F I N A L R E P O RT – D E C E M B E R 6 , 2 0 1 1T H E L I N C Y I N S T I T U T E F E L L O W S H I P R E SE A R C H

AWA R D

G W E N C . M A R C H A N DA S S I S T A N T P R O F E S S O R

D E PA R T M E N T O F E D U C A T I O N A L R E S E A R C H , C O G N I T I O N , A N D D E V E L O P M E N T

Understanding Student Disaffection through the Lens of

Alternative Education

Project Introduction

What is this project all about?

Partnership between Student Support Services Division (SSSD) in Clark County School District (CCSD) who administer to alternative schools and UNLV

Grew from desire to know: More about the demographics and academic history of

alternative school population being served by SSSD Student perspectives of educational experience

leading to alternative school placement How to better identify needs and target current and

early intervention services

Alternative Education in Clark County

Alternative Education in Clark County Behavior Schools – 9 weeks Continuation Schools – 18 weeks Also called consequence schools

Alternative schools served 5,690 students in 2009-2010 30% received multiple referrals 18% had an Individualized Education Plan (IEP)

Need for Project

Alternative school may be last stop before dropping out entirely Some alternative schools have dropout rates exceeding 50%

(www.nevadareportcard.com)Why focus on special education students in alternative

education? Students in alternative education are predominately male, minority, and

a substantial percentage are eligible for special education services. Students of color are overrepresented in special education (Shealey &

Lue, 2006 & Ferri, & Connor, 2005) Many students placed in special education also face other challenges,

such as few economic resources (Shealey & Lue, 2006) Taken together, special education students may have increased risk for

academic disaffection leading to alternative education.

Relevant Literature

Alternative education Deficit-thinking paradigm dominates limited literature

on alternative education Suggests individual factors, rather than systemic factors,

are responsible for student failures and disaffection Alternative settings may offer caring environment but

lack academic rigor (Kim & Taylor, 2008) Limited research on student trajectories to alternative

education and student educational experiences in alternative education

Relevant Literature

Student disaffection Disaffection is characterized by active withdrawal from

academic activities and is reflective of maladaptive motivational states (Skinner, Furrer, Marchand, & Kindermann, 2008) Negative emotions, disruptive or unproductive behavior, reduced

cognitive engagement Transactions between the individual and the

educational system may contribute to disaffection Dearth of information about systemic factors, such as

provision of services, teacher quality, transition plans, curriculum continuity, school culture, etc. that may contribute to disaffected behaviors leading to alternative enrollment

Relevant Literature

School transitions Transitions may be a period of vulnerability for

academically at-risk students Scheduled transitions

Students may be unprepared for increased demands of middle and high school and may lack appropriate structure to help them succeed

Unscheduled transitions Frequent mobility associated with achievement loss

(Alspaugh, 1998; Engec, 2006) and high school completion (Rumberger, & Larson 1998)

Project Goals

Research Use existing data sources to identify patterns of academic life

leading to enrollment and recidivism in alternative education for students receiving special education services.

Conduct a series of interviews to understand student experiences in general and alternative education, particularly during transition periods.

Partnership Develop partnership with the Clark County School District (CCSD)

Student Support Services Division (SSSD) staff responsible for serving alternative education schools.

Support SSSD in developing capacity for understanding and using data to… better target existing services establish evidence and guidance for early intervention programs

Research Activities

Design

Quantitative

Cohort-Sequential Longitudinal Design

Secondary Data

Qualitative

Investigate Student Experiences

In-depth Student Interviews

Mixed Methods Sequential Explanatory Design (Creswell & Plano Clark, 2007)

Quantitative Methods

Secondary data sources: Count day file 2009-10 = demographics Enrollment history Annual discipline counts Annual attendance State standardized testing data (CRT; Grades 3, 5, 8)

  Academic YearData Source 03-04 04-05 05-06 06-07 07-08 08-09 09-10Annual Attendance

