews in order to obtain as much information as possible. The

limitations of the study were also addressed within this chapter to identify issues that could

possibly influence data collection and outcomes of the study. The definition of terms was

presented in chapter I to insure the readers’ familiarity with vocabulary that is used within the

study.

Chapter II further reviews factors that influence students to leave high school before

graduation. This chapter presented research on; student interest, student engagement, student

behavior, student grades, parent involvement, family factors, community influences, gender and

race, socioeconomic status, and incarceration rates. It also explained obstacles that dropouts

must face in comparison to those that graduate from high school. Chapter II showed a closer

look at what dropouts are costing Americans annually and progressively over a lifetime. Lastly,

the research presented any preventative measures that can be implemented in order to keep our

students in school.

Chapter III demonstrated and explained the methodology of the study. It presented the

information about the participants, the interviews, the place where the study was conducted, and

how the data was categorized into different themes and subthemes. Chapter IV explained the

outcomes and the findings of the research. In this chapter the data obtained from the study was

23
presented within their categories and themes, and are explained thoroughly for complete

understanding. In chapter V, the researcher’s knowledge and findings of the study are

demonstrated, and conclusions about the data are presented and explained.

Chapter II

Literature Review

This literature review observed research on factors that cause students to drop out of high

school. This chapter is laid out in three major areas of literature. The initial category examines

the factors that cause students to leave. The next section is about student engagement,

motivational theory, and how they affect student achievement. Finally, a review of research on

successful intervention programs was discussed.

The research on factors that cause students to drop out identified an assortment of

findings. Both qualitative, quantitative, and mixed method studies concluded that the increasing

dropout rate was a problem for all education systems, and they reinforced the need for

assessment and intervention. A team of researchers made up of Wells, Bechard, and Hambly

(1989) found that a combination of factors, which they identified into four broad categories

influence students’ decisions to leave prior to graduation. These categories, which are student

related, school related, family related, and community related, are used within this chapter to

categorize the factors that were identified throughout this study.

24
 There are many ways in which school systems define a dropout. Being defined as a

dropout is based on many various factors that each state looks at individually. In fact, the

definition varies in every state. In many cases, it is hard to find the real dropout rate among the

nation due to the various definitions in each state. In the state of Tennessee a dropout is an

individual who:

was enrolled in a school at some time during the previous school year; was not enrolled at

the beginning of the current school year; has not graduated from high school or

completed a state-approved educational program; and does not meet any of the following

exclusionary conditions: transfer to another public school system, private system, or

specifically approved state school; temporary absence due to suspension or excused

illness; death (“Dropout and Truancy,” 2015, p.1).

There are many more definitions that can apply for the word dropout, but the ones stated

above are the main definitions of a dropout in the state of Tennessee. The other facts that

contribute to being considered a dropout have to with the defined period of the school year, facts

about alternative certificates, that can be received, and many other concepts that apply to being

labeled as a dropout.

What does it mean to graduate? In many states, there are different definitions or paths to

graduating high school. Many students earn what is called a regular diploma, while others

complete an equivalency test and get what is called general educational development (GED), and

lastly, some students receive alternate diplomas which have various requirements, such as

attendance and passing a certain test provided by the state (High school dropout rates, 1996).

Alternate diplomas are those that require less vigorous course of study than that of a standard

high school diploma. Examples of alternative diplomas are Certificate of

25
Completion/Attendance, Certificate of Achievement, IEP/Special Education Diploma, or

Occupational diploma (“Graduation Requirements and Diploma,” 2009). A regular diploma is

awarded when an individual completes all 12 years and passes the required course work (High

school dropout rates, 1996). Since the implementation of the Tennessee Diploma project in 2009,

a student is required to pass 22 credits to graduate and they are tested on core subject areas with

end of the course exams (Graduation Requirements, 2015).

High school graduation is extremely important due to the fact that many who fail to

obtain a diploma end up earning extremely lower incomes than those that are successful

graduates (“Reasons to Stay,” n.d.). In fact, the U.S. Department of Labor states, “high school

dropouts are 72% more likely to be unemployed and earn $275 less that high school graduates”

(“So You Are Thinking,” 2005). In another article, it states, “The half-million young adults that

dropped out from high school between October 1997 and October 1998 were much less likely to

participate in the labor force (60.9%) less than their peers that graduated from high school”

(Cantave & Harrison, 1999, p.3). Moreover, “High school dropouts earn $9,200 less per year on

average than those who graduate. Over the course of their lifetimes, they will earn an average of

$375,000 less than high school graduates, and roughly $1 million less than college

graduates”(Burrus & Roberts, 2012, p.1). The need for highly skilled workers is now becoming

more of a necessity for today’s job market. In order to be skilled in an area of work, an

individual must attend school at least through the 12th grade (Youth Who Drop, 2000). Another

interesting statistic is that “high school graduates earn $143 more per week than high school

dropouts” (Reasons To Stay, n.d., p. 2). Sadly, “dropouts comprise a disproportionate

percentage of the nations’ prison and death row inmates. Amazingly, 82% of prisoners in

America are high school dropouts” (Reasons To Stay, n.d., p. 2). Graduating with a high school

26
diploma of some kind will allow an individual to decide how he or she will live for the rest of

their lives. It is not just a façade that graduating from high school is important; it is a fact

because people that do not finish high school have little room for success.

Dropouts cause problems not only for themselves, but for everyone else as well. The

students that are choosing to leave high school before graduation cost the government money

because they are more likely to receive government aid than those who choose to stay in school

(Reasons To Stay, n.d.). For those who dropout of high school and cannot find jobs that provide

health care or insurance often end up costing the U.S. taxpayers money in order to provide

welfare, Medicaid, and emergency room assistance (Krugman, 2005). The societal cost of a

dropout is an outrageous amount of money for taxpayers to pay.

Each year’s class of dropouts will cost the country over $200 billion during their lifetimes

in lost earnings and unrealized tax revenue. Dropouts comprise nearly half of the heads

on welfare and an even higher percentage of the prison population. (Hale, 1998, p. 1).

The reason that most dropouts have trouble living successful lives is because over half of the

dropouts leave when they are 15 to 16 years old (Youth Who Drop, 2000). Leaving at such a

young age leaves them unprepared for jobs or situations that they will face throughout life.

These dropouts are not only making it hard for themselves, but they are also placing a burden on

society by having them pay for their debts.

In today’s society it is almost impossible to live comfortably without a college degree

much less a high school diploma. People who drop out of high school mostly earn wages below

the poverty level, which means “the poverty rate for families headed by dropouts is more than

twice that for families headed by high school graduates” (Herbert, 2005, p. 3). Almost all

27
dropouts are defeated before they begin a future because they do not have a diploma. Although

there are astonishing statistics that show the problems that high school dropouts must face,

people are still choosing to quit school. What factors are causing them to leave?

Factors That Influence Students to Drop Out

Student-Related Indicators

Student-related factors are often described as student actions that occur both in and

outside of the school setting. Many times the student-related factors are negative student

behaviors that cause the student to become less engaged in school. These factors include areas

such as student behavior and disciplinary problems, academic achievement, and attendance.

Research shows correlations between student behavior and academic performance with

the dropout rate. Students who dropout have either disciplinary problems, truancy issues, may be

on probation, or just do not do well in school (“Youth Who Drop,” 2000). Students with

disciplinary problems are 28% more likely to leave school than those who do not cause problems

(Weis, Farrar, & Petrie, 1989). Children that are on probation for breaking the law are 32.7%

likely to quit before graduation.

In a longitudinal study conducted by Ekstrom, Goertz, Pollack, and Rock (1986) 248 girls

and 247 boys were followed from grades 7-12. The researchers examined behavioral, cognitive,

and demographic factors. They concluded that students who were previously known to have

demonstrated high levels of aggressive behavior issues and scored lower academically were

those that became dropouts (1986). In a longitudinal study conducted by Cairns, Cairns, and

Neckerman (1989), relationships between behavioral, cognitive, and demographic factors were

analyzed. They assessed 248 girls and 247 boys and observed them from grade 7 through either

dropout or completion of high school. The study included individual interviews to assess the

28
14% who left school before grade 11. The researchers concluded that 82% of the males and 4%

of the females with increased aggressiveness and low performing academics in the seventh grade

had decided to drop out.

According to United Way website, “Academic performance is another key factor that was

consistently cited as a factor that influences a student staying in school and graduating. Several

research articles cited that the road to academic success starts early in the education system” (“3

Reasons Students,” 2013, p.1). Academic performance is one of the most influencing factors

that cause students to quit school. The authors Weis, Farrar, & Petrie (1989) express that 37.0%

of students with grades C and below are more likely to leave school then those who make A’s

and B’s. Students that have failing grades and have been retained are more likely to quit school.

Students that left school said that they had to be retained in a class or failed, so they were too

embarrassed to come to the same class the next year (Weis, Farrar, & Petrie, 1989). Alexander

and Entwisle (2001) found that students that had been retained at any point during school career

increased the likelihood of quitting school regardless of the reason for retention. According to

Alexander and Entwisle, the highest predicting factor for dropouts was if a student had repeated

a grade (2001).

An early study on behavior and academic achievement while attending school and its’

effect on dropping out was conducted by Roderick (1993). She analyzed three dropout

indicators for students starting in fourth grade through the completion of high school. The study

showed reasons that can be used when determining the factors in dropping out. The three

indicators included performance in classwork, engagement in school, and social background. In

her study she compared dropouts with non-dropouts. She used history analysis to look at

academic records including grades and attendance. She found a pattern displaying two separate

29
types of dropouts: the early ones who left between 7th and 9th grade, and the other dropouts that

left later between grades 10 and 12. The findings showed that these two types of dropouts had

very different academic performances through their educational careers. The students who left

early showed poor academic performance as early as 4th grade. The dropouts who left later had

the same performances in 4th grade, but showed tremendous regressions during the transitional

years into middle and high school.

Students with truancy issues are 33.2% likely to drop out of high school. In fact,

Allensworth and Easton (2007) established that attendance was an immense factor of

successfully completing high school. They found that absentee rates during transition years from

elementary to middle school and middle school to high school were particularly significant in the

dropout rate. Absenteeism was also identified as a primary indicator in student engagement.

Cairns et al (1989) found that schools, which are diverse and highly normative, were found to be

the most helpful for keeping kids on track and in school. Schools that fell in the subgroups of no

clear normative culture and disenfranchised had higher rates of absenteeism. School structures

that clearly defined that school culture were more likely to have a lower absentee rate. Bryk and

Thum (1989) explained in their study about how the organizational structure of a school affects

dropouts. The research used linear analysis to study what leads to absenteeism. The research

found that school organizations with specific norms in place had less of a risk for student

absenteeism, thus, lowering the dropout rate.

In a study, conducted by the California Dropout Research Project, it was confirmed that

30,000 juvenile crimes would have been prevented and more than $550 million dollars would

have been saved if the dropout rate were reduced by half. The same research project studied the

30
effect of dropouts on the state’s economics, and determined that $46.6 billion are lost by the state

for each group of 20 year olds that drops out (Belfield & Levin, 2007).

School-Related Indicators

School related factors defined by Wells et al (1989) are those factors that occur during

the school day and are related to the structures and activities within the day. These factors

include things such as school climate and learning environment, teacher –student engagement,

school structure, and school vision. Every school related factor has the ability to either keep

students in school or deter them from finishing. Schools must find ways to keep students in

school.

When interviewed, some dropouts claim that they did not have a good enough high

school experience. In one instance, a student expressed that her school was a waste of time and

that the students would not even do their homework or class work and still get passing grades

(Lagto, 2005). It was also exclaimed that teachers could not control the classroom, and she felt

like it was a waste of her time to go to school every day when she was not learning (Lagto,

2005). The authors Weis, Farrar, and Petrie (1989) explained that 31% students just quit because

they did not like school. In a different article, the author states that students with poor grades felt

like there was no hope in continuing school (“Youth Who Drop,” 2000).

Another reason mentioned was that students do not feel safe at school so they choose to

leave and to not finish at all. When students do not feel safe at school and are at risk to leave,

counseling should be provided to the students, but “on average, only one certified counselor is

available for each 500 students in all schools…and they have many assignments that have leaves

little time to spend with the students that are at risk for dropping out” (“Youth Who Drop,” 2000,

p.4). School structures characterized with “safety and orderliness in a location that is accessible

31
and not-threatening can make a powerful contribution to dropout prevention” (Bonikowske,

1987, p. 75).

Learning institutions influence students’ success in so many ways. Some of these

structures have been studied and have found to be positive influences on the dropout rate. Small

learning communities, or schools within schools, help students feel engaged and important which

increases academic performance in large high schools (Baker & Sansone, 1990). Some school

systems have followed the “small schools” movement which was created with the financial

support of Bill Gates. These schools continuously track and follow students to determine their

cohort graduation rate. However, while some schools are successful, others show little to no

change within the preliminary results (Gates, 2008).

The vision of a school and the interaction the staff has with its’ students plays a

substantial role in decreasing the number of dropouts. In an ethnographic case study conducted

by Fine (1991) she described an environment where student-teacher engagement, school

disciplinary policies, district policies and curriculum contributed to 40% of the dropout rate.

Fine (1991) found that unsuccessful students were transferred to alternative schools, and staff

members were asked to identify students that they thought was at-risk for leaving. Interviews

with the teachers, students, administrators and counselors were conducted, recorded, and

transcribed. Fine (1991) found that no prevention plan for dropouts existed, and the graduation

rate was irrelevant to the goals of increasing both academic standard and student achievement.

Within the interviews the principal shared her goal of developing a new approach to the

standards within the courses, and students indicated that teachers that helped them excel shared

the same qualities. These teachers strived to understand students’ point of views and tried to

offset their feeling of powerlessness (Fine, 1991).

32
 A school’s focus usually lies in the hands of the administrators and district leaders.

District leadership also plays a role in strategy development for teaching and learning. School

leaders have a significant part in preventing dropouts, and the responsibility and accountability

of decreasing the dropout rate lies within their plate of duties. School boards, superintendents,

curriculum supervisors, school administrators, and teachers must engage in a successful

partnership to collaborate and strive for a successful improvement agenda. In order to monitor

prevention intervention efforts, school leaders must provide adequate resources, research based

training, technical support, and current student driven data.

School leaders must receive reinforcement and encouragement from their school board.

This support leads to innovative schools and collaboration with employers and universities.

Educational leaders struggle at every level to proactively implement programs that prevent

students from dropping out, and prepare those who graduate from college and careers.

In the report, The District Leadership Challenge: Empowering Principals to Improve

Teaching and Learning, Bottoms and Fry (2009) found that school systems have to advance

working environments and support for high school administrators. Without improvements, the

nation will continuously be plagued by the increasing dropout rates and the ill prepared workers

for the job market. The report also found after interviewing administrators from both high and

low performing schools that relationships between curriculum supervisors and high school

administrators can advance or decrease the principal’s ability to efficiently lead a school in order

to receive higher achievement levels. This same report also noted that principals with schools

that were most improved had better working relationships with the district and felt like the

district had little control over decisions about the individual school improvement. On the other

hand, administrators of schools with little improvement felt like the improvement reforms were

33
centralized in the district office and they were tightly controlled by the district (Bottoms & Fry,

2009).

Reform strategies such as; utilizing school time so teachers can work together on

instructional problems, additional staff that are highly qualified in their expertise of instruction,

extra tutoring and support for students, and access to advanced up to date materials all result in

successful school districts. Lastly, Bottoms and Fry (2009) state “The research is clear and

overwhelming: If school districts want high-achieving high schools, they must empower

principals to be leaders of change” (p. 12).

Family-Related Indicators

Family factors include qualities like family environment, composition, socio-economic

status, and drug use in the home. According to Wells t al (1989), family related factors are more

likely the cause of students leaving school. Parental support, parenthood, and other home life

related factors are the very ones that contribute to a student’s decision to leave or stay in school.

Wells et all (1989) explained that a lack of parent support along with an abusive home is

connected with a higher incidence of dropping out. Lastly, factors such as living in a violent

dysfunctional home, a home were drugs and alcohol are abused, a home where family

deficiencies are present, a home where a language other than the primary language of the

educational institute is spoken, and a lack of parental education have all been linked with student

dropouts (1989).

For most students, family support has a lot to do with whether or not the individual is

going to quit school before graduation, or whether he or she will complete all 12 years and

receive a diploma (Hale, 1998). In an article posted on the United Way website, parent

engagement was one of the leading reasons why students were not completing their education. It

34
stated, if parents are engaged early in the child’s education, then the child is more likely to be

successful in school. A parent’s support in their child’s education shows the child that their

educational career is important. The parental support consequently increases the child’s

likelihood of having successful academic achievement (“3 Reasons Students,” 2013).

