Summary

Why do some high schools send more graduates to college than others? Theories abound: better educated parents, higher levels of income, more dollars spent per student, smaller classes, smaller schools, more experienced, better educated teachers, more counselors, and the presence of influential friends or role models to name only a few. Most of these have been shown to correlate well with postsecondary attendance. Yet some high schools send a large portion of their graduates to college when conventional wisdom suggests they should not, and others, which by all measures should have many of their graduates in college, fail miserably. Clearly, other, perhaps intangible, factors are at work.

To learn more about what those factors might be, the Kentucky Long-Term Policy Research Center constructed a statistical model that considered a wide range of factors generally accepted as predicting education beyond high school and applied it to Kentucky’s high schools. It then compared the model’s predictions with actual postsecondary education outcomes. Some schools performed as predicted. More interestingly, some did not. Researchers selected four schools that either did far better, far worse, or about as predicted for more intensive study. The goal of the examination was to identify those influences that caused these schools to depart from the model predictions.

The Schools We Studied

Researchers selected four schools for intensive follow-up study. Two of them did much worse than the model predicted; that is, they sent far fewer graduates on to college in 1998 than the model predicted. One performed precisely as the model predicted, and one did much better, sending more of its graduates to college (17 percentage points) than the model anticipated. We labeled these schools A, B, C and D, and the letter grades roughly approximate our assessment of their overall performance (not just how they did in sending graduates on to college).

High School A. This school is located in a county of relatively small towns. The area is a mix of relatively small towns and rural areas and principally offers economic opportunities in blue-collar jobs. Demographic data suggest that the more educated members of the community tend to move away. This school has the largest, poorest, and most racially diverse population of the four. As is consistent with these characteristics, the school has the highest dropout rate in the group, and its ninth graders register the lowest scores on the CTBS-5, the National Basic Skills test used in Kentucky. This information implies that the school is doing a poor job. However, as our grade of A suggests, that is not the case. The intangibles present here result in an extraordinary percentage of this school’s graduates pursuing college. The school has a new leadership team and a relatively young faculty. It has established innovative programs, has pursued them with energy, and the results are obvious. From the well-maintained appearance of the school to the clear understanding of the benefits of and obstacles to going to college on the part of its students, the efforts of the leaders and faculty are readily apparent.

High School B. This school performed exactly as the model predicted it should. Its students come mainly from rural areas. The student body is overwhelmingly white and predominantly working class, although it has a sizeable number of poor and low-income students. The area’s economy is in transition as manufacturing jobs have dwindled, as major employers have left or downsized dramatically. As a result, the local employment picture is not rosy, which probably contributes to the high fraction of the high school students going on to college and to their eventual decision to leave the area. The school has able leadership, dedicated guidance counselors, and the most experienced faculty of the four schools. The physical appearance of the school belies its many strengths. Much of it is aging and dismal, suggesting neither pride nor commitment. But the students generally perform well on the Kentucky Core Content Tests, scoring above average in every area but math. They do not do well on the CTBS-5 test, with fewer than half performing at or above the U.S. average. The dropout rate is slightly below the state average.

High School C. This school is located in a completely rural area. The population of the school’s home county has the largest percentage of the four studied without high school degrees, and it has the largest portion of the population living in poverty. However, the student body is more affluent than that of High School A. In spite of its once strong agricultural base, employment opportunities in the county are now quite bleak, but ample employment opportunities lie within easy commuting distance. The faculty is the least experienced of the four studied, and the building is old and dilapidated, due to limited resources. In this case, however, initial appearances deceive. The school has a cohesive and supportive atmosphere with many of the attributes of a close family. Faculty and leaders are involved. Teachers have decorated their individual classrooms, often footing the bill for improvements. The principal is deeply involved in the school and has established good rapport with faculty and students alike.

High School D. High School D is located in the state’s urban triangle, but its character ranges from urban to rural. The school is largely racially homogeneous but economically diverse though it tends to draw many of its students from one of the poorest parts of the county. However, the economic situation is relatively good, as low-skill jobs are readily available. The school’s home county has the smallest fraction of people living in poverty, a characteristic that carries into the high school. That said, a substantial percentage of its students qualifies for free lunches. Interestingly enough, even though the median income level is the highest of the four areas studied, it has the lowest fraction of college-educated citizens. The school faculty is relatively senior. The school is among the newest in the case study group but it is physically unattractive, suggesting a lack of pride. This impression is accurate. Lack of trust, contempt, and resentment characterize relations between the principal and staff. Given the problems with leadership found, it is unsurprising that by and large the culture of the school seems to be one of resignation.

How the Schools Compare

Researchers visited each school and assessed a number of characteristics. Those that seem to be most influential and illustrate the disparities among schools most clearly appear in the first column of Table S.1 along with the ratings given for each area in the form of a plus or a minus depending on how the factor influenced the school. Some characteristics have both signs, indicating a mixed influence. The first sign indicates the most influential one.