      X X X X

Annual Discipline Counts

      X X   X

CRT (3, 5, 8)

X X X X X X  

Quantitative Methods

Participants – all 8-12th grade students designated as having a learning disability or other health impairment (ADHD) enrolled and showing evidence of attendance as of 2009 count day (September 2009) AND having available enrollment history data

Quantitative Descriptive Findings

Frequency of alternative enrollment 665 students (61.7%) = 1 enrollment 217 students (20.1%) = 2 enrollments 196 students (18.2%) = 3 or more enrollments

Within-year mobility during elementary

school Alternative group: Average of 1.17 transitions (SD =

1.53) Non-alternative group: Average of .63 transitions (SD

= 1.16)

Academic Performance

Academic performance history

Gr3 Reading Gr5 Reading Gr8 Reading Gr3 Math Gr5 Math Gr8 Math0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

Perc

enta

ge

Attendance

Average annual absences from 2006-07 thru 2009-10    Excused

AbsencesUnexcused Absences

DaysEnrolled

  n Mean (SD) Mean (SD) Mean (SD)

Grade 8 Alt 114 14.44 (8.23) 7.95 (6.89) 170.72 (8.84)

Grade 8 Non-alt 1403 6.08 (5.29) 4.52 (5.10) 173.92 (9.75)

Grade 9 Alt 230 15.74 (9.26) 11.53 (9.53) 169.69 (15.89)

Grade 9 Non-alt 1560 6.82 (6.40) 6.07 (7.89) 174.51 (13.03)

Grade 10 Alt 331 17.69 (12.12) 11.76 (9.87) 170.51 (15.97)

Grade 10 Non-alt 1664 7.06 (6.41) 6.76 (7.74) 174.62 (12.43)

Grade 11 Alt 219 16.69 (11.01) 9.64 (7.34) 170.12 (16.22)

Grade 11 Non-alt 1240 7.12 (6.70) 5.86 (6.82) 174.20 (13.32)

Grade 12 Alt 171 15.21 (10.22) 8.44 (8.01) 170.72 (17.52)

Grade 12 Non-alt 1040 7.26 (7.01) 4.90 (5.62) 175.23 (12.89)

Discipline

9th Grade Student Discipline Data for Grades 6, 7, and 9

con0

607

con0

708

con0

910

susp

end0

607

susp

end0

708

susp

end0

910

expe

ll060

7

expe

ll070

8

expe

ll091

0.0000

.5000

1.0000

1.5000

2.0000

2.5000

3.0000

Alternative Non-Alternative

Aver

age

Num

ber

of R

efer

rals

Discipline

10th Grade Student Discipline Data for Grades 7, 8, and 10.

con0

607

con0

708

con0

910

susp

end0

607

susp

end0

708

susp

end0

910

expe

ll060

7

expe

ll070

8

expe

ll091

0.0000

.5000

1.0000

1.5000

2.0000

2.5000

3.0000

Alternative Non-Alternative

Aver

age

Num

ber

of R

efer

rals

Quantitative Summary and Next Steps

Consistent pattern of negative adjustment indicators for students who eventually enroll in alternative programs At what grade do these indicators begin to diverge? Are there threshold points of increased vulnerability? What role does elementary mobility play as a risk factor?

Middle school may be a time of increasing disparityReceipt of additional data and more in-depth

analyses of existing data to investigate Student trajectories Statistical differences and effect sizes between groups Predictors of risk

Qualitative Methods

Purposeful sampling with following criteria: Students with learning disabilities Students enrolled in behavior or continuation school

for initial interview Students recidivated into alternative education

11 student participants enrolled in one of 4 alternative schools (2 behavior; 2 continuation) 10 males 2 8th graders; 2 9th graders; 3 10th graders; 1 11th

grader; 3 12th graders

Qualitative Methods

Interview protocol loosely based on Seidman’s (2006) life history approach In-depth interviews Open ended and conversational style Questions based on general topic areas