Many times family deficiencies have to do with the decision of dropping out. If a student

has a structural deficient home then this means he or she lives in a single-parent family (Weis,

Farrar, & Petrie, 1989). Sometimes the parent is working to survive and does not have much

time to support the child in school. This is often the case in which students decide to quit and

begin working because they feel obligated to assist in paying the bills (Weis, Farrar, & Petrie).

Another family type is the functional deficient household. This is when the student’s parents

have no interest in the child or his or her schooling, and there is no true communication between

the parents and the child (Weis, Farrar, & Petrie, 1989). In these households children have the

freedom to make what decisions they want, and many times are not responsible enough to know

whether or not they should stay in school (Weis, Farrar, Petrie, 1989). Rumberger’s (2003)

research shows that students from single parent and large family homes have less adult contact

and limited resources to help them with their schoolwork. He also concluded that the

educational achievement of the parents connected with the likelihood of a student dropping out,

meaning parents who quit school before graduation were more likely to have children that

dropped out (Rumberger, 2003). The support of the family is a significant influence that

students need in order to finish high school (Hale, 1998).

Ginsberg and Miller Cribbs (2000) explained that students, living in homes where other

languages are spoken that are not that of the primary language of the school, have a connection

to a higher rate of dropping out of school. The same study showed links between dropouts and

35
those who live in homes where alcohol and drugs are prevalent. Students with parents who have

criminal records, or who were incarcerated are also connected to these factors (Metzer, 1997).

Family stability was a factor that had a positive influence on a student’s path to

graduation. According to Rumberger and Larson (1998) in a longitudinal study using a data

sample of 1,500 students in California, they identified a group of predictors for high school

completion, income, future employment, and adult crime. In the study they examined data on

specific students, family information, demographics, and school experience from birth to high

school completion or dropout. Their research focused on the analysis of students who were non-

mobile and highly mobile. The study found that student who frequently moved suffered

psychologically, socially, and academically. It also found that students who change high schools

even one time were twice as likely to quit before graduation.

Although most people consider family support to be from those who are literally

genetically family members, sometimes others can be considered family. In fact, many students

that are members of extracurricular activity teams consider their teams as family. This family

support can play just as much of a part in a person’s decision to drop out or complete high

school. Rumberger (2003) investigated a sample of 14,249 students to conclude whether certain

extracurricular activities (athletics and fine arts) considerably reduced the likelihood of quitting

school. He found that athletics, which usually consist of being on a team, were the only ones

that had a significant role in the decision to quit school. Mahoney (1997) studied extracurricular

activity roles and the involvement they played in student engagement, involvement, and

prevention for dropouts. He used a longitudinal assessment where he analyzed interviews with a

cohort of 392 students from grades 7 to 12. The study interviewed 206 girls and 186 boys.

Cluster of social competence in the cohort were identified by middle school teachers based on

36
interpersonal competence. Next he looked for a relationship between those who were active in

extracurricular activities. Mahoney concluded that students with a lack of participation in

extracurricular activities combined with low interpersonal competence had a higher rate of

dropping out.

Community-Related Indicators

According to Wells et al (1989), community indicators played a role in influencing

students to stay or leave school. Community factors include things such as their ethnicities,

cultures, environment, social class and community support. A student’s background and identity

play a huge role in their decision to leave. Poverty is a community related factor that is often

correlated with the dropout rate.

The gender statistics state that in most recent years men were more likely to drop out of

school than woman, where in the past it was predominately women who were quitting before

graduation (High School Dropout, 2002). Also to summarize what the authors are stating in the

article High School Dropout Rates by Sex and Race/Ethnicity, “in 2001, 9.3% of woman dropped

out of high school compared to the 12.2% of men that left” (High School Dropout, 2002, p.1).

Although, there has been a turn-around from the number of men and women dropping out, the

need to decrease both numbers is vital in order to improve our labor market.

When it comes to race or ethnicity, Davalos, Chavez, and Guardolia (1999) found that

students of minority are more likely to acquire the traits tor behaviors hat provide the greatest

correlation with quitting school. Some of these qualities include higher occurrences of poverty, a

lower incidence of academic achievement, and are more likely to live in urban communities

(1999). For example, Hispanics are dropping out significantly more than both black and white

races (High school dropout, 2002). According to Pearson Education, in 2000 27.8% of

37
Hispanics dropped out compared to the 13.1% for Blacks, and 6.9% for Whites. “From 1990 to

2013, the Hispanic status dropout rate declined from 32 percent to 12 percent, while Black and

White status dropout rates decreased by 6 and 4 percentage points, respectively. Nevertheless,

the Hispanic status dropout rate in 2013 (12 percent) remained higher than the White (5 percent)

and Black (7 percent) status dropout rates” (Status Dropout Rates, 2015, p.1).

The national center for education statistics state that, “Asian/Pacific islanders and White,

non-Hispanic students are more likely to have higher completion rates than Black, non-

Hispanics, Hispanics, and American Indian students” (Public High School, 2004, p.5). The

dropout rate has declined in all ethnic groups and gender, but these numbers should be an eye

opener for people to realize that there is a problem. Although there has been a decline of dropout

rates in each decade from 1960-2000, the number of dropouts still remains (High School

Dropout Rates, 2002). In fact, “the status dropout rate decreased from 12 percent in 1990 to 7

percent in 2013, with most of the decline occurring since 2000” (Status Dropout Rates, 2015,

p.1). Even though, 12.8% of students in the state of Tennessee did not graduate in 2012, the

actual number of students that dropped out and did not graduated differs. The Tennessee dropout

rate in 2012 was 11.2%. 6.9% of these dropouts left various cohorts and special programs, and

4.3% were event dropouts (State Wide Report, 2012). This statistic is much closer to home and

shows that much work can be done to improve local dropout rates. Each state cannot take this

problem lightly because a society with no education will lead to a future of chaos.

Carpenter and Ramirez (2007) studied common factors of dropouts that are shared within

the Hispanic and White student subgroup which included gender, time doing homework and

family structure. In their conclusions, male students from single-parent households were more

prone to dropout than other within both the White and Hispanic subgroups. Carpenter and

38
Ramirez (2007) also found achievement gaps within ethnicities were more profound than gaps

across ethnicities. The study stressed the need for school leaders search for early predictors.

They also concluded that school leaders should not just identify at-risk students, but rather they

should understand the individual needs of the students in order to prevent them from leaving and

furthermore decreasing the dropout rate (Carpenter & Ramirez, 2007).

Research performed by Brindis and Philleben (1998) examined three distinct factors of

dropouts. They noted that students associated or “hung out” with other dropouts had higher

frequencies of dropping out themselves. Other factors included low socio-economic status and

early parenthood. These indicators point to negative community or cultural influences of peer

groups from poverty. Even though teen parenthood is present in all socio-economic classes, it is

also linked to leaving school before graduation.

The social class influences of dropping out comes from the fact that students in middle to

upper-classes are less likely to drop out of school then those of a lower income class (Hale,

1998). According to another article, students from families that fall in the lower income

distributions are five times more likely to drop out of school than those of higher income families

(Cantave & Harrison, 1999). This is based on the fact that normally families of lower income

have deficient families, either single parent households or no involvement of parents with

support from the importance of education (Weis, Farrar, & Petrie, 1989). Although the odds are

not in their favor, there has been a decline in the percent of low-income students dropping out.

The status dropout rate has decreased from 24 to 11 percent between 1990 and 2013 (Status

Dropout Rates, 2015).

Many communities have made efforts to improve graduation rates and implement

initiatives to support at-risk students. These initiatives include studying factors that cause

39
students to dropout, provide support for the educational system, as well as support for the

students and their families. In their paper for Achieve and Jobs for the Future, Steinberg and

Almeida (2008) explain six factors to help educational leaders and communities focus on the best

practices of schools that successfully rescued dropouts and kept unsuccessful students engaged in

school. The first factor presented was to focus on the transitional year to high school. Because

students are more likely to either fail or be held back in ninth grade than any other grade, ninth

grade is considered to be a critical make-it or break-it year (Herlihy, 2007). Secondly, they

recommend warning systems to pinpoint students who have shown early signs that link with

dropping out of school. These early warning systems allow schools to connect students at risk

with community agencies that can provide support outside of the school day. Another

recommendation that Steinberg and Almeida (2008) presented was restructuring the campus to

better accommodate the needs of the students. They noted that schools that successfully lowered

that dropout rate for their school actually had extended the school day, created centers for credit

recovery, and reorganized the school year to provide ability to catch up once a student had fallen

behind. Next, they recommend improved access and a rigorous curriculum for all students.

After that, they presented the factor of aligning high school success with the necessary skill for

both college and the job market. They included details about successful schools such as setting

high expectations for your students by aiming for college and career entry and not just the

minimum graduation requirements. Lastly, they found that support for transition out of high

school to the job market or college was essential to improving graduation rate. These transition

programs were things such as dual high school and college enrollment, internships as well as

cooperative education programs. These programs help students acquire the skills needed to be

successful in the workforce and college (Steinberg & Almeida, 2008).

40
 Knowing and understanding the complexity of the dropout crisis includes acknowledging

that the community’s role in the problem is as crucial as looking as the student and school’s

roles. Isolating the responsibility to the schools and the students will not fully address the

problem. Attention should be given to all stakeholders that are involved including the student,

school, family, and community. Beating the dropout epidemic is going to take all arsenal that is

available. Other than early warning systems and providing support to at-risk students, educators

must also study motivations behind student achievement in order to improve the graduation rate.

Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs

Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs theory is that every person has basic needs that must be

met. Within the school building, the students’ needs are what educators are striving to

accomplish. These needs are self-actualization, esteem, belongingness, safety, or physiological.

According to the theory, students who feel like these needs were not met were more likely to

drop out (Maslow, 1943, 1954). According to Bradshaw, Waasdorp, Debnam, & Johnson (2014)

the school learning environment, is detrimental to a students’ success. The school climate which

is determined by the learning environment, safety, and engagement between students and adults

of the school are also important. School climate is a significant predictor of rates of dropout,

absenteeism and truancy, suspension, drug use, and violent and aggressive behavior (2014).

When looking at the theory of Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs, a student’s needs must be provided

by the school through teacher-student engagement, school climate, and the learning environment.

If these needs are lacking, then many times it results in students lacking success, and failing to

complete high school (Carter, 2013). According to Fisher & Roster (2016), Maslow’s needs of

self-actualization, esteem, safety, and physiological plays a huge role in the success of students.

41
The researchers continued by explaining that schools, which lack a safe and nurturing learning

environment, where these needs are not met have three times higher dropout rates (2016).

Motivation and Engagement

Motivation Theory

Theorists within the field of psychology have conducted studies on motivation in order to

learn about human behavior. Throughout these studies they have found ways to encourage

positive behaviors as well as eliminate negative behaviors. Educational psychologists have used

these studies to get a deeper look at what motivates students to learn. They have identified that

the motivation to learn is broken up into two groups--intrinsic and extrinsic. Intrinsic motivation

is a yearning to learn for natural reasons, self-fulfillment, and to master the skill. Extrinsic

motivation is a want to perform for an incentive or specific outcome (Huitt, 2011). Educators

often try to learn as much about student motivation and student engagement in order to improve

student achievement.

Understanding how students are motivated is crucial for educators. This understanding

can assist in keeping students intrigued in school and on track to graduate with either the skills

needed for careers or college attendance. However, identifying what motivation a student learns

by is a very difficult challenge. Furthermore, once the motivation type is determined, figuring

out how to keep the student motivated is even more challenging for educators. One issue that

educators often encounter is the student that lacks motivation all together. This problem is more

prevalent than not, and usually leaves educators searching for external rewards to assist in

keeping these students engaged. Researchers Hidi and Harackiewicz (2000) explain that

extrinsic prizes may be relevant to the perspective of unmotivated students. Since these students

usually find their academics as uninteresting, combining external rewards and exciting activities

42
may be one of the greatest approaches to educational intervention for the unmotivated student

(Hidi & Harackiewicz, 2000).

According to Glasser (1998), behaviors are chosen, and as humans we are driven to meet

five basic needs: love and belonging, survival, freedom, power, and fun. The construction of

these five necessities forms the core for behavior and motivation of a person. Students store

pictures in their brains that create their “quality world,” and individual needs can be satisfied

only by creating those pictures, choosing to act, at that time, the way they think will fulfill their

needs as shaped by these pictures.

Glasser (1998) studied a sample of middle school students who had “removed learning,

teachers, reading, and schoolwork” (p. 40) from their “quality world” pictures that were stored.

These students began losing or leaving the few friends that liked school and were well behaved

and on track in class. They eventually developed relationships with friends who were students

that shared their common interest in disruption and nonacademic morals. These students began

skipping class and eventually fell behind academically. By the end of middle school, many of

these students showed disciplinary issues throughout middle school grades, and were less

equipped for high school than when they started middle school (Glasser, 1998).

The understanding of motivation theory for learning is not enough just to know, but

educators must apply this knowledge in their classrooms in order to keep students motivated and

engaged in learning. Throughout history, legislators have tried multiple times to create extrinsic

rewards in order to motivate all students to graduate. However, researchers Amrein and Berliner

(2002) determined that in 18 states where high-stakes test were mandated by legislature do not

lead to higher academic achievement. Additionally, these tests are capable of decreasing student

motivation and leading to increased dropout rates and higher student retention. When legislature

43
passed the No Child Left Behind law, it was believed that the high stakes test were going to

“motivate the unmotivated,” consequently the unmotivated remained unmotivated and

disproportionately make up the minority students in urban area schools.

Amerin and Berliner (2002) believed that when rewards and incentives are associated

with tests, students are more likely to become less intrinsically motivated and often refrain from

critical thinking. They also noted in their study that when the stakes are high, educators are more

likely to create teacher-driven lessons, and less likely to promote student-directed exploration of

topics. The research went on further to state that, “Test-driven classrooms exacerbate boredom,

fear, and lethargy, promoting all manner of mechanical behaviors on the part of the teachers,

students, and schools, and bleed schoolchildren of their natural love for learning” (p. 33).

Amerin and Berliner (2002) presented the fact that the assumption to implement high

stakes tests to motivate students is not only flawed, but that there is evidence that actually shows

that it increases the likelihood of dropout and retention. In fact, the dropout rate was a

remarkable 4% to 6% higher in states that require an exam for graduation, and a 25% higher

chance that students dropped out when they fell within the bottom quartile of scores for these

exams (Amerin & Berliner, 2002). In states with high stakes testing, researchers discovered that

students who failed the test, but otherwise had good academic records were more likely to

dropout. Moreover, 88% of states with exit exams had higher dropout rates than states that did

not require them. In 62% of states that began implementing exit exams, dropout rates increased

in relevance to the nation’s dropout rate once implementation took place. Amerin and Berliner

(2002) also discovered that in addition to quitting school or being retained, students that were

required to pass an exit exam were more likely to choose the General Education Equivalency

(GED) test instead of graduating with a regular diploma. Furthermore, they explained that 63%

44
of states that mandated exit exams reported a decline in the age of students that were taking the

test which permits the students to opt out of high school, and they reported that the 10 states with

the lowest continuation rate from grades 9 to 12 all required exit exams (Amerin & Berliner,

2002).

Since all students are not motivated intrinsically, educators are constantly looking for

extrinsic rewards to motivate students. However, according to Dweck (1986) when everyone is

rewarded more harm occurs in the long run. She further mentioned, “Many believe that (1)

praising students’ intelligence builds their confidence and motivation to learn, and (2) students’

inherent intelligence is the major cause of their achievement in school” (p. 34). She concluded

these remarks by assuring that statement one was false, and statement two is harmful. She

further argues that there is research that teaches how to praise students in order to motivate.

Dweck (1986) also explained that students who believe their intelligence is fixed and

cannot be improved tend to participate in activities that confirm this, and this belief is damaging

and interferes with the learning process. On the other hand, Students who believe that

intelligence is an ongoing process, tend to focus on developing and are motivated to learn new

skills without worrying about how smart they appear. This “fixed” and “growth” mindset of

intelligence is correlated with which students are more motivated to learn. Those students who

have the “fixed” mindset tend to refuse learning opportunities due to a fear of failure. These

students fear that they are going to be seen as “not smart,” and when they do make mistakes they

often try to cover them up. Dweck (1986) described that students with the “fixed” mindset, are

often afraid of effort. These students believe that if they are smart, then effort should not be

needed. This thought process is detrimental, and can cause intelligent students to stop trying

when the curriculum becomes more challenging. Dweck (1986) stated specifically that,

45
“students in the fixed mindset don’t recover well from setbacks” (p.35). She also explained that

these students reduce their efforts, and many times turn to cheating or pretend they do not care

about the skill. Conversely, those students with the “growth” mindset tend to enhance their

effort in the face of a challenge. They usually see challenges as an opportunity to grow

intellectually. Dweck (1986) contended that students who accept and believe in the growth

model usually surpass their equivalent peers.