Table S.1: Factors Influencing Postsecondary Outcomes

The table contains a myriad of messages, but some of the most important ones can be derived from the ratings for High School A, which received a plus in every area but two, spending per student and paid employment. However, even the two minus ratings only highlight the success of this school. It spends the least per student, yet has the highest success in sending its students on to college. It even succeeds in the areas where conventional wisdom holds that money matters: appearance and facilities. Although it spends about 20 percent less per student than does High School D, it is a far more appealing and attractive school. Paid employment, the other area receiving a minus, refers to students holding down jobs, a common circumstance particularly for juniors and seniors. Many of High School A’s students work at local businesses, which provide the school valuable support but also appear to expect an uninterrupted source of cheap labor. Typically students put in between 15 and 30 hours per week, but some have what equates to full-time jobs. The jobs divert their attention from study and other traditional school activities. That notwithstanding, the school seems to overcome this negative.

High School D marks the other end of the spectrum, scoring a minus in every area save one, school spending. But the school seems to get far less for its money. In spite of the relatively modern facility, its appearance is stark and institutional, and even though it reports networked classrooms and a low student-to-computer ratio, students do not appear to have ready access to computers or to be using them much, and teachers report that equipment is outdated. Moreover, teachers complain of large class sizes.

The message of the table is clear: intangibles such as leadership, culture, and communication can more than make up for such tangible measures as spending per student, poverty, and undereducated parents. This is not to say that these latter influences do not matter because they do. All other things being equal, innovative, caring leadership and a dedicated faculty will do better with more resources and students who do not have to struggle economically. But as High School A demonstrates, dedicated professionals can overcome such obstacles.

The analysis of these four schools provides a rich catalogue of lessons. Not all are positive. Our analysis shows that leadership is critical, but it can work for good or ill. The challenge of motivating a young person to be the first in his or her family to go to college is difficult. Adding bad or even mediocre high school leadership into the mix makes a tough job even tougher. By contrast, superb leadership can overcome even the most daunting odds. With these thoughts in mind, we suggest that legislators, educators, community and business leaders, local officials, and parents find ways to implement the following action items in their respective venues.

• Focus on Leader Development. Given the dramatic influence leaders have on virtually everything that goes on in schools, investment in developing good leadership qualities would seem to be time and money well spent.

• Expand Support for Programs to Improve Academic Performance. We found some excellent programs with key attributes that can be readily adapted to other programs: liaison with middle schools and colleges, peer tutoring and counseling, rapid intervention, and freshman orientation and training in study skills. A comprehensive approach, such as that found at High School A, appears most desirable.

• Invest in At-Risk Students. Boosting the state’s percentage of those who go on to college will require paying attention to those least likely to succeed: students with poor reading skills and home environments that interfere with their schooling. Actions include interventions by counselors and social workers, visits to colleges, and, most importantly, positive reinforcement that helps instill in students a belief that they can succeed.

• Improve Accountability Measures and Reporting. Accountability measures for schools need to give more weight to what happens after students leave high school. A narrow focus on CATS scores does not help in this regard. Both students and educators recognize that these do not mean much for their futures. Current measures such as School Report Cards could be improved to provide more and better information.

• Reconsider, Restructure Incentives. One way of getting more students to go to college would be to provide incentives to do that. As mentioned, students have little incentive to perform well on CATS tests, yet the skills these tests measure have a lot to do with continuing education after high school. One approach would be to tie the level of reward of the KEES scholarship to CATS performance rather than to grades and performance on the ACT.

• Make Information Sharing Integral to Professional and Institutional Development. Sharing information about what works and what does not can play an important role in increasing the numbers of students who go on to college. The institutionalization of routine exchanges of information within and among schools would be beneficial.

• Consider Statewide Standards for Guidance Counselors. Our data suggest that guidance counselors have too much to do and that too much of what they do does not relate to their core skill of counseling. Since many children form their attitudes and expectations about college early, informed counseling at every grade level is important. While more research is needed to determine what works best, steps that would seem to merit consideration include such things as establishing manageable student-to-counselor ratios and timelines to achieve them, relieving counselors from such unrelated duties as hall monitoring, and training counselors to work with the academically troubled student as effectively as they do the likely college-bound.

• Further Examine the Effects of Paid Employment. Many students juggle extraordinary schedules that frequently relegate education to a low place on their list of priorities. While work can cultivate habits important later in life, it can also foreclose opportunities for deeper educational experience and social maturity. Indeed, some seniors seem to use it as a way to avoid more demanding studies. One useful step would be to ensure employers comply with child labor laws and to educate parents and students about these laws. Additional research into how work affects the underachieving and the at-risk would also be beneficial.

• Foster Wider World Views. Not aggressively promoting a wider world view fosters a narrow one by default. Exposure to new ideas, opportunities, and places imbues young people with the desire to explore them and the confidence that they can. Many young people are conditioned by the histories of their parents and the attitudes and expectations of those around them. Breaking out of the mold requires them to know what else is possible and to believe that they can achieve it. Programs that broaden their horizons, such as visits to colleges and cultural events, are one way to break this self-limiting cycle.

The Kentucky Education Reform Act (KERA) has set a high standard for the state, one that some argue cannot be met given the inherent obstacles posed by poor and undereducated populations that have no tradition of valuing education. Yet some schools beat the odds. And more of them will succeed if we can transplant lessons learned from those that already have.

To view a list of all chapters in this book, click here.  To read the chapters in sequential order, please follow the arrows below.

   Ahead to Introduction