2 interviews of each child Interview 1: during alternative school enrollment Interview 2: following transition back to comprehensive campus Interview last between 20 minutes and over an hour

Interview one Focus on student experiences since first enrollment in CCSD General motivation and engagement; support systems; school behavior;

experiences during transitions Interview two

Student reflections and meaning-making of recent experience of alternative and general ed settings and transition between the two

Qualitative Findings

5 general themes/domains emerged from analysis of coded data Personal attributes Perceptions of social relationships Problem solving activities Processing of school environment Processing of school events

Personal Attributes

Student behavioral proclivities, beliefs, perceptions of reasons for engaging or disengaging in school, emotional orientations toward school Emerged from discussions of factors that facilitated or

inhibited school adjustment and behavior issuesInterest and activities and peers commonly

discussed as reason for coming to school and stay out of trouble

Personal Attributes

Student negative emotional orientations, such as anger or boredom, common source of problems

I: You said that you threw scissors at a teacher, what made you do that?S: Like my anger and stuff like that. Like when I get angry I use to get angry and there was no stopping me. Like anything you told me not to do, I would do.

Beliefs about self and behavior leads to conflicts in academic situations

I: How would you describe yourself as a student?S: …I’m a good student, but it’s just I’m just here because like I feel like whenever somebody disrespect me I gotta disrespect them back…

Social Relationships

Specific discussions related to interactions with social partners, such as teachers or peers Emerged from discussion of facilitative and inhibitive factors

Peers both source of school engagement as well as source of problems Students insightful as to role of peers in behavioral influence Example from student describing experience during new

school transitionI: Do you think that the curriculum was easier? Was there anything that you could attribute to your better performance?S: It was easier but then I ain’t have no friends there so I was just like going to class on time doing my work.

Social Relationships

School staff interactions featured heavily in discussions Some students felt alternative teachers were more attentive but

others did not; non-classroom teachers often mentioned as supports: coaches, counselors, sped

Example of when interactions with teacher influenced behavior

When I ask for help, they ignore me; but when I raise my hand, like, they’re <like> “put your hand down, I’m not answering no questions right now.” Like, when teachers they’ll get mad like before they get to school and like, they take it out on the students....or they like come over there like "what you want" or something like that. Like, when they get all in my face like "what you want," I won't even ask 'em for nothing anymore. I won't ask them a question for like a week.

How Students Approach Problems

Students discussed how they dealt with challenging situations, such as transitioning to new school or with academic challenges

Strategies and awareness of resources Differences in student willingness to use problem solving

strategies in classroom and knowledge of strategies General low level of how to access help or even when help

needed Extreme end – student comes to school for social reasons,

gets by through copying from smart people, does not participate and avoids situations to expose her to failure

Other students more positive and mention going to teachers, special ed facilitators, classmates for hellp

Environment Processing

Theme emerged from discussions about how students understand specific school settings, such as alternative schools Focused heavily in transition discussions

Apprehension toward alternative school based on past experience common theme Fear of getting further behind due to curricular differences

or environmental challenges S: These kids…<they interfere with the education the student is trying to get>…’cuz they always disrupting the teacher or something, yelling or something, doin’ some stupid thing…and then like the teacher get disrupted and she gonna deal with them and that’s takin us out of hour.

Environment Processing

Change in environment and school culture often helpful in forming new relationships or academic adjustment

S: …they some fun teachers because they like to do activities and stuff in the class…and they teach a lot too.I: …and was it easy for you to get to know teachers <at the new school>?S: Yes.I: Okay good. What made them easier to approach? What was it about their demeanor?S: Cuz like the other school I was going to, <old school>, it’s like a ghetto school…and <the new school> is like a corny school…like lame. (student continued to divulge how the teachers kept the students on track at this “corny” school and that helped him)

Event Processing

Students reflected on important life events that influenced school experience and illustrated student behavioral and psychological adaptation

Change in belief about school importance stemming from scheduled school transitions

S (02): It’s high-school, like it counts…all your credits and stuff like you’re not just doing all your work for nothing. Like middle school and elementary, it’s like you’re doing work for nothing..So that’s why I think like most people don’t really try.