Dweck (1986) found that praising students on their academics gives them an inkling of

pride for a little bit of time, but later it is followed by negative consequences. In order to test this

theory, she had the teachers to praise and honor students for their intelligence and efforts. This

led to the conclusion that teachers shape the mindset of their students. When students were

questioned about whether they were or were not in agreement with a list of questions, they were

significantly influenced by the way the teacher used praise. When the students were given a

challenge, the “growth” mindset students escalated their efforts and remained confident and

excited, while the “fixed” mindset students lost their eagerness and self-esteem in the task.

Dweck’s (1986) research helped educators create interventions to intelligence growth.

Teachers who educate students on the “growth” mindset of learning ultimately encourage and

motivate their students to exert effort in order to become smarter. Students need to feel

confident about how intellectual they are, but teachers cannot just hand this confidence over to

them. Instead, teachers must direct them through the growth model and encourage students to be

motivated and present as much effort as needed to accomplish the challenge (Dweck, 1986).

Motivation plays one of the largest roles in academic success and completion of high

school graduation. Although motivation is often intrinsic for some, there still are those students

that need to be otherwise motivated. Teachers are one of the leading resources for motivating

46
students, and this motivation comes from certain aspects that the teacher portrays such as:

teacher body language, behavior, style of instruction, relationships with students, and assignment

relevancy. Even though there are many components and factors that cause students to leave

school, motivation is one of them, and it is one that teachers have can directly control.

Student Engagement

When searching through the literature linked to high school dropouts, student

engagement appeared to be a reoccurring aspect that contributes to the dropout epidemic.

Student engagement is not a solo activity, and it is about interaction and relationships. It

involves participation during instruction and schoolwork along with the overall community life

of school. Behavior indicators of engagement are participation in class, attendance, effort in

classwork, and low number of disciplinary problems. Other indicators for psychological

engagement are interests and enthusiasm, a feeling of belonging, and identifying with the school

community (Christenson & Thurlow, 2004; Fredericks, Blumenfield, & Paris, 2004). Student

boredom, lack of motivation, an easy curriculum, and an overall disengagement are all reasons

why dropouts said they quit school (Bridgleand, DiIulio, & Morison, 2006). According to

Alexander and Entwisle (2001), engagement venues exterior to the classroom are things like fine

arts activities, clubs, and athletics. A lack of student engagement in these extracurricular

activities was significantly linked with dropping out at the high school level. The issues related

to student engagement were abundant throughout the literature on dropouts. This study funneled

its research around the following areas: academic engagement, behavioral engagement, lack of

psychological engagement, and social engagement.

A study of student engagement in an elementary school was conducted and found that

school size and the focus of students with multiple risk factors was also correlated with higher

47
dropout rates. Further analysis is needed on the effect of a school with additional opportunities

to unite with individuals, smaller class sizes, and interventions for those at risk (Battin-Pearson et

al, 1998). The researchers further presumed that early indicators to link elementary students with

their schools could have encouraging long-standing effects on graduation rates later (Battin-

Pearson et al, 1998).

Behavioral Engagement

Behavioral engagement is another factor that is linked with high school dropouts. If

students are engaged in behaving according to the rules and expectations of teachers and

administrators, they are more like to have higher academic achievement (Hammond, 2001).

Those students who experience behavioral disengagement are strongly correlated with discipline

issues throughout their teen years (Alexander & Entwisle, 2001). According to De’Falco, Baker

and D’Mello, (2013) behavioral disengagement is defined as behaviors that fail to follow the

rules or expectations for an activity. Instead behaviors are engaged with outside of the norms or

expectations, such as lacking participation in the activity, or participating in it in an incorrect or

inappropriate fashion.

When addressing behavioral disengagement, many times administrators follow discipline

procedures that many times start with smaller punishments, but as the same students continue to

be discipline problems, their punishment turns into suspensions and expulsions. However,

researchers noted that a better measure of discipline was behavioral grades instead of suspension

(Balfanz and Herzog, 2005). They further explained that suspensions from activity periods such

as lunch, morning break, or study hall did not necessarily cause disengagement for class

instruction. This research demonstrates the control administrators can have on behavioral

48
engagement. They can discipline students in ways that students have the ability to stay engaged

behaviorally.

Aggression and behavior issues were linked with quitting high school as early as the first

grade (Cairns et al, 1989). Students, who have trouble with behaving like those the norm,

struggle with academic success. The constant corrections and discipline procedures that

disengaged students experience negatively affects the classroom instruction that they receive.

According to Balfanz and Herzog (2005), student behavior during class time was greatly

correlated to high school dropouts.

Academic Engagement

Academic engagement is defined as being actively involved within class. Successful

participation in class, and attending class consistently is interrelated with academic engagement

(Hammond, 2001). Engaging academically can portray indicators that signal lack of interest in

school including lack of eagerness, dropping grades, and feelings towards school. The

combination of behavior in the classroom, dealings with the subject instruction, and the teacher

are critical to academic engagement. Professional development on how to detect early signs and

how to further engage students during instruction can assist in decreasing a lack of academic

engagement (Hammond, 2001). This research supports Balfanz and Herzog‘s (2005) findings

that behavior in the classroom is correlated ton dropout rates.

Researchers Balfanz and Herzog (2005) studied a group of sixth graders for 6 years in the

city of Philadelphia. They used a tracking system from the University of Pennsylvania

Cartographic Modeling Laboratory. The monitoring system followed this cohort in search of the

answers to three different questions: What number of students dropped out in a year? What

percentage of students completed high school in 4 years? And what indicators can help schools

49
identify at-risk students? Balfanz and Herzog (2005) found that more than 13,000 students left

from Philadelphia schools in 2002-2003. Researchers also noted that around 54% of students

graduated in 4 years. Students who were absent for more than 5 weeks of school in eighth grade

had an 80% chance of quitting school. They further mentioned that freshmen who were not on

track to graduate after their first year of high school had a 75% increased chance of dropping out.

They concluded that physical and mental disengagement led to a much higher rate of dropouts.

Academic engagement can be explained by separating it into two different categories,

either superficial or deep. Engagement that is superficial consists of rule abiding students who

compliantly participate. Academic engagement that is in the deep category is defined by a want

to learn and mastery in curriculum (Battin-Pearson et al, 1998). Academic engagement can be

affected by the result of teacher connections with students, pertinent lessons that use internships,

engaging curriculum, or hands-on activities. A successful approach to promoting academic

engagement will support every student and more specifically target students who have been

targeted as those who are at-risk for dropping out (Battin-Pearson, 1998).

Psychological Disengagement

Psychological disengagement involves a feeling of uncertainty. Being uncertain about

the future, whether on will graduate, and post high school plans are all possible indicators of

psychological disengagement. A feeling of “not belonging” and a “dislike in school” are also

indicators of psychological disengagement (Hammond, 2001). Hammond (2001) recommended

that additional study on those who succeed, in spite of psychological engagement, could provide

information on how school districts can mediate when there is a lack of belonging and student

behaviors and attitudes are poor (2001).

50
 A study by Opara (2003) looked at a suburban and an urban high school in order to

identify factors that could lead students to drop out at both schools. The researcher attempted to

isolate occurrences that led to choosing a specific course and to determine how students

navigated through their high school careers. A sample of 200 students was used for the study.

The researcher made an effort to obtain representative samples of typical groups within the

sample. The study used an array of methods for collecting the data such as interviews, document

analysis, and questionnaires. Four categories emerged within the study. Opara (2003) found that

a “combination of factors are responsible in creating an atmosphere of separation from a high

school learning environment” (p. 72). A deficiency of parent involvement, a loss of self-identity,

low socio-economic status, and a lack of discipline all increased the likelihood of dropping out.

He also noted the issue was much more prevalent in the inner-city schools (Opara, 2003).

In search for a link between academic and psychological engagement, a study of an urban

comprehensive highs school was conducted (Ett, 2008). Ett (2008) used a case study method

along with a research group from Southern California. She investigated high schools in Southern

California that had better performance academically than other schools with the same

demographics. Next she analyzed the engagement levels in the school and checked for

additional levels of achievement. Within her study she used the High School Survey of Student

Engagement to determine the definition of engagement. Ett’s (2008) study included qualitative

data and quantitative data. The researcher used information from the archives from the

California Department of Education to view the success levels of the statewide rank, California

Academic Performance Index rate, and whether or not the school had met goals put in place by

the legislatures of California. Ett (2008) concluded that one school had beat accomplished their

missions due to a shared vision among students and teachers, a connection between students and

51
teachers, and an emphasis on parent involvement. The execution of these factors allowed all

students to be engaged psychologically which intern improved academic achievement (Ett,

2008).

Social Engagement

Social engagement involves positive relationships among students and peers within their

school (Neild, Stoner-Eby, & Furstenberg, 2008). Likewise, social disengagement is occurs

when students have little to no relationships with peers, they are lacking social skills, or their

group of friends have also been targeted as potential drop outs, or some have already dropped out

(Hammond, 2001). Seniors who fraternized with students who quit school more than four times

a week, and were not on pace to complete school were more likely to dropout (Neild et al, 2008).

According to Wagner, (1996) this occurred more in students with special needs. She argued that

school districts that wished to correct these trends could implement programs or social clubs that

explicitly connect students in the school with those with disabilities (1996). Creating school

environments that encourage more positive peer influences and time for interaction and

connection among teachers and students within a school culture holds promise for additional

study on academic achievement.

Student engagement often suffers when a lack of social skills or academic skills are

present (Neild et al, 2008). Many students show indicators of leaving school in early elementary

grades (Alexander, Entwisle, & Horsey, 1997). Alexander et al, (1997) identified early

elementary predictors in a longitudinal study. These predictors included initial engagement in

school and instruction, family stress, and reading group levels. The early transition into school is

influenced by occurrences in the preschool years, which increases students’ chances to be on

track for low achievement, obtaining a “troublemaker” label, and over all disengagement (Neild

52
et al, 2008). Identifying these early factors and changing the path of these students is possible,

nevertheless the negative effects emerge years down the road with grade retention and dropping

out.

Although early childhood encounters may cause students to eventually leave school

before graduation, studies have shown that quitting school is the result of a prolonged process of

becoming disengaged in school (Finn, 1993; Newman, 1992). Student engagement is vital to

academic success. In fact, both academic and social engagement in school can potentially lead to

dropping out of school (Neild et al, 2008).

Engagement portrays that attachment to school is vital for students to have success in the

classroom. Students who feel secluded from parents, teachers, and peers lack any encouraging

relationships. Peer groups that unite students and school have the potential to decrease the

dropout rate (Brewster, & Fager, 2000). Often time’s students participate in behaviors out of

school that makes it difficult for them to learn during the school day. It is important for schools

to be structured, and there is a need to deal with student behavior early to deter poor attendance

and suspension (Bryck & Thum, 1989). Determining precise expectations for classroom and

student behavior is essential, as is creating and enforcing consequences when rules are broken.

Academic engagement is critical in order to build skills needed for successful classrooms.

Disengaged student often drop academically and eventually separate from the school leading to a

higher number of dropouts (Sinclair, Christenson, Evelo, & Hurley, 1998). Programs that

recognize the signs of disengagement and prioritize the importance of student engagement are

needed to fully support students on graduation.

As research has shown, student engagement is an important and seemingly instrumental

issue when looking at factors that cause students to dropout. Some things schools have done to

53
decrease dropout rates is implemented practices that create student motivation, behavior habits,

and academic skills. The next part of this review of literature looked into successful programs

that increased student engagement in those students who might have otherwise decided to leave

school.

Successful Programs for At-Risk Students

Educators have searched and studied programs that could be implemented in order to

prevent students from leaving before graduation. Research shows that there are many programs

in and outside of the school that have been implemented to support students who show behaviors

that are consistent with being at-risk for dropping out. These programs use a variety of methods

in order to reach this disengaged students. These programs use measures such as moving the

location of schools, creating new models for learning, involving military services to implement

behavior modification, and creating relationships. Programs that are commonly found among

school districts use technology to reach at-risk student, provide academic support, identify early

warning signs, focus on transition into high school, and engage community members to be

involved with at-risk students.

Shopping Mall School

The shopping mall program is one that is located in a shopping mall. It creates a learning

environment that is different from any other learning model. The classroom setting in a

shopping mall school, which appears to be different than the traditional classroom, helps

motivate students to learn in an appealing location. Taking students out of the learning

environment where they experienced failure, many times erases the memories and habits of

being unmotivated and disengaged. The new location often appears to be a clean slate for these

students and improves their motivation and engagement in schoolwork. Some believe that a

54
shopping mall is an unusual location for a school, but students that are accustomed to a

consumer-based society find this location to be an exciting and energizing atmosphere. The

location also links positive experiences with potential opportunities for at-risk students

(DeNisco, 2013).

One of the first alternative shopping mall schools was established in the 1990s. The

school, known as Education Resource Centers (ERCs), was created in collaborations between

more than one school district in the community and the Simon Youth Foundation (SYF). The

employees of both establishments wanted to create a program that helped students at risk for

leaving school. The SYF was established in 1997 as a nonprofit organization (DeNisco, 2013).

Their goal was to seek out and assist disengaged students. The committee chose to use an open

space in a Simon Mall for the location of the alternative school. While a shopping mall appears

to be an odd place to hold school, this unusual site provided an array of opportunities to students

who otherwise had relinquished hope for their education and no longer were able to achieve

success in a traditional classroom setting. The shopping mall location provided a learning

environment where students felt motivated, comfortable, and safe, not to mention the

opportunities that these students were presented with due to the location of the school such as job

opportunities, internships, and mentoring (DeNisco, 2013).

The mission at ERC was not to create an easier or more difficult school curriculum, but

instead they sought to create a different approach to learning. Even though there approach is

much different than traditional high schools, ERC students are required to pass the state

mandated tests in order to graduate. The differences between shopping mall school and

comprehensive high school that ERC believe have the biggest impact on students are class sizes

and the software they use (Chalker & Stelsel, 2009). They maintain a small class size with an

55
average of 15:1 student-to-teacher ratio. The small class approach allows for immediate

assistance and allows teacher and students to share closer relationships. The software ERC uses

are academic programs like NovaNet and Plato Learning. These programs are successful for

ERC because they allow students to work at their own pace; the programs are individualized to

instruction, and ensure that students are engaged throughout the entire lesson. The programs also

offer immediate results that make it easier for teachers to address problems instantly (Chalker &

Stelsel, 2009).

ERC also created school days that were shorter than normal school days. These shorter

days were typically made up of half-day sessions because disengaged students often struggle to

attend school and focused for an entire day (Indiana University Center for Evaluation and

Education Policy [CEEP], 2006). The shorter days also accommodate students with children and

employment responsibilities. During the short class time, students are able to focus and

concentrate on earning the credits needed to receive a diploma. When students enrolled at ERC

are not in class, they participate in volunteer activities in the community that encourages them to

acquire pride, ownership, and connect with their communities. The ERC program not only uses

shorter school days, but the students usually complete the requirements for a high school

diploma in less time than the traditional high school program.

The SYF Shopping Mall School was evaluated be CEEP, and the purpose of the study

was to evaluate the effectiveness of ERCs. Researchers studied their ability to motivate at risk

students (Chalker & Selsel, 2009; Plucker, 2005). Data was collected using a mix of methods

including surveys, focus groups, site visits, and archival data. The CEEP study (Plucker, 2005)

identified several reasons why ERC was successful. ERCs provided: small class setting, self-

paced curriculum, flexible schedules, individualized tutoring, caring teachers, a respectful

56
learning environment clear of distraction and disruptions, emphasis on conflict resolution and

multicultural interaction, and computer based instruction.

The CEEP study (Plucker, 2005) also focused on the results of the alumni interviews.

Every alumnus stated that his or her academic achievement had “markedly improved” after

enrolling in ERC. They each gained an average of a .5 improvement in their GPA. A student

who had previously quit traditional high school before she enrolled at ERC stated, “I would

probably be working at McDonalds the rest of my life, definitely wouldn’t be in college, and

wouldn’t be doing any of the things I’m doing right now” (Plucker, 2005, n.p.). A different

alumnus explained that your success at ERC is individualized and up to you. Whether

requirements get completed or not is totally up to the student. Furthermore the program builds

character because it teaches responsibility (Plucker, 2005).

ERC teacher interviews were also analyzed by CEEP (Plucker, 2005). These teachers

shared that their mission was to present students with a more relaxed “college-like” environment

that allows students that miss class occasionally an opportunity to make up their work instead of

falling hopelessly behind. The CEEP study concluded that ERCs share good working

relationships with administrators in collaborating school districts because they share a common

goal of success for at-risk students (Chalker & Stelsel, 2009; Plucker, 2005). In conclusion of

the study, Jonathon Plucker stated (Plucker, 2005):

Many lessons can be learned from the model whether it is applied at a large school or at a

shopping mall. Students connected with caring adults, students empowered in their own

education, and alternative means of instruction are reoccurring themes in research.

Rethinking the practice of punishing in order to increase motivation, and revisiting the

need to treat students with respect despite their conditions changed their motivational

57
 pattern. Unfortunately, with the focus of holding schools accountable for assessment

results and improving student achievement, the importance of the relational aspect of

school and the basic needs of the students is too often overlooked (n.p.).

Technology Focused Alternative Schools TFAS

Other than changing the location of a school, school districts should consider modifying

teaching and learning strategies in order to keep students engaged in class and from otherwise

dropping out. One way to change instructional strategies is by incorporating technology in

classroom instruction. Technology is a rising approach that attempts to reach all students even

those that are labeled as “hard-to-reach” students. Some students who have failed in the

traditional models of instruction find success using technology (Smith & Lee, 1997).

One school that forces technology to be the foundation of its educational program is the

Virtual Education Academy (VEA). The academy was developed for students on homebound

who were at risk of quitting school due to serious behavioral issues, psychological problems, or

illness and excluded high school students. The team created a curriculum for students 9-12 in

mathematics, science, citizenship, social studies, and English using technology as the primary

type of instruction (White, Lare, Mueller, Smeaton, & Waters, 2007). Since the team was aware

of the mandates in No Child Left Behind, VEA connected their curriculum in each subject within

each content area. The connection within all subject matter allowed VEA to obtain academic

credit and sustain the citizenship curriculum within the course of study. A pilot program was

started and was used by students after school in computer labs on campus. The students were

taught how to use the software and were offered constant technical support. The system

recorded and accessed progress that was reported to student mentors. This allowed for mentors

58
to communicate with students via email to discuss progress and adjustments that need to be made

(White et al, 2007).

VEA trained college students in role modeling, team building, and confidentiality and

paired them with VEA students. The college mentors and students would meet at a minimum of

two hours per week at a high school campus. An hour was used for team building, and the other

for online core curriculum. School districts that participated in the VEA program discovered that

they conserved money for their homebound program, and VEA was “highly effective” in

encouraging students to transition back into a conventional school setting (White et al, 2007). In

fact, fourteen of the 37 students that chose to participate in the VEA program returned to the

traditional high school program and zero of them dropped out. Researchers studied the work

completed by VEA and concluded that online curriculum that promoted face-to-face mentoring

as well as a blend of academic, social, and emotional support was beneficial to all students

(White et al, 2007).

Programs with Academic Supports

Implementing programs that create both academic and social support is vital to the

success of all students academically. Programs that provide a look into the future after high

school and present opportunities to be successful in college have helped in decreasing dropout

rates (Conchas & Clark, 2002). There are many programs that exist which can provide this

assistance to students. One program in particular is the Advancement Via Individual

Determination (AVID) program isolates low-income youth of color in both middle and high

schools. AVID’s mission is to develop a support system that will provide college opportunities

for students who maintain average grades, but show promise that they are engaged and willing to

learn (Mehan, Villanueva, Hubbard, & Lintz, 1996). The program exposes students to various

59
things like academic progress through intensive writing, access to college tutors, vigorous

curriculums, enhanced study and organizational skills, and collaboration among teachers in the

school (Swanson, Marcus, & Elliot, 2000). Success of the program was reported by showing

that over 4,000 AVID graduates became registered college students, and many of them were first

generation college students. Additionally, between the years of 1990 and 1997, 93% of AVID

students attended universities after graduation, and 89% were still attending two years later

(Swanson et al, 2000). Researchers concluded that “AVID is the one secondary school reform

effort that has achieved documented success preparing lo-income, disadvantaged students for

college” (Swanson et al, 2000, p.37). The outcomes of the AVID program show that a rigorous

curriculum and student-focused intervention can transform students’ lives tremendously.

A program studied by Tyner-Mullings (2008) that was implemented in an alternative high

school, strived to teach inner city students habits of mind, a constructivist pedagogy based on

Mosaic of Thought written by E. Keene and Zimmerman’s (1997). This longitudinal study

researched the impact of teaching students how to study and its’ affect on their future careers.

The web-based study followed 225 students for 10 years by interviewing them after they left an

alternative school. The study concluded that students positively identify meta-cognitive lessons

and accredited the lessons to helping them with their futures.

Programs that more time in school have shown to assist students who are at-risk for

dropping out. School programs that provide after school tutoring and summer courses for

students who required additional help are more successful assisting students on the path to

dropout (Hertzog, 1996). Summer Bridge is a program that has been applied in various schools

across the United States. It provides incoming 9th graders with inspiring summer activities that

give scholarly support, motivation, and advancement to students during this transitional time.

60
The program uses career-related field trips and relevant activities to help these students excel in

high school (Wathington, Pretlow, & Mitchell, 2011). Extended school time programs and

others mentioned provide continuous support for students during the transition process with

proven success.

Even with the implementation of academic programs, sometimes it isn’t enough to

change the path of an at-risk student. Reason being that many times the intervention is put into

play far too late in the ball game. When students have gone years without being engaged or

interested in school, many times it is hard for these one-size fits all solutions to be successful.

For this reason, programs that identify and target students at an early age have become more

successful.

Programs Using Early Warning Indicators and School Transition

Research clearly shows that ninth grade is a make it or break it year when transitioning

into high school (Allensowrth & Easton, 2007). Moreover, more students fail ninth grade than

any other grade in high school. Additionally, a disproportionate number of students who are

retained as freshmen subsequently are dropping out (Herlihy, 2007). Research suggests that

predictors can be used to target students who are more prone to be influenced by transition and

further comprehend the root of their problems. The data is found using a tracker that isolates

students that are at risk and on track and is determined by number of credits earned, performance

in academic courses, attendance, and grade point average (GPA). Allensworth and Easton

(2007) proclaimed that ninth graders who do not pass one or two classes in their first semester of

high school are less likely to complete high school. They further explained that those freshmen

with three or more Fs are not likely to graduate at all. Attendance during the freshman year of

high school also shows a connection to graduating. A student that misses 10% of instructional

61
time is a cause for concern whether or not these freshmen will one-day graduate (Allenswoth &

Easton, 2007).

Credit accumulation, attendance, and course failure are all indicators that are currently

used to identify high school and college readiness as well as students at-risk for falling behind or

dropping out (Balfanz & Herzog, 2005; Neild et al 2008). In Chicago, researchers are using the

early warning programs to identify on-track students. They used freshman credit accrual and

course semester failures to identify whether students were on track or not. A shocking 58.8% of

schools were confirmed in need of improvement for keeping more students on track to graduate.

Conversely, indicators that spotlighted students on track provided promise for some students

who were at one time falling behind, but were now accelerating and focused.

Educational leaders often address transitional periods. The need for a smooth transition

is detrimental to the future successes of a student. Transitional programs and various

interventions have been discussed and attempted numerous times. Often times, these programs

attempt to focus on the social, academic, and logistic details of transitioning with ease (Alliance

for Excellent Education, 2007). Initial research suggests that programs involved with students,

parents, and teachers often have the greatest effect on the transitional period. Programs that are

frequently used for all students transitioning include assemblies, comprehensive monthly

meetings with staff from both middle and high schools (Alliance for Excellent Education, 2007).

Additional programs that are being used for transition consist of informative parent meetings,

student shadowing, counseling sessions, and peer mentoring programs. Even though most

schools use a mixture of these programs, few use programs that fully engage students, parents,

and staff from both school sites, which would provide complete support. Some researchers

recommend that transition programs that provide extensive support have the greatest impact on

62
high school experiences. On the contrary, programs that only use one facet of transition

(students, parent, or staff) showed to have no effect on these outcomes (Smith & Lee, 1997).

Transitional programs that stress both academic and social support are often times successful

(Reyes, Gillock, Kokus, & Sanchez, 2000). The characteristics of these programs include

ongoing obligations to support students during transition times using well-developed support

programs; constant planning and adapting; regular communication among students, teachers, and

parents; and assessment of the programs (Watson, 1999).

Programs that identify early indicators and ease transition often assist educators keep

students engaged and successful in school. Implementations of these programs provide

improvement to the overall achievement of students. Educators must look early and often to

identify disengaged students, and using the programs available assist these students as much as

possible. However, support from more than just the school is needed in order to reach all

students. Community support and programs play a large role in decreasing the high school

dropout rate.

Community Programs

Programs that are provided by schools to reach at-risk students have come more prevalent

in recent years. However, outside agencies have recently been created to help students who

seem to be disengaging from school. Although many outside programs exist, the ones that were

reviewed included the National Guard program and the truancy program of Atlanta.

The National Guard Program. The National Guard has a program that concentrates on

16-18 year olds who have already quit school. The program is a 22-week “quasi-military”

residential phase followed by mentoring for a year. When the program started, an initial

screening was used to place applicants into either a control group or participatory group. Nine

63
months later, participants were surveyed to look at educational success, incarceration time, and

mental and physical health. Researchers determined that after nine months of being enrolled in

the program, the number of students who had received a GED or high school diploma had

improved. Of those who were enrolled, 46% of them finished high school or earned a high

school equivalency certificate compared to the 10% that were in the control group (Bloom,

Gardenhire-Crooks, & Mandsager, 2009). Another interesting fact that emerged was that at the

end of the nine months employment rates and college enrollment had increased, while the

number of arrest had decreased. Researchers indicated that if the assessment of the program had

been conducted later, then it might have produced different results, especially in the part of

attainment (Bloom et al, 2009).

The Truancy Program of Atlanta. The community in Atlanta realized that attendance

in school was a necessity for students to be successful. Community members could see the

affects that students not in school were having on their community and they created a program to

help fight against disengaged students. The Truancy Project of Atlanta dealt with the issue by

matching volunteer lawyers with youth in the community (Gullatt & Lemoine, 1997). This

program used mentoring from the lawyers as intervention for disengaged students. Results of the

program showed that more than 50% of the students that were once truant or failing re-engaged

and successfully completed the school year (Gullatt & Lemoine, 1997).

Many programs from outside agencies are available to at-risk students. These programs

were created to provide additional support to students outside of the school setting. Although the

National Guard program and the truancy program of Atlanta were the only ones mentioned, other

intervention programs exist throughout the United States that are assisting in the decrease of the

dropout rate.

64
 Summary

The dropout epidemic is a complex and multifaceted problem that is not easily resolved.

In order to get a clearer understanding of the issue, Wells et al (1989) classified the factors into

four categories. These included student indicators, school indicators, family indicators and

community indicators. Studies showed that student factors that lead to student drop out are drug

abuse, incarceration, and early parenthood. School factors that were presented were retention

and ineffective discipline procedures, student-teacher relationships, learning environments,

school climate, and school vision. Family factors parental support and living conditions. Lastly,

the community factors include ethnicity, culture, and socio-economic status. All these factors

influence the decision of students that are likely to drop out.

An analysis of research showed that student engagement and motivation play huge roles

in academic achievement. Engagement can be broken up into four different categories. These

categories are academic engagement, behavioral engagement, psychological engagement, and

social engagement. The research showed that engagement in school was what kept students

motivated to learn. As soon as disengagement began, then the downward spiral is what causes

students to fall behind and eventually leave school. Understanding what causes the different

types of disengagement and how to prevent them from occurring are the stepping stones to

solving the epidemic of dropouts. Motivational theories also support the need to create

environments that encourage successful students. Motivational theories can show how some

educational practices are detrimental to students’ futures. These theorists also shed light on how

65
to use motivational techniques to reach all students not matter if they are on track to graduate or

at-risk for quitting.

Preventative intervention programs are what research reveals is the solution to the

dropout crisis. Targeting students early and getting them active in a preventative program

increases the likeliness of them to graduate. Programs, no matter if they are alternative school

programs or those that focus on transitional times, using all resources and getting everyone on

board in the support program is what makes them more successful. Whether the program is

embedded within the school or an outside agency, the support program must be implemented and

carried out in order to save students at-risk.

While this chapter shed light on the research of the dropout crisis, factors that cause

students to quit, and intervention programs used to keep students in school, supplementary

research could further explain the dropout crisis. In the next chapter information gathered from

this review of literature will be used and the researcher will build upon the investigation with

explanations of the study.

66
 Chapter III

Methodology

The purpose of this study was to identify factors that cause students to leave high school

before graduation. The study analyzed the factors presented and examined whether or not at-risk

students believed that supports were offered. If programs for intervention were offered, did they

accept it? This study also sought to discover suitable types of support and interventions that

educators could implement to make students stay in school based off feedback from the

participants of the study.

High school campuses across the nation lose around 40% of their students from grades

9th–12th grade (Greene & Winters, 2005). Who are the students that left, and where did they go?

What factors caused them to give up and quit school? Could the school have done anything to

prevent them from leaving?

Although high school students are still young, immature, and dependent upon adult

guidance, they often confuse their ability to have adult thoughts and emulate adult behaviors

with actually being an adult. This ability many times is the downward spiral to their decision for

leaving school. Students also bring non-school problems into the classroom that affects their

ability to learn. Students also endure subconscious pressure from their peers to fit into social

cliques. Those who do not fall into the cliques are often the target for threats, teasing, and many

times bullying. The knowledge of why, where, and what difficulties dropouts encountered could

67
improve the school districts understanding on the high school experiences and why at-risk

students dropout. The purpose of the study was to provide details about what factors cause

students to leave before graduation. Furthermore, the objective of this study was to identiy

preventable measures that can be used to motivate students to continue high school and to

highlight factors that will keep students in school through graduation. Information obtained from

the study may be used to create support, intervention programs, policies, instructional design,

and curriculum design by using all stakeholders’ ideas, including the voices of those students

who are at-risk for quitting before graduation.

Research Questions

Two questions guided this study and the discussion with participants. During the one-on-

one interviews and follow-up telephone interviews additional questions were used to seek more

in-depth answers to the guiding questions.

3. What factors cause students to leave school before graduation?

4. Are there any preventative measures that educators can do to keep students in school until

after graduation?

Like previously mentioned, the objective of this study was to recognize factors that cause

students to leave school before graduation, and to identify whether or not preventable measures

or programs were available to encourage them to stay in school. The understanding of student

perspectives on this in depth problem is important in order to better support school systems in

fixing the problem at hand. Students that drop out of high school are sometimes indefinable and

difficult to research. Therefore, the participants in the study are students that decided to continue

their education and are enrolled at an adult high school.

68
 Research Design

The researcher adopted a qualitative method for this research in order to study a

phenomenon in its rich detail. The researcher also chose a qualitative study because she used a

small sample and collected data primarily through an interview tool. The researcher used

descriptions and interpretations in order to complete the study. The objective of this study was

to provide a voice to those who dropped out of high school and attend adult high school in East

Tennessee. Instead of interviewing teachers, administrators, or other staff members about why

they thought students dropped out, the researcher chose to hear the students’ voice in the matter.

The researcher used one-on-one semi-structured interviews to question participants who were at

one-time high school dropouts, but now decided to continue their education in a non-traditional

high school. The purpose of the study was to identify why students quit and whether anything

could have prevented them from leaving.

A basic interpretive study was completed for this qualitative research. Qualitative semi-

structured, one-on-one interviews and follow up telephone interviews were used in this study to

encourage the participants in discussions. Throughout the discussions the researcher looked for

emerging themes relative to the research questions. Unlike quantitative research, qualitative

research methods can reveal descriptions and meaning that is useful to the research study. In

fact, qualitative data creates data that is descriptive and many times it is observable behaviors

and is written in people’s own words (Taylor & Bodgan, 1998). Marshall and Rossman (1999)

stated, “Qualitative research is pragmatic, interpretive, and grounded in the lived experiences of

people” (p. 2). Qualitative methods permit researchers to test and modify theoretical methods

based on participants’ responses and feedback (Cresswell, 2003). Cresswell (2003) also

compared qualitative research methods to constructivist theory by explaining that both are

69
research methods that aim to provide various meanings of personal experiences, create patterns,

and promote support.