S (S03): …So when I finally did start asking for the help and getting what I needed, it kinda made it easier to transition into high school, ya know, to understand that now you have to have not this kid set of mind, but more of a mature, teenage-adult mind; you have to set your standards higher; you have to put the bar up there; “you have to think about the next step before you just do it this time,” (chuckles) ya know, ‘cuz now you’re thinking “there’s a consequence for everything soooo now that I know that (chuckles,) I may want to think about this before I do it;”

Event Processing

Student responses to life events, such as parental divorce or within-year mobility, was that this is “just the way things are” and seemed to become the status quo for many students Revised expectations for school and behavior downward Not a big deal if not having a positive experience or doing well,

because that is not the expectation for selfStudents form beliefs about why others respond to

them in certain ways after attending alternative school Students discussing experiences with teachers at gen ed campus

S: They don’t talk as much to you as other people because I think they like know that I’m a fighter and stuff, yeah.

Qualitative Summary

School supports and student personal resources and perceptions interact to influence student adjustment in school Students may not have sufficient knowledge of problem

solving strategies to succeed and may not view the system as open for assistance

This is one avenue for possible interventionSchool staff and peers are key partners in

facilitating or inhibiting adjustmentHistory of negative or null experiences contribute

to downward revision of expectations of self and others

Qualitative Next Steps

Things to consider Curricular coherence

More overlap School climate

Distinctions/similarities between school types Transitions

Supports for effective within-year transitions Different structural transitions may have different

meanings Where have students remained engaged? Where have

they withdrawn?

Qualitative Next Steps

Continue to collect data for initial and follow-up interviews

Refine coding scheme and search for new themes

Develop narratives: For common and disparate history of experience For common and disparate meaning-making over

alterative to general ed transition For individual stories spanning both events

Research Summary

Preliminary results from mixed-methods study are intriguing and ripe for follow-up Both quantitative and qualitative components indicate

that early school experience influences subsequent student behavior leading to alternative school placement

Middle school may be a time of increased vulnerability due to lack of supports, decreased monitoring, low academic competence

Student mobility may be important indicator for early intervention services

Partnership Activities

Completed Activities

Ongoing meetings to share findings and discuss ways to use data

Work together to devise materials for collection of behavior plan data to improve service provision

SSSD perceptions of partnership:“As part of a proactive process the Student Support Services Division will be able to work with students to identify patterns that will potentially lead to future behavior difficulties and eventually to student disaffection if they are not addressed…. The benefits of having this information are unlimited for how to prevent students from eventually being referred to a consequence school. School decision making teams will have less of a disconnection when determining supports for students. Currently when students are sent to a consequence school, the referring school has very little understanding of how this impacts the student educationally and emotionally. The information gained from this project will be beneficial for future training to make teachers at all levels aware of how the decisions that are made for students at all levels can impact their future educational success.”

Ongoing Activities

Developing training partnership to assist behavior mentors at schools in consistently collecting and using data about information in behavior plans

No-cost evaluation of new program provided by SSSD to alternative schools

Continued development of research activities to provide SSSD with useful and relevant data to guide decision making and determine effectiveness of services

Conclusions

Moving Forward

Project will continue past Lincy Award thanks support from Shulman Family Foundation The APA Division 15 Early Career Award A great CCSD partner

Preliminary results from the interview portion of the project already committed to publication in book chapter in 2012.

Acknowledgements

Lincy Institute staffJoanne Vattiato, Stephanie Simmons, Katja

Hermes, Kamille Bryner at SSSDParticipating schools and studentsTireless UNLV student assistants: Kayana

Sanders, Christie Higgins, Kyle KaalbergCOE and Department of Educational

Research, Cognition, and Development

Questions????