In the past, various qualitative, quantitative, and mix methods research have been

completed in order to resolve this silent epidemic of dropouts. Research has shown that one of

the most familiar strategies for collecting qualitative data is interviews (DiCicco-Bloom &

Crabtree, 2006). Even though, there are multiple kinds of interviews available, face-to-face,

sometimes called one-on-one, semi-structured, in-depth interviews are widely used, and they are

helpful for learning about personal experiences and perceptions on diverse issues (DiCicco-

Bloom & Crabtree, 2006). Face-to-face interviews are beneficial to qualitative research because

it produces synchronous communication between the interviewer and the person being

interviewed. Thus, meaning that the communication is taking place at the same time and place

unlike interviews via email, mail, or telephone. Unlike other interview methods, the

synchronous communication in a face-to-face interview gives the researcher the advantage to

view social cues such as, voice, body language, intonation, etc. It also allows the interviewer to

ask additional questions in order to delve deeper about a particular part of the interview

(Opdenakker, 2006). DiCicco-Bloom and Crabtree (2006) explained that many qualitative

researchers tend to use focus groups when collecting data for a study, but the individual in-depth

interview permits the researcher to explore deeper into the private and social matters of the

interviewee.

Face-to face interviews are more advantageous than other methods because of the

certainty of the interviewee being the specific person to answer the questions that are being

studied. These interviews also permit personal contact between the interviewer and interviewee,

as well as the interviewer can serve as a motivational source. Moreover, face-to face in-depth

70
semi-structured interviews decreases the reluctance of participants to quit the study and provide

additional information to the participants for understanding questions within the interview and

can ask additional questions (Becker & UAB-Team, 2011).

Face to face interviews, although widely used, do have their disadvantages as well.

These types of interviews cost time and money, participants might experience stage fright during

the interview, and the validity of sensitive questions is always present during an interview

(Becker & UAB-Team, 2011; Opdenakker, 2006). In-depth interviews can deliver rich

information and material about individual experiences that are essential to the researcher in order

for them to explore the perspectives and meanings of responses and generating a hypothesis.

This leaves most of the interpretation and analysis of the data up to the investigators discretion

that can cause answers to be subjective (DiCicco-Bloom & Crabtree, 2006).

In this study the researcher used one-on-one semi-structured interviews and follow up

telephone interviews to gain perspectives of dropouts on why they left before graduation. This

research method was used in order to spread the scope of inquiry by using different methods for

diverse components (Hansen, 2006). These methods also permitted the researcher to get a more

personal and in-depth look at the data for analysis.

Within every qualitative study, transferability, dependability, and confirmability are

issues that must be addressed (Ary et al, 2014). In this study the researcher used descriptive

adequacy, similarity, and limiting reactivity approaches in order to insure the transferability of

the study. The dependability of this study was addressed with approaches like documentation,

consistent findings, coding agreement, and corroboration. Lastly the researcher followed up by

insuring the confirmability was met by using additional approaches of documentation,

71
corroboration, and control of bias (Ary et al, 2014). The researcher used all of the approaches to

insure that the qualitative study was credible.

Prevention and intervention are critical when addressing students at risk for dropping out.

Educational leaders must implement preventative programs to keep students in school and must

find a way to keep students from giving up on their education and starting their lives behind

those who choose to graduate.

Research Context

The context of this study was one adult high school in a rural school district whose

students decided to leave traditional high school prior to graduation, but have since enrolled in

this adult school to earn a diploma or the equivalency of a diploma. The adult high school is

located in a rural county, which is located in East Tennessee and is one of twenty-nine schools in

the rural school district. This school provides programs and additional opportunities to more

than 280 dropouts.

Demographics of School District

The school system is a district that consists of 29 schools that provide educational

programs to more than 14,500 students in grades PreK-12. The student population is not very

diverse based off of ethnicity. Only five ethnic groups are represented throughout the district,

and 87.2% of the students are White. 8.9% are Hispanic or Latino. 2% are Black, and 1.4% is

Asian. The number of students that are English Language Learners is 5.2% and 14.4% of the

population are students with disabilities. The majority of the population of students in this

district are economically disadvantaged, in fact, 63.3% qualify for the free and reduced lunch

program.

72
Demographics of the adult high school

The adult high school is a one of two continuation schools in the school district where the

study was conducted. It is unique because most of the students enrolled were at one-time high

school dropouts. These students have since returned to pursue an education by obtaining a

diploma or the equivalency of a diploma. The students that are enrolled in the adult high school

vary in ages anywhere from 18 years old and up. School hours fluctuate daily in order to meet

the needs of those who hold regular jobs, but are still seeking a high school education.

The adult high school offers three different programs. There is a program for youth, who

have fallen behind for various reasons on their graduation pace, i.e., teen pregnancy, truancy

issues, discipline problems, etc. The Youth Program offers credit recoveries, regular credits, and

extra hours to help with attendance. The Adult Learners Program, which is the program this

study will focus on, is for students over the age of 18, but not under compulsory attendance.

These students were dropouts, but now are working towards a regular diploma, and/or prepping

for the High School Equivalency Exam. The school’s third program is Adult English as second

language program for those adults who seek the ability to learn English.

The adult high school has more than 250 students enrolled in the programs they offer.

The percent of male and female students enrolled are as follows 54.5% of the students who

attend are females, and 45.5% are male. The diversity of races among the students are as

follows; 36% of the students that attend are White, the Hispanic population makes up 58% of the

students, 3% are Asian, 2% are Black, and 1% is other. The breakdown of races and gender

together are as follows; 37% of the students are White males and 38% are White females. 55%

are Hispanic males and 60% are Hispanic females. Asian males make up 4% of the students, 2%

are Asian females. 3% are Black males and 0 students who attend the school that are Black

73
females. There are 1% of students that are male that are more than one race. The adult high

school provides a second chance for many dropouts who decide later that quitting high school

was not the correct decision.

Instrumentation

The researcher chose to use a semi-structured, one-on-one interview to identify answers

to the guided research questions by using additional questions as prompts. These prompts served

as a technique to dig deeper into the responses given by the participants of the study. The

research questions were presented in Chapter I, and the prompt questions were created in order to

get a clearer look at why these dropouts left school. The prompt questions are in the appendices

as Appendix A.

The researcher analyzed the data by coding the information and determining patterns and

evolving themes. The researcher’s field notes and transcribed interviews were coded using open

coding, axial coding, and refined coding. The preset codes in open coding were based off Wells

et al’s (1989) Dropout Framework, the four categories which are: school-related, student-related,

community-related, and family-related. The responses were color coded accordingly,

highlighted, and transferred into data table as final themes emerged.

The volunteers of the study were interviewed one-on-one so they would open up in

reflection about their personal experience during high school. The prompts were also used to

take a deeper look at the school’s role in why the participant chose to dropout. The researcher

strived to use these questions to determine why the participants left and whether the school could

have prevented them from quitting. The questions in the study relate to the information in

Chapter II and searched for ways to prevent at-risk student from making the same decision.

74
 Population

The participants of this study consisted of students who dropped out of high school, but

have since decided to return to an educational program in order to pursue a high school diploma.

The students in the study were made up of adults 18 years of age and older. The participants were

all enrolled in one adult high school in East Tennessee. The population will consist of students

from a district who are predominately White, have low socio-economic statuses, and have family

patterns of not graduating from high school. Although, on average in the last three years, 85.3%

of all students in this school district graduate, there is an impending need to understand why the

other 14.7% do not complete high school.

Participants

This study used a sample of 15 student Volunteers that were enrolled at the adult high

school, a school that provides programs to earn a high school diploma to those who chose to drop

out of traditional high school. The participants who were interviewed were 18 years of age and

older and attended classes throughout the day that best worked with their individual schedules.

The participants were not just credit deficient, but actually made a conscious decision to quit

school and later return in order to obtain a diploma.

In order to select participants, the researcher began by meeting with the administrators of

the school and discussing the study, and then by visiting during a non-instructional class time to

speak with students about the study. After visiting and talking about the study, the researcher

asked for volunteers, took down their names, and distributed consent forms to those interested in

volunteering for the study. The consent form included a brief description of the study and its

purpose. It explained that participation was voluntary and that participants may withdraw from

the study at any time. A copy of the consent form is located in the appendices as Appendix B.

75
 Data Collection

This study used semi-structured face-to face in depth interviews in order to obtain

information for the qualitative methods. The interviews were used to gain knowledge about

personal experiences, thoughts, beliefs, and expectations of a group of 15 dropouts. The semi-

structured interview strived to answer two research questions, but additional prompt questions

were used to get a deeper understanding of these volunteers’ experiences. These interview

protocols were created with the participants’ vulnerabilities in mind. Multiple steps were taken

to assure confidentiality throughout the study. In reporting data, no names of the participants

were mentioned, only aliases that were given by the researcher, and all collected documents and

data was kept locked in one secure area away from the interview site. This research was only

completed in one school in the school district, and the superintendent granted permission for the

study to take place.

After Institutional Review Board (IRB) approved the study, the visits to the adult high

school during non-instructional class times were made. This study asked for volunteers from

ages 18 years old and up that were high school dropouts to participate in on-on-one interviews.

Students enrolled at the adult high school were informed about the study, and the purpose of the

interviews. Volunteers were offered consent forms and asked to sign and return them as soon as

possible.

Volunteers were informed that they could quit or stop the study at any time. The

participants were interviewed using a semi-structured instrument that consisted of prompts that

persuaded them to give details about their personal experiences. The interviews were

administered in an office separate from all distractions and interruptions. The participants were

guaranteed that their responses would be held in confidence and no personal data about their

76
participation would be included in the study, but direct quotes would potentially be used. They

were reminded that their participation was appreciated and it was furthering research on the

prevention of high school dropouts.

When the individual interviews began the purpose of the study was again explained to the

volunteers. The researcher then received consent for using an audiotape recorder during the

interview. Although some uneasiness might have been present throughout the interview because

of the nature of the interview, the researcher again assured the participants that they could

withdraw from the study at any time. The researcher informed the participants that the

recordings and field notes would be kept in a locked area away from the location of the

interviews, and would only be transcribed by the researcher, and later destroyed after the study

was complete. The researcher began by stating the date and location of the interview and the

alias for the participant. The interview began and the interviewer took field notes while the

audio tape recorded. Throughout the interview, the researcher used the prompt questions to get

more detail about the participants’ experiences.

Data Analysis

After the one-on-one interviews were completed, the researcher transcribed the audio

recordings from each interview. The researcher’s field notes and transcribed interviews were

then analyzed and coded by using categories for open coding based off the preset codes of Wells

et all (1989) framework. The open coding process was the first level of coding, and in this level

of coding distinct concepts and categories were identified and separated into the preset codes. In

the next level of coding, which is called axial coding, the researcher confirmed that concepts and

categories were accurately represented, as well as explored how both were related. During axial

coding, emergent codes often arise that are different from the pre-set codes in open coding. The

77
researcher identified the emergent codes that were presented during this level of coding. Lastly,

the researcher completed the last level of coding. In this level, which is referred to as refining

and transferring codes, the researcher identified and transferred the final concepts and categories

onto a data table. This table assisted the researcher by pinpointing specific themes and sub-

themes of the data. This data directly answered the research questions being studied.

Role of Researcher

The researcher was an employee of the district where the study was conducted. The

researcher provided proof to the district and administration at the study site that she was a

doctoral student seeking information about why students drop out of high school, and if schools

could have prevented their decision. The research was conducted and shared with other

educational practitioners in order to prevent students from dropping out of high school.

Ethical Issues

Anytime a study is being conducted using human subjects, integrity, confidentiality, and

opportunity cost are concerns for those involved. Permission must be obtained when sharing

participant information, and individual trust should be honored. Confidentiality of information

must be observed so no harm or prejudice will occur to the participants or future studies. It is

necessary to be precise in communicating the information to all stakeholders regarding the

purpose of the study. It is imperative to clearly communicate the cost, time, and importance of

the study to all involved.

Respecting participants’ time away from class is vital. These participants are students

who are volunteering their time to be in the study, so being respectful and considerate of time is

crucial during the interviews. Securely storing the data and later destroying it is imperative to

78
the confidentiality of the subjects. Scheduling interviews when both parties are available is

significant to the cost of the study for both the participants and the researcher.

Finally, it is moral and ethical for the researcher to fully study the factors why students

leave high school, and analyze the results. Identifying these reasons and sharing information

with those who can implement programs to prevent students from leaving is an obtainable goal.

It is the responsibility of all educators to prepare each individual student to be successful adults

in today’s society.

Limitations

Limitations of the study are as follows:

1. Because this study used a qualitative method, the data obtained may be considered

subjective, and interpreted differently by various readers.

2. Due to the fact that the sampling of the study was made up of volunteers and was a

convenience sample, the researcher cannot confidently say that this sample was a clear

representation of the population (Cresswell, 2003).

3. The results of the data analysis have limited generalizations to similar populations from

which the volunteer sample was obtained (Tobachnick & Fidell, 2000).

Although limitations are present, qualitative research produces constructive results. These rich

and in-depth responses created by qualitative methods allow researchers to get a more precise

understanding of the problem being studied. The information obtained from the one-on-one

interviews provided the researcher with better insight of what factors cause students to leave high

school, and if there were preventative methods that could have kept them in school.

This chapter provided an overview of the methodology of the study that was conducted in

order to discover what factors cause students to leave school, and furthermore if school’s could

79
have prevented them from leaving. The two research questions guided the interviews, but the

prompt questions provided more in-depth answers in order for the interviewer to gain deeper

insight of the study.

Chapter IV includes a summary of the findings of the interviews. It includes sections that

have an overview of responses, a discussion of themes and sub themes, a summary of the

findings, and a discussion of the findings. In Chapter V, the conclusions of the study are

presented.

80
 Chapter IV

Research Findings

Chapter III described the analysis of methods used to understand why students leave high

school before graduation, and what could have prevented them from quitting. This study

included 15 respondents from one adult high school who participated in one-on-one interviews

and follow up phone call interviews with the researcher. The researcher used a 16 question

interview guide to seek the findings of the two research questions of this study which are as

follows:

1. What factors cause students to leave school before graduation?

2. Are there any preventative measures that educators can do to keep students in

school until after graduation?

The questions in the interview guide aligned with the research questions provided a deeper

analysis into the findings of the study and provided more discussion for the responses provided.

The interviews provided an understanding of why students were leaving before graduation as

well as, whether or not the educational system could have kept the dropouts in school. The

information obtained during the interviews gave the researcher an opportunity to interpret the life

experiences of the respondents, because the synchronous communication in a face-to-face

81
interview provided the researcher the advantage to view social cues such as, voice, body

language, intonation, etc.

The study was conducted over a four-week period of time during which the researcher

met with the school administrators, visited the classrooms, spoke to students, and conducted

82
interviews. The administrators at the adult high school assisted in identifying and securing

volunteer respondent. When visiting the classroom, the researcher was able to observe how the

participants were engaged in the class instruction and discussion, as well as the information that

was presented about the study. The classroom was setup in a non-traditional classroom setting.

Instead of desk where students would usually do their work by writing, there were tables with

desktop computers for each students’ use. The researcher introduced the study that was

conducted, and then was able to stay and observe class afterwards. The students that were once

dropouts seemed engaged and interested during instructional time, and no one throughout the

observation behaved badly or interrupted class during the observation. On the day of the

interviews, the respondents met with the researcher individually in a private room where there

were no interruptions. The researcher reminded the respondents about the purpose of the study,

and insured them that their identity would in no way be revealed throughout the study. After the

face-to face interviews, the researcher then followed up with four of the respondents via

telephone to ask additional questions to get a clearer understanding of the responses and to

assure that the analysis of the data was correct.

After completing all interviews, the research began the open coding process, in order to

complete this coding process, the researcher read through the field notes of the interviews and

listened to the audio recordings to note any information that seemed relevant to the research

questions. During this level of coding distinct concepts and categories were identified and

separated into preset codes. Next, the researcher revisited the data to begin axial coding. During

axial coding, emergent codes were revealed that were slightly different from the pre-set codes in

open coding. The researcher identified the emergent codes that were presented during this level

of coding. Lastly, the researcher completed the final level of coding. In the refining and
transferring of the codes level, the researcher identified and transported the final concepts and

categories onto a data table. This table assisted the researcher by pinpointing specific themes

and sub-themes of the data.

In order to ensure transferability, dependability, and confirmability, the researcher used

certain methods throughout the study. In order to obtain transferability, the researcher used

limited approaches to obtain the information, and used one interview guide for each participant.

In order to verify dependability, the researcher used a peer mentor coder to verify her coding

process. The peer mentor that was used held advanced degrees in education, and was familiar

with the coding process and analyzing data for qualitative studies. The researcher also used a

member check coder. This person was one of the respondents who the researcher asked to verify

the emergent themes that were revealed to what the respondent had shared in the interview.

Lastly, the researcher accessed student transcripts in order to confirm responses that were given

during the interviews such as; attendance records, discipline issues, and credit verification, in

order to ensure confirmability. All these steps were used in order to obtain and analyze the

findings of this study in order to limit biases.

This chapter presents the data from the one-on-one and the follow up phone call

interviews of this study. The findings of this study were analyzed by answering the initial

research questions and searching for emergent themes throughout the data. The researcher

analyzed the data by using a coding system that had different levels of coding, a peer mentor

coder, and a member check coder. The following information is an analysis of the findings of

the study.

84
The Respondents

This study used 15 volunteers from an adult high school. The respondents consisted of 9

males and 6 females. The races of the respondents were 8 White, 3 Black, and 4 Hispanic. The

respondents’ ages varied from 18-25 years of age, and the age when they actually dropped out

varied from ages15-17. Moreover, the respondents revealed that although 60% stated that the

last grade they attended was the 11th grade, an astonishing 73% reported that the 9th and 10th

grade is where they began to fall behind in schoolwork. Figures 4.1 through 4.4 present the data

of the overall percentages of the ages of the respondents now, when they actually dropped out,

the grade they last attended, and the grade they actually fell behind.

Figure 4. 1 presents overall percentages of the ages of the respondents in the study

Overall - Age
30% 27%
20% 20%
20%
13%
10% 7% 7% 7% Overall - Age

0%
18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

Figure 4. 2 presents the percentages of the overall ages of the respondents when they dropped out

of high school

Overall - Age when dropout

60% 47%
40% 27% 27%
20% Overall - Age when dropout
0%
15 16 17

85
Figure 4. 3 presents the overall percentage of the last grades attended by the respondents

Overall - Last Grade Attended

100%
60%
50% 27% Overall - Last Grade
7% 7% Attended
0%
8 9 10 11

Figure 4. 4 presents the overall percentages of the grade level when the respondents fell behind

Overall - Grade When Fell Behind in Credits

50%
40%
40% 33%
30%
20% 13% 13% Overall - When Fell Behind
10%
0%
8 9 10 11

These tables above show the percentages of the respondents’ demographics for the beginning

questions of the one-on-one interviews conducted by the researcher.

What Factors Cause Students to Leave School before Graduation

The researcher used the same guiding questions during each interview, but also asked

additional questions to each respondent based on their responses, so there was a more in depth

understanding. When respondents were asked about what factors made them drop out of high

school, shockingly the responses immediately revealed emergent themes. A little less than half

of (40%) of the respondents stated it was because of a lack of credits, and they had fallen behind.

In fact, one respondent stated,

86
 When I showed up for school my junior year, the principal told me I wasn’t going to

graduate with my class, and there was no way I could catch up. When he told me that, I

didn’t want anyone to know so I just quit going to school.

Other respondents shared similar stories about being informed that they lacked credits and would

not be able to graduate with their class. Two of the respondents who lacked credits, did so due to

illness and a lack of homebound services. One reported that she was unable to get approved for

homebound, while the other said that his homebound teacher quit, and failed to report the credits

he had earned.

The other emergent themes consisted of moving, language barriers, bullying, and a

combination of more than one of those reasons. Respondents that had moved into a new school

district, reported that they just did not enroll in school when they arrived, leaving them with no

option but to become a dropout. The student that described his factor as being unable to

understand the primary language of the school stated,

I would sit in class not knowing one thing my teacher or other students were saying. I

could sometimes understand a little of what I was reading, but I felt so out of place and

uncomfortable that I just felt like school was a waste of time.

Two respondents reported that they were bullied in school, and they felt unsafe. One of

these respondents actually stated that he left for multiple reasons, but one of them was because

he was overweight and was constantly picked on about it. These two respondents shared vivid

memories of the harassment that they endured throughout their childhood. One respondent

reported,

I would have rather stayed home and gotten whipped by my parents instead of having to

go to school and hear the mean things my classmates would say to me. Of course, I

87
 would try to keep to myself, but when someone thrives off your humiliation, and you are

as overweight as I was, then it is impossible to be invisible.

Lastly, 33% of the respondents shared that there was not just one thing that caused them

to leave. In fact, it was multiple reasons. For example, one respondent said that she moved here

from Honduras because of this move, she lacked credits here in America. Another said that he

was bullied, and later he became sick, which forced him to homebound schooling. However, the

teacher quit without ever reporting his progress or credits.

After hearing the responses on why these students left high school, the researcher then

followed up by asking whether or not they regretted their choice to quit school. Of the

responses, 26.7% of them reported, “no they did not regret leaving.” One respondent stated,

If I had stayed in school feeling as miserable and as worthless as those students made me

feel, I might not be alive today. So, no I don’t regret my decision

On the other end of the spectrum, 73.3% said they did regret it, and if they could change their

decision to quit, that they would do so. One of the respondents stated,

Quitting school is one of the hugest regrets of my life. In fact if I could take back that

year when I started abusing drugs, fell behind in my credits, and chose to just quit school,

I have no doubt that I could be a successful person in society right now. Instead, I am

working forty hours a week at some zip line where I get no benefits, and can barely pay

my rent.

Figures 4.5 and 4.6 present the factors reported as the factors that caused students to leave high

school, and the percent of respondents that regret this decision.

88
Figure 4. 5 presents the overall percentages of the factors that caused students to dropout

WHAT FACTORS CAUSED YOU TO LEAVE SCHOOL?

45% 40.0%
40% 33.3%
35%
30%
25%
20% 13.3%
15% 6.7% 6.7%
10%
5%
0%
Credits Moved Language Bullied Multple Reasons

Figure 4. 6 shows the overall percentages of whether or not respondents regretted their decision

to quit school

DO YOU REGRET YOUR DECISION TO LEAVE BEFORE

GRADUATION
80% 73.3%
60%
40% 26.7%
20%
0%
YES NO

Are There Any Preventative Measures to Keep Students in School

After the researcher analyzed the factors that were reported, she then determined whether

or not these respondents could have been kept in school based on the guiding questions revealed.

When the respondents were questioned about what the school did in order to try and keep you in

school, 66% of them reported that the school “met with them about not dropping out, or

suggested alternative programs to finish school.” Thirty-three percent reported that nothing was

done in order to keep them in school.

89
 Although, a large number of respondents shared that the school did try to do something to

help keep them in school, when asked “what the school could have done to keep to try and keep

you in school”, 67% reported they could have helped them more, 13% shared they tried

everything to keep me in school, and I just chose to leave; 20% said there was nothing they could

have done to keep them in school. The researcher followed up by asking those who said, “the

school could have helped more,” by asking what kind of help could they have provided. A few

of the respondents shared by saying,

If I would have known I was behind earlier, I would have tried harder, or maybe the

school could have gotten a tutor to help me get back on track.

Another said,

If the school would have helped stop the bullying, I probably wouldn’t have had to quit

school, but no one seemed to think it as a big deal that I was humiliated every day.

Lastly, one reported,

If I could have had some help understanding what my teacher was saying, I know I could

have learned, but no one tried to help translate for me.

The researcher finalized this line of questioning by asking each respondent if there was anything

at all that would have prevented them from leaving school, again 40% said help with class,

translations, or other school issues would have prevented them from leaving. Thirty-three

percent said if they had never fallen behind in credits, they would have finished. Shockingly,

27% said that there was absolutely nothing anyone could have done to make me finish high

school. Figure 4.7 and 4.8 show the answers to the research question of what preventative

measures educators can take in order to keep students in school based of the 15 respondents in

this study.

90
Figure 4. 7 presents the overall percentages of responses given to answer what the school could

have done to keep them in school

WHAT COULD THE SCHOOL HAVE DONE TO TRY TO KEEP

YOU IN SCHOOL?
80% 67%
60%
40% 20%
13%
20%
0%
Helped Tried Everything Nothing

Figure 4. 8 presents the percentages of the overall responses given to answer what would have

prevented the dropouts from quitting school

WHAT WOULD HAVE PREVENTED YOU FROM

QUITTING SCHOOL?
50% 40%
40% 33%
30% 27%
20%
10%
0%
Nothing Help Been on Track

Guiding Questions Analyzed Using Emergent Themes

Next, the interview guide was used to seek information from the respondents about their

attendance, disciplinary issues, involvement in the school culture, their feelings on school, and

student-adult engagement in the school. This area of question would help the researcher analyze

student engagement while they were attending school, and could reveal other factors that led

them to leave school.

91
 The first question the researcher asked was, “how they felt about school.” This question

revealed that 7% of them were indifferent about school, and 46.5% both like and disliked school.

Later, she asked whether or not the respondents were involved in extra-curricular activities in the

school such as, sports, clubs, band, or other organizations. The responses were as follows, 40%

said that while they were attending they played a sport, 20% answered that they participated in

clubs, 7% were in the band, and 33% were not involved in anything. The researcher followed

this question up by asking them about when they quit school, “were you concerned about

quitting on their teammates or their club or band members.” All respondents that played sports

reported that because they were failing and not on track to graduate, they no longer were eligible

for their sport. Many followed up by saying, “when I wasn’t able to play I didn’t want to go to

school anymore.”

The next two questions analyzed attendance and disciplinary issues. Out of the 15

respondents, 60% said that they frequently missed school meaning they would miss seven or

more days out of ten. Twenty-seven percent reported that they never missed school; 13% said

that they rarely or occasionally were absent from school. When the researcher asked about how

often they were a disciplinary issue, respondents answered by stating that 33.5% were never in

trouble, 46.5% were rarely or occasionally an issue, and 20% of them frequently experienced

disciplinary problems.

Lastly, the researcher asked the respondents about whether or not there was an adult in

their school with whom they had a personal relationship and could discuss personal problems.

Respondents shared responses such as, teachers, coaches, counselors, multiple people, and no

one. One respondent stated,

92
 I literally knew no one at my school and could not communicate with any of my teachers

or classmates. I felt lost and helpless while I was at school. It was a hard time for me

because I had no one I could relate to.

Another respondent told,

I had lots of people I felt comfortable talking to about problems or needing help; I just

didn’t always take their advice because I thought I knew everything.

Figure 4.9 represents the people with whom the respondents felt they had a relationship with at

the school to discuss problems.

Figure 4. 9 presents the percentages of the overall responses given to answer whether there was

an adult with whom they had a relationship and could discuss personal problems

WAS THERE AN ADULT AT YOUR SCHOOL WITH

WHOM YOU HAD A RELATIONSHIP AND COULD
DISCUSS PERSONAL PROBLEMS?
50%
40%
40%
30% 27%
20% 13% 13%
10% 7%
0%
Teacher Coach Counselor No one Multiple

The next few guiding questions used were to identify family involvement in the students’

choices to leave school. The researcher asked questions such as who was most influential in

your decision to quit, what did your family do to influence your decisions, how did your family

react to your decision, and do you have other family member that did not complete high school.

The respondents’ answers consisted of 46.5% of them stating that the most influential person in

my decision to leave was themselves. Another 46.5% said it was a parent that talked them into

quitting, and 7% said it was a grandparent. One respondent noted that,

93
 I pretty much decided it myself because I didn’t really have too much to do with my

parents. My mom worked all the time and my dad was in and out of jail cause of drugs

and stuff so I never even knew when he was going to be around.

Another respondent said,

I think my mom wanted me to quit so badly because she wanted me to stay home and

help with my baby sister. She had to work, and no one was there really to help. Plus, I

didn’t even know what was going on at school since I didn’t understand anything they

were saying.

When asked how their families influenced their decision, 33% said they did absolutely nothing to

keep them in school, 27% of the respondents’ family members tried to get them to finish school,

and 40% of them reported that family members talked them into quitting school. A respondent

reported that,

Well, I guess that was the problem in the first place, my parents really didn’t do anything.

I think they expected me not to make it. They just sort of said I needed to try and find a

job somewhere.

When the respondents were asked how their families reacted to their decision, 20% said they

were happy they had dropped out, 40% were upset, and 40% were indifferent about the decision.

The last question the researcher asked related to family was about what other family member had

dropped out of school. Some reported that a parent had not completed school some said a

sibling, others said there were multiple people in their families that had not graduated, and some

reported that there was no one to their knowledge that had not finished. Figure 4.10 below

shows the representation of the findings of this question

94
Figure 4. 10 presents the overall percentages of responses to answer what family members of the

dropouts had also dropped out.

WHAT OTHER FAMILY MEMBERS DROPPED OUT OF

HIGH SCHOOL?
50% 40%
40%
27% 27%
30%
20%
7%
10%
0%
Parent Siblings No one Multiple People

The follow up questions that all the interviews ended with were seeking employment

information. One question asked if the respondent was aware of the types of jobs available for

them since they did not have a high school diploma, and the other question was what their annual

salary was. The researcher discovered that almost half of the respondents did not know the types

of jobs available. Moreover, 53% of the respondents were unemployed. When asked about

kinds of employment, many said minimum wage jobs. One specifically stated,

Because I live here where all these visitors come, I will always be able to find a job

somewhere serving them. These jobs wouldn’t pay a lot, but there were lots of options

for me because we have so many people coming in and out of here all the time.

Figure 4.11 below shows the responses to the types of job opportunities the respondents said

were available to those without a high school diploma.

95
Figure 4. 11 shows the overall percentages of the responses to answer what employment

opportunities are available for dropouts.

DO YOU KNOW WHAT EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUITIES

ARE AVILABLE FOR YOU WITHOUT A DIPLOMA?
50%
40% 40%
40%
30%
20%
20%
10%
0%
Don’t Know Minnimum Wage Tourism Industry

Lastly, the researcher analyzed the responses from the last guiding question of the interview,

which asked about the annual salary of the respondents. The findings showed that 7% of those

interviewed have an annual salary of $17,000-$22,000. There were 20% that made $11,000-

$16,999, and another 20% earned $5,000-$10,999. Remarkably, 53% were unemployed and did

not earn any income. Figure 4.12 below better represents the findings of the question on annual

salaries.

Figure 4. 12 shows the overall percentages of the respondents’ annual salaries.

WHAT IS YOUR ANNUAL SALARY

60% 53%
50%
40%
30% 20% 20%
20%
10% 7%
0%
22,00-17,000 16,999-11,000 10,999-5,000 Unemployed

96
 Summary

This chapter reflected the voices of those respondents that participated in one-on-one

interviews and follow up interviews. These interviews were used to answer two specific

research questions. The guiding questions used throughout the interview were used to shed light

on what factors cause students to quit school, and what could have prevented them from leaving.

The researcher analyzed the data by using different levels of coding and looking at the research

questions for emergent themes within the responses. The researcher then used a peer coder and a

member check to verify the coding process. Lastly, the researcher used transcripts that were

provided in order to verify information given throughout the study.

Dropouts’ voices often go unheard, and as a result the epidemic of students quitting high

school before graduation continues to occur. In this chapter, a few dropouts had an opportunity

to be heard. The analysis of this chapter reveal answers to educators about what factors are

causing students to drop out of high school, and whether or not something could have prevented

it from occurring. Based-off the emergent themes that occurred, more often than not students are

dropping out because of a lack of credits, moving, language barriers within the school, and

bullying. Although, many said that there was nothing that could have prevented them from

leaving, a more prevalent response showed that earlier and various kinds of help could keep

students in school.

Chapter V presents the findings of the study within the context of the research and the

emergent themes. The researcher will demonstrate the connection of the themes of her findings

with those of Wells, Hambly, and Bechard’s (1989) framework, and the theory of Maslow’s

Hierarchy of Needs as well as the Motivational and Engagement theories described in Chapter II.

The chapter also discusses the study’s implication for practice, and further recommendations for

97
future research.

98
 Chapter V

Findings, Implications, and Recommendations

The review of literature clearly establishes that the dropout epidemic is a widespread

issue. The findings of these researchers and theories presented a plethora of findings.

Researchers of these studies had used quantitative, qualitative and mixed-method research

approaches in their studies in order to obtain their findings. This particular study analyzed the

dropouts by hearing the students’ voices in order to provide insight about this complex problem.

In this chapter the researcher presents the discussion of findings of the study. The emergent

themes are noted and discussed as well as linkage to Wells, Bechard, and Hambly’s (1898)

framework, Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs theory for dropouts, and motivational and engagement

theories of dropouts. Lastly, the chapter presented the implications for practice as well as

recommendations for future research.

Summary of the Study

The purpose of this study was to determine the factors that caused students to drop out of

high school as well as what preventative measures could have been implemented to keep them in

school. The researcher conducted a qualitative study, which took place within context of one

adult high school in a rural school district whose students decided to leave traditional high school

prior to graduation, but have since enrolled in this adult high school to earn a diploma or the

equivalency of a diploma.

Many students start school with expectations of success. Unfortunately, many of these

same students encounter obstacles or issues that lead them towards dropping out instead of

99
graduation. One in three students leave high school in the United States, and a higher number of

minority students do not graduate (Youth Who Drop, 2000). Although, many efforts have been

made to stop students from leaving, the dropout epidemic is still an issue for educators.

Throughout the last three decades, the dropout rate has remained the same despite the increased

funding that has been allocated to stop this crisis (Swanson, 2004). This problem is not only an

issue for the dropout themselves, but it also impacts the national health and welfare programs

too. The current challenge of the educational system is to prepare our students for successful

futures, starting with keeping as many of our youth in school. Educators can use information

from those participating in school about what programs are succeeding and what programs are

failing. Dropping out is a gradual process that includes disengagement within the educational

system. There are many reasons why students decide to leave school therefore there is no one

solution to keeping students in school. However, high school students are the experts that need

to be heard in order to address the dropout crisis.

The information obtained in his study give insight to educators for best practices and

prevention methods for high school dropouts. The factors that were revealed in this study

consisted of a lack of credits, moving, language barriers, bullying, and a combination of the four.

In addition to discovering factors, prevention methods were also determined in the findings of

this study. The information provided concluded that monitoring progress earlier, additional

academic support, and a safe learning environment could help prevent students from quitting

before graduation.

Research Questions

This study used input from stakeholders who have a first-hand personal connection to dropping

out in order to answer the following research questions:

100
 1. What factors cause students to leave school before graduation?

2. Are there any preventative measures that educators can do to keep students in school until

after graduation?

Findings

Although students spend more time in the education system than anyone else, their voices

are often overlooked and limited when it comes to literature and research on education. These

students’ experiences during school, along with their individual perspectives, resulted in the

emergent themes of this study. One-on-one interviews at the adult high school were used to listen

to students who were once dropouts from high school to acquire the information of what caused

them to leave before graduation, and what could have been done to prevent them from dropping

out. The analysis of the students’ voices in this study uncovered the significance academic support

for students that had fallen behind in credits. There were also areas that revealed a necessity of

support for those who had moved into the area, spoke a different language, and had been mistreated

or bullied during school. Other themes showed that many of the respondents were disengaged

from their peers, teachers, and schools in general. A lack of family support and expectations were

other themes that appeared throughout the study.

Major findings of the interviews can be broken down into three emergent themes of what

could have prevented them from leaving school. Respondents confirmed that being on track to

graduate would have kept them in school. Other respondents revealed that support from authority

figures for those who felt unsafe at school, or receiving academic support could have kept them

engaged and on track to graduate. Lastly, the findings presented that nothing could have prevented

some of the respondents from leaving school.

101
 Findings Related to Research

The researchers Wells, Bechard, and Hambly, (1989) created a framework that

categorized factors of why students left school into four main categories. The data collected

during the interviews were analyzed within this framework. The four categories that were

developed by Wells et al (1989) included student related factors, school-related indicators,

family-related indicators, and community-related indicators. Although some of the findings

could represent more than one category, the researcher selected the most apparent fit for the

factors involved, but also discussed the factors within both categories.

Student-Related Indicators

One of the listed categories of Wells et al, (1989) are student-related factors that the

student can control these factors. Student-related factors are most often described as student

actions that occur both in and outside of the school setting. Many times the student related

factors are negative student behaviors that cause the student to become less engaged in school.

These factors included areas such as student behavior and disciplinary problems, academic

achievement, and attendance (Wells et al, 1989). Findings in the student-related factors were

very common among the factors presented among the responses. These factors that were

identified during the interview were things such as a lack of credits, their attendance, disciplinary

issues, and students’ feelings about school in general.

When respondents were asked about why they left school, many reported that they were

failing classes because they did not complete assignments, participate in class discussion, or do

homework assignments. Although, they all were aware of the consequences of not completing

these tasks, they still failed to comply with class curriculum in order to pass, thus, leaving them

102
failing and behind on credits and unable to graduate. One particular respondent shared with the

researcher,

When I was in class I didn’t act out or anything, I just didn’t do anything. I wasn’t really

smart and didn’t understand what the teacher was trying to show us, and I was too

embarrassed to ask for help. So I would just sit there and not turn in anything.

Attendance was another student-related factor that was mentioned many times throughout

the interviews. In fact, 60% of the respondents said they frequently missed school. These

absences caused many of the respondents to fall behind in class and ultimately fail, which was

the case according to this particular respondent that reported,

I literally wouldn’t go to school for weeks at a time. Then when I would show back up I

would have a whole pile of makeup work. Seeing all that work just made me not want to

come back the next day. So, I just would lay out again, and I never did my makeup work.

Like attendance, disciplinary issues were also factors within the interview that Wells et al

(1989) categorized as student related issues. Students that were in trouble more often than not

had a hard time staying until graduation (1989). The researcher found that only 33% of the

respondents had never been in trouble in school. This factor indicated that the other 67% of

respondents did in fact have discipline issues that could have impacted the result of them failing

to complete high school.

School-Related Indicators

School related factors are those factors that occur during the school day and are related to

the structures and activities within the day. These factors include things such as school climate

and learning environment, teacher–student engagement, school structure, and school vision.

103
Throughout the interviews, respondents shared information that falls within this category that

Wells et al (1989) created within their framework.

When asked what factors caused them to leave school, two respondents shared that they

were being bullied in school, and this caused them to leave. This is a school-related factor

because it is the school’s responsibility to ensure that all students feel safe in school. Being

harassed and bullied makes it hard for students to learn, and can often make them feel withdrawn

(1989). Next, respondents were asked about their feelings about school. Some reported being

indifferent about school, and the others were evenly split on whether they either liked or disliked

school. One person stated,

I didn’t like school because I never felt like I fit in. No one ever really smiled or asked

me how I was doing, or really seemed to care about me at all. I think if I would have felt

like I belonged there, I might would have liked it better, but I thought it was awful that I

had to go there every day.

Another respondent said,

I really liked my principal, he always talked to me and asked me how I was doing, but the

students there were so mean to me. They constantly bullied me and made my life

miserable. I don’t know why that principal didn’t believe me when I tried to tell him they

were picking on me. He just always told me to ignore them, but I just couldn’t.

These students experienced schools that lacked a safe and inviting learning environment. The

culture and climate of a school are critical in keeping students in school (1989).

The next question asked resulted in findings that fell in the school-related category was

what your school did to keep you in school. Again, attending a school with an inviting school

culture and a clear vision both increase the likeliness of student success according to Wells et al

104
(1989). The respondents reported that 67% of the schools either suggested alternative programs

or met with them about not quitting. Thirty-three percent stated that the school did absolutely

nothing to keep them from quitting. Additionally, the researcher followed up by asking if there

was anything the school could have done to prevent them from quitting. A respondent shared

her experience by stating,

When I started shooting up, I knew I wasn’t going to be able to go all day at school, so I

started either checking in late or leaving early. When this started, my coach who was

also me principal talked to me about going to rehab or detox, but I wouldn’t listen to him.

He would call me into his office frequently to try and encourage me not to just quit, but

to at least get my GED. I lacked two credits to graduate, but I literally didn’t care

because my only focus was getting high again. Even though he had to kick me off the

basketball team, he still tried to talk me into getting my life back on track, but I did not

listen and eventually got caught with drugs at school, got arrested, expelled, and now I

am here at age 25 trying to get those two credits. I say all that to say this, my school tried

to help me; I just wasn’t looking for help.

Additionally, 13% of respondents said that the school tried everything to keep them there. More

than 60 percent said that the school could have provided help to them in order to keep them at

school. This help consisted of things such as tutors, translators, earlier prevention methods, and

help to stop being bullied. However, of the respondents interviewed 20% said that nothing

would have kept them from leaving.

Another question the researcher used in order to identify these factors was whether or not

there was an adult at the school with whom the student felt comfortable with to share problems

with. All respondents but 27% said that there was a teacher, counselor, coach, or multiple adults

105
who they felt like they could share a personal problem with if they had one. These findings

revealed that student-adult relationships are important, and many times can prevent students

from quitting according to Wells et al (1989).

Family-Related Indicators

Family-related factors include things like family composition, socio-economic status, and

drug use in the home. Parental support, parenthood, and other home life related factors are the

very ones that contribute to a student’s decision to leave or stay in school (Wells et al, 1989).

Additionally, factors such as living in a dysfunctional home, a home were drugs and alcohol are

abused, a home where family deficiencies are present, and a lack of parental education have all

been connected with student dropouts (1989). The researcher used these categories when

analyzing her data and determined that many of these respondents shared information that fell

within these family related categories.

When the researcher asked about what factors caused them to leave school, 13.3%

answered that it was because they moved. This reason falls within the family-related factor

because of the specific reasons these respondents moved. One respondent moved to America

because her mother married a man from here so they left Honduras. Another student left

Mexico, and moved to America to find her father who had previously come to America without

her. Others reported that their parent was leaving their spouse and made them move. These

moves ultimately caused them to become dropouts because they did not enroll in school once

they moved, when they tried to enroll their credits didn’t transfer leaving them behind, or they

experienced language barriers that caused them to quit.

The respondents that were interviewed were asked to describe their family environment

or home life. Only two out of the fifteen students that were interviewed lived with both their

106
mother and father. Three of the students lived with neither of their parents, and ten lived with

one or the other. These finding connect with Wells et al (1989) factors of why students drop out

of high school.

The researcher later questioned the respondents about who influenced their decision to

leave, what did your family do to influence you, and how did they react to your decision to leave.

More than 50% of the respondents answered that a family member was the most influential

person in their decision. Twenty-seven percent said that their family tried to talk them into

quitting school, and 33% said their family did nothing at all to influence them to stay or quit.

Above that, 60% of the respondents reported that their family was either happy or indifferent

about their decision to quit.

When the students were asked about other family members that had dropped out before

graduation, over 60% of the respondents answered that a parent, a sibling, or multiple family

members had dropped out prior to graduation. The findings of these family related questions

reveal that Wells et al (1989) theory on factors such as living in a dysfunctional home, a home

were drugs and alcohol are abused, a home where family deficiencies are present, and a lack of

parental education have all been connected with student dropouts.

Community-Related Indicators

Community related factors according to Wells et al (1989) also played a role in

influencing the respondents to leave school. Community-factors include things such as their

ethnicities, cultures, language, environment, social class and community support. The researcher

analyzed some of the findings of this section overall and based on gender and ethnicity.

The researcher interviewed 15 respondents 6 out of 15 were female, and 9 out of the 15

were male. Based on the race of the respondents, 53.4% were White, 20% were Black, and

107
26.6% were Hispanic. According to the findings from the first question, gender and ethnicity

played a role. Figures 5.1 and 5.2 demonstrate the factors of why students left school based on

gender and ethnicity.

Figure 5. 1 presents the overall percentages of responses given to answer what factors cause

them to leave school based on gender.

Factors Based on Gender

50% 44%
40% 33% 33% 33%
30% Female
17% 17%
20% 11% 11% Male
10%
0%
Credits Moved Language Bullied Multple
Reasons

Figure 5. 2 presents the overall percentages of responses given to answer what factors cause

them to leave school based on race.

Factors Based on Race

80% 75%
67%
60% 50%
33% White
40%
25% 25%
20% 13% 13% Black

0%
Credits Moved Language Bullied Multple Reasons

The first community-related factor that stood out was the language barrier that three out of the

fifteen respondents stated was an issue. Although Figure 5.2 only shows 25% being Hispanic, it

is because in the multiple reason factors both Hispanic students said that language was a factor as

108
well. Not understanding the primary language of the school was a huge factor in why these three

students chose to leave.

Another community-related factor was social class. All respondents reported that they

made less than $23,000 a year. Meaning they fall below the poverty level. In fact, 93% made

less than $17,000 annually. These earnings make it hard to live comfortably enough to be

worried about graduating. Thus, these students left before graduation. Wells et al’s (1989)

framework for community-related factors connect things such as their ethnicities, cultures,

language, environment, social class and community support to dropping out, and the analyzed

data above represents the same connection.

Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs

The theory behind Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs is that every person has basic needs that

must be met. Within the school building, the students’ needs are what educators are striving to

accomplish. These needs are self-actualization, esteem, belongingness, safety, or physiological.

According to the theory, when students feel like these needs were not met they were more likely

to drop out (Maslow, 1943, 1954). The researcher analyzed her findings to determine which

responses if any, linked with Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs.

Many respondents claimed that the main factor that caused them to quit school was when

they were informed of a lack of credits. When this occurred, they decided to just leave school

altogether. This factor relates to the self-actualization tier. When students lack the feeling of

achieving their full potential or success, many times it results in giving up. The respondents in

the study demonstrated that 40% of them quit school because a lack of credits, and being off

track to graduate on time. Another factor that respondents reported when asked what caused

them to leave before graduation that links with Maslow’s Needs was given by the two

109
respondents who said they left school due to being bullied. The lack of safety and security that

these two respondents endured throughout their schooling ultimately led them to becoming

dropouts.

Later the researcher asked respondents whether they were active in extracurricular

activities in their school. Thirty-three percent answered “no,” they did not participate in

anything at school. It wasn’t until the follow up question when the respondents explained why

they did not participate that the researcher discovered another need that wasn’t being met. The

respondent shared,

I didn’t ever tryout for anything or sign up to do that stuff because I was never good at

anything like that. I was always picked last in gym class to be on anyone’s team, so I

didn’t want to waste the time trying.

This respondent lacked the esteem need. He never felt like he had accomplished anything or that

he was good enough to be a part of a team. His lack of esteem can be linked with why he left

school.

The next question asked pertained to how the students felt about school before they left.

Again, it was the follow up question that really shed light that needs were not being met.

Respondents shared reasons such as; they didn’t feel welcome there which is a lack of

belongingness, or they were worried about their safety. However, on the other side of the

spectrum, there was one respondent, who said,

I loved going to school because I knew I was going to get to eat, and I didn’t have to

worry about what was going on at the house with my parents.

The lack of physiological needs that this respondent endured at home is what made him enjoy

going to school. The last question asked that was linked to the needs of belongingness and

110
safety, was the question about whether there was an adult with whom you had a relationship and

could discuss personal problems. Again, those who reported no they did not have anyone gave

reasons such as,

I didn’t feel like anyone in that school even knew I existed much less would talk to me

about personal problems.

Another respondent said,

I literally kept to myself trying to get through the day. I rarely even made eye contact

with people at school much less talked to them.

Although these two respondents had no one at their school they could confide in, others shared

responses such as; yes, they felt comfortable with various adults in their school and had no

problem talking to them. The difference for these respondents was a lack of Maslow’s Hierarchy

of Needs theory where some of the students’ needs weren’t being met. Those who lacked the

needs responded in ways that revealed links between their responses and Maslow’s theory on

dropouts.

Motivational and Engagement Theory

Educational psychologists have identified that the motivation to learn is broken up into

two groups--intrinsic and extrinsic. Intrinsic motivation is a yearning to learn for natural reasons,

self-fulfillment, and to master the skill. Extrinsic motivation is a want to perform for an

incentive or specific outcome (Huitt, 2011). Motivation along with engagement plays a role in

student success. Student engagement is about interaction and relationships. It involves

participation during instruction and schoolwork along with the overall community life of school.

Indicators of engagement are participation in class, attendance, effort in class work, and low

number of disciplinary problems. Other indicators for psychological engagement are interests

111
and enthusiasm, a feeling of belonging, and identifying with the school community (Christenson

& Thurlow, 2004; Fredericks, Blumenfield, & Paris, 2004). The researcher analyzed her data

searching for responses that could be linked with both motivational and engagement theories.

Motivation and engagement both can be connected with a lack of credits. When students

lack intrinsic motivation, and they are not engaged in class instruction or schoolwork, they tend

to fall behind (Huitt, 2011). Based on responses like this one,

When they told me I wasn’t going to graduate, and that I was behind on my credits, I just

wasn’t motivated to even try and finish.

More responses similar to this one were given when asked about being behind in credits.

Motivation and engagement appear in the responses about attendance and disciplinary issues as

well. Christenson & Thurlow (2004) found that attendance and disciplinary issues are indicators

of a lack of motivation and engagement. According to these responses, the two theories are why

both of these respondents did not come back to school.

Respondent 1 stated:

I missed school a lot, and I would be so far behind in class it would be hard for me to be

interested in what the teacher was teaching. Not to mention, I was so unmotivated to do

my makeup work.

Respondent 2 asserted:

When I was expelled and got sent to an alternative school, I lost all interest in even trying

to finish. I just quit going all together because there was no point.

These two respondents both clearly show a lack of motivation and engagement. The guiding

questions about whether or not the respondents were active in extra-curricular activities, their

feelings about school before they left, and whether they had a good relationship with an adult at

112
their school are connected with motivational and engagement theory. Respondents who did not

participate in the additional activities, did not like school, or did not have an adult to share their

problems lacked motivation to be a part of the school culture, and they were not engaged in the

school environment. Based-off previously stated responses like a lack of belongingness at a

particular school, the respondent was not happy, or they felt unsafe are all connected to a lack of

motivation and engagement.

The last question that connected motivational and engagement theories with the findings

were the two questions: “what the school did to try and keep you in school”, and “whether or not

there was anything that would have prevented you from leaving.” According to the responses,

the schools tried to help keep them from quitting (80% reported), and 27% responded that there

was nothing that would have kept them in school, a lack of motivation and engagement was

clearly noted after the researcher analyzed these findings.

After analyzing the findings related to the research, the researcher concluded that many

of the factors presented in the data were connected to those stated in the research from the

literature review. Many reasons given by the respondents did fall within the frameworks of

Well’s et al (1989), Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs, and Motivational and Engagement theories.

However, educators do not appear to be changing what they are doing to eliminate the problem.

Legislators must hear the dropouts’ voices, and then change prevention methods so the dropout

rate will ultimately decrease.

Conclusions

Many issues have emerged from the study, which need to be examined by educational

practitioners. The changes that support students’ and teachers’ needs in order to develop

productive citizens must be addressed and implemented. The factors of why students left that

113
were identified in the findings provided clarity for educators on what could help keep students in

school. The study exposed to the researcher that monitoring school progress and identify at-risk

students earlier, providing academic support, and creating safe and inviting learning

environments would help prevent students from leaving prior to graduation.

Monitor School Progress and Identify At-Risk Students

Students reported, if they would have known earlier that they were behind in their credits,

which would cause them not to graduate on time, then they would have applied themselves more.

The schools did not provide academic support or any type of help to these failing students right

away therefore resulting in them falling so far behind that they could not graduate on time even

if they wanted. Educators must use preventative methods by monitoring students’ progress

throughout their middle school and high school grades in order to seek out at-risk students and

provide assistance to them. Educators must be able to identify early signs of students that are at-

risk to failing other than just grades they are earning on work. Knowing the signs of

disengagement in classwork, discussion, and peers are all warning signs that must be noted and

taken seriously (Hammond, 2001). When educational practitioners begin to monitor students’

progress more efficiently, and actually take preventative steps for those that are at-risk sooner,

then there will be hope for a decrease in the dropout rate.

Provide Academic Support to At-Risk Students

Respondents conveyed academic support would have kept them in school. Many

students that feel unintelligent, lack the confidence to seek out help from educators. Teachers

must be the first ones to offer assistance to those who are falling behind. Academic support can

be provided through group work, peer tutors, adult tutors, additional learning materials, extended

instructional time, and one-on-one instructional moments (Sinclair, Christenson, Evelo, &

114
Hurley, 1998). Identifying students that need help with classwork is crucial for teachers because

it can determine the success of a student throughout their educational career.

Other supports that often need to be provided are counseling and translating. Students

who become disengaged in class more times than none have personal issues that might need to

be addressed by a school counselor. Many times, this support can accomplish more than any

type of tutoring that is available. When students are dealing with issues in or out of school,

many times their grades are the first things to suffer (Youth who drop, 2000). Students that are

English language learners often fall behind due to language barriers between them and other staff

and peers in the school building. Not being able to understand the primary language of a school

causes most students to become disengaged, and results in dropping out (High school dropout,

2002). Translators should be required for those who are unable to understand the language of

instruction in order to keep them on track to finish school.

Create a Safe and Inviting Learning Environment

Students reported that in many cases, they did not feel like they were able to learn, or

complete classwork because they felt unsafe or not welcome in their learning environments. The

school culture and climate are two of the most important responsibilities of a school. Making

students feel welcome and comfortable in their learning environment are detrimental to the

success of a student. Educators cannot expect a student to learn while feeling unsafe or not

welcome in the classroom or at school (Bonikowske, 1987). An inviting classroom as well as a

safe learning area, allows students to be engaged in what is going on during instructional time

instead of worrying about being an outcast or safe (Baker & Sansone, 1990). It is the duty of the

educational system starting with administrators all the way down through the staff to provide a

safe and inviting learning environment.

115
 Limitations

Throughout this study, there were some limitations that occurred. The need to interview

a larger population of participants was a limitation. The population consisted of only 15

participants. When looking at research, a quality sample is important. A quality sample can be

characterized by the number and selection of respondents. A larger sample results in a better

representation of the population, as well as provides a broader range of data, and creates a clearer

picture for analysis. Another limitation was the geographical area which the respondents were

located. This study was conducted at one adult high school in rural East Tennessee. A larger

geographical area to choose your sample from in research is important because the group chosen

to study represents the whole population, and is not biased in a systematic manner. The use of a

larger area provides more candidates to be interviewed, more various responses, and more

diverse races of respondents. This diversity would have shown a better representation of the

population therefore, creating better research.

Recommendation for Future Research

In order to get fully grasp why students drop out of high school before graduation,

additional research needs to take place. The need to fully understand students’ perspectives and

views is vital when looking at dropout rates. Future suggestions for this study would be to

interview a more diverse population of dropout students. Another area would be to use a more in

depth interview guide to provide clarity about their personal backgrounds, home lives,

communities, and personal expectations.

Another recommendation would be to conduct the study using a quantitative method of

research instead of qualitative. Although the qualitative method allows for rich details and in

depth data, quantitative methods provide clear cut findings. When looking at the data of this

116
study, it would be beneficial to compare responses in a systematic way, instead of interpretations

from the researcher. Quantitative data collection is much more structured, and it uses

measurable data to convey facts and reveal patterns in research. Researchers could look at test

scores, attendance and disciplinary records, and over all grades to analyze the factors that cause

students to quit school. Applying these recommendations could ultimately lead to solving the

crisis of high school dropouts.

Summary

The conclusions of this study showed students were leaving school due to reasons that

can be prevented. A lack of credits, moving, language barriers, bullying, and etc. are all factors

that can be relieved with a little collaboration between all the stakeholders involved. A lack of

communication between the educational system, students, and parents resulted in students

quitting before graduation. The need for academic support for those who have fallen behind is

pertinent for students to get back on track before it is too late. Other supports for students with

conflicts in or outside of school, as well as language barriers also need to be provided to

encourage student to stay engaged and involved in education. Lastly, school must be safe and

inviting learning environments for all students. Students who are unsuccessful slowly disengage

from school both mentally and physically, and it is the responsibility of educators to keep all

students engaged and interested throughout their educational careers. Students’ voices are vital

components needed to enlighten educators about the complex problem of dropping out. Students

have made it clear that early monitoring of progress, academic support, and a safe and inviting

learning environment are what is needed for changes to occur. Educators will be more capable

to prevent students from leaving if they will listen to the voices of dropouts. A students’ voice is

a great source for educators that seek answers to the dropout crisis because their responses could

117
create stronger supports for those at-risk for dropping out. Results of these findings call for the

need to monitor progress often and early communication between all stakeholders, increase

academic support, and create safe and inviting learning environments. The insights of these

findings point to a successful future for other at-risk students. Even though the respondents were

at one time high school dropouts, their decision to return to school to earn a high school diploma

spoke to the greater goals and lessons necessary for them to live successfully in society.

Although their paths are undetermined, their desire to return to school and to tell their story can

help us correct the mistakes that we as educators have made serving them.

118
 References

Alliance for Excellent Education. (2008). The high cost of high school dropout. Retrieved from

[Link]

America’s Promise Alliance. (2009). Toolkit: Youth engagement. Retrieved from

[Link]

engagement,aspx

Biography for Peter Jennings (I). (2005). Internet Movie Database Inc. Retrieved from

[Link]

Becker, K., & UBA-Team. (2011). Face to face interviews. Retrieved from [Link]

[Link]/cophes/[Link]

Bradshaw, C. P., Waasdorp, T. E., Debnam, K. J., & Johnson, S. L. (2014). Measuring School

Climate in High Schools: A Focus on Safety, Engagement, and the Environment. Journal

Of School Health, 84(9), 593-604. doi:10.1111/josh.12186

Bridgland, J., DiIulio, J., & Wulsin, S. (2008). Engaged for Success: Service learning as a tool

for high school dropout prevention. A report by Civic Enterprises in association with

Peter D. Hart Associates for the National Conference Citizenship, April 2008.

Carpenter, D., & Ramirez, A. (2007). More than on gap: Drop out rate between and among

Black, Hispanic, and White students. Journal of Advanced Academics, 19, 32-64.

Carroll, T. (2008). Education beats incarceration. Education Week, March 26, 2008.

Carter, C. (2013). Better understanding paretns in poverty: Meeting basic needs first. Huffington

Post. Retrieved from [Link]

pare_b_3000089.html

119
Christle, C. Jolivette, K. & Nelson, C. (2007). School characteristics related to high school

dropout rates. Remedial and Special Education, 28, 325-339.

Community. (n.d.). Online Dictionary. Retrieved from

[Link]

Confronting the Graduation Rate Crisis in California. (n.d.). Harvard University. Retrieved from

[Link]

Cresswell, J.W. (1994). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods

approaches. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage

Cresswell, J.W. (2003). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods

approaches. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Davalos, D. B., Chaves, E., & Guardiola, R. J. (1999). The effects of extracurricular activity,

ethnic identification, and perception of school on student dropout rates. Hispanic Journal

Behavioral Sciences, 21(1), 61-77.

DiCicco-Bloom, B. and Crabtree, B. F. (2006), The qualitative research interview. Medical

Education, 40: 314–321. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2929.2006.02418.x

Donnelly, M. (1987). At-risk students. Eric Digest Series, 21: ED2921722. Retrieved from

[Link]

Dropout Defintion. (n.d.). National Center for Education Statistics. Retrieved from

[Link]

Dropout and Truancy Accounting Report. (2005). Tennessee Board of Education. Retrieved from

[Link]

Family. (n.d.). Online Dictionary. Retrieved from [Link]

120
Fisher, M. H., & Royster, D. (2016). Mathematics Teachers' Support and Retention: Using

Maslow's Hierarchy to Understand Teachers' [Link] Journal Of

Mathematical Education In Science And Technology,47(7), 993-1008.

Gallagher, C. (2002). Stories from the strays: What dropouts can teach us about school.

American Secondary Education, 30, 3, p. 36-60.

Ginsberg, L., & Miller-Cibbs, J. (2000). Understanding social problems, policies, and programs.

Columbia, SC: University of South Carolina Press.

Graduate. (n.d.). Online Dictionary. Retrieved from [Link]

Graduation Requirements and Diploma options for Students with Disabilities. (2009). United

States Department of Labor, (22). Retrieved from

[Link]

Greene, J.P., & Winters, M.A. (2005). The effect of residential school choice on public high

school graduation rates (Education Working Paper No. 9). New York, NY: Manhattan

Institute for Policy Research.

Hale, L. (1998). School dropout prevention information and strategies for parents. Retrieved

from [Link]

Hansen, K. & Hansen, R.S. (2006). Using asynchronous discussion board for online focus

groups: A protocol and lessons learned. Paper presented at 2006 College Teaching and

Learning Conference, Washington DC.

Herbert, B. (July 21, 2005). Education’s collateral damage. New York Times. Retrieved from

[Link]

Huitt, W. (2011). Motivation to learn: An overview. Educational Psychology Interactive.

Valdosta, GA: Valdosta State University. Retrieved from

121
 [Link]

Jimerson, S. Egeland, B., Sroufe, & Carlson, B. (2000). A perspective longitudinal study of high

school dropout: Examining multiple predictors across development. Journal of School

Psychology, 38(6), p. 525-549.

Kerry, S. (2002). The first rule of education should be: do no harm. World Prosperity.

Retrieved from [Link]

Košir, K., & Habe, K. (2013). Analysis of Learning Environment Factors Based on Maslow’s

Hierarchy of Needs. Revija Za Elementarno Izobrazevanje, Vol 6, Iss 2-3, Pp 173-191

(2013), (2-3), 173.

Kranick, R. & Hargis, C. (1998). Dropouts: Who drops out and why? And the development

action (2nd ed.). Springfield, IL: Charles C. Thomas Publication, LTD.

Lagto, J. (2005). Dropouts explain why they voted with their feet: they didn’t teach me.

National Catholic Reporter 41(29), p. 18.

Marshall, C., & Rossman, G.B. (1999). Designing qualitative research (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks,

CA: Sage.

National Education Association (NEA). (2006). Reducing the nation’s dropout rate-A fact sheet.

Retrieved from [Link]

Opdenakker, R. (2006). Advantages and disadvantages of four interview techniques in

qualitative research. Forum Qualitative Sozialforschung/ forum: Qualitative Social

Research. 7(4). Art. 11. Retrieved from [Link]

[Link]/[Link]/fqs/article/view/175/391

Orfield, G., Losen, D., Wald, J., & Swanson, C. (2004). Losing our future: How minority youth

are being left behind by the graduation rate crisis. Cambridge, MA: The Civil Rights

122
 Project ar Harvard University: Contributors: Advocates for Children of New York, The

Civil Society Institute.

Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. (2007). Education at a glance. Paris:

Author.

Patterson, J., Hale, D., & Stressman, M. (2007). Cultural contradictions and school leaving: A

case study of an urban high school. The High School Journal, Dec 2007/Jan. 2008, p 1-

15.

Rumberger, R. (1983). Dropping out of high school: The influence of race, sex, and family

background. American Educational Research Journal, 20,2, 199-220.

Rumberger, R. (1987). High School Dropouts: A Review of Issues and Evidence. Review of

Educational Research, 57,2, 101-121.

Schoenlein, J. (2004). Working on that old dropout rate. Principal Leadership (High School Ed,),

4(7), p. 14-18.

Swanson, C. (2004). High school graduation, completion, and dropout (GCD) indicators.

Washington, DC: Urban Institute.

Tabachnick, B.G., & Fidell, L.S. (2000). Using multivariate statistics (4th ed. ). Boston, MA:

Pearson/Allyn & Bacon.

Taylor, S.J., & Bogdan, R. (1998). Introduction to qualitative research methods (3rd ed.). New

York, NY: Wiley.

U.S. Department of Education, Office of Special Education and Rehabilitative Services, Office

of Special Education Programs. (2006). 26th Annual (2004) report to Congress on the

implementation of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act. (Vol. 1). Washington,

DC: Author.

123
Weis, L., Ferrar, E., & Petrie, H. G. (1989). Dropouts from school. Albany, NY: State

University of New York Press.

Wells, S. Bechard, S., & Hambly, J.V. (1989). How to identify at-risk students: A series of

solutions and strategies. Clemson, SC: Nationsl Dropout Prevention Center at Clemson

University.

What is an Adult School. (2016). [Link]. Retrieved from

[Link]

Youth Who Drop Out. (2000). Focus Adolescents Services. Retrieved from

[Link]

124
Appendices

125
Appendix A: Interview Guide

126
 Interview Guide

Age: _________
Gender: Male or Female
Race: White Black Native American Hispanic Asian Pacific Islander
Age at dropout: _________
Grade when you fell behind in credits________
Last grade completed: _____

Why did you decide to leave school?

Do you regret you decision to leave?

Were you an active participant of a group like a sports team, the band, a club, or another
organization?

How often did you miss school while you were attending?

How often were you a disciplinary issue in school?

What kinds of feelings did you have about your school before you left?

What did the school do to try to keep you in school?

What could the school have done to prevent you from leaving?

Was there an adult at your school with whom you had a relationship and you could
discuss personal problems?

What did your family do to influence your decision?

Who was most influential in your decision to leave school?

How did your family react to your final decision?

What other family members dropped out of high school?

What would have prevented you from leaving?

What types of employment opportunities are currently available to you because of your
decision to leave school without a high school diploma?

What is your annual salary range?

127
Appendix B: Participant’s Letter of Consent

128
Please allow me to introduce myself and explain the purpose of this survey. My name is Katie

Moore, and I am in the process of completing my dissertation as part of my graduation

requirements for Carson Newman University. I have chosen study the dynamics that persuade

students to withdraw from high school prior to graduation. My study is entitled “Dropped out:

Factors that cause students to leave before graduation.”

I would appreciate your participation in this effort by completing one-on-one interviews with the

researcher as well as follow-up phone calls. Please be assured that your responses will remain

confidential and that you in no way will be identified in this study. Also be assured that at any

time throughout the study you are welcome to leave with no consequences. After the study is

complete, all data will be destroyed to assure confidentiality. Your honest responses will be

valued and will ensure the validity of the study. Your signature below signifies that you are a

willing participant in my dissertation.

Thank you for your willingness and honesty.

Most respectfully,

Katie Moore

I willingly and knowingly agree to participate in Katie Moore’s dissertation study. I have been

informed that my answers are completely confidential and that I will not be identified in any

manner. I also was informed that I am able to leave the study at any time and not suffer any

consequences.

___________________________________________ ____________________

(Participant’s Signature) (Date)

129
Appendix C: Director of School’s Letter of Consent

130
131