CLAIM The nation has a dropout crisis, and high school graduation rates are falling.
REALITY High school dropouts are at an all-time low, and high school graduation rates are at an all-time high.
Everyone knows” that there is a dropout crisis in America and that huge numbers of young people never get a high school diploma. We read it in the newspapers, we see it in television documentaries, we hear annual reports on “the dropout crisis.” The conventional wisdom tells us that things are bad and getting worse.
But it is not true.
The nation does not have a dropout crisis, and high school graduation rates are not falling. Those students who do not complete high school are certainly disadvantaged in their ability to earn a living, and a disproportionate number of them are African American and Hispanic students who drop out of highly segregated schools. Being poorly educated is a handicap in life, and we should strive to educate everyone well. But let us direct our efforts to improve the situation by relying on accurate information.
Having a high school diploma is crucial for entry into almost any line of work these days, so it is important that everyone have one. This may be a mark of credential inflation, as there are many jobs where a diploma is required but not really necessary, such as truck driving, housekeeping, retail sales, and home health care. A high school diploma signifies, if nothing else, the ability to persist and complete high school. Certainly, all people should have the literacy and numeracy to survive in life, as well as the historical and civic knowledge to carry out their political and civic responsibilities. Unfortunately, the pressure to raise graduation rates—like the pressure to raise test scores—often leads to meaningless degrees, not better education.
As a nation, we should continue to strive to raise the graduation rate and to reduce the dropout rate, but we should do so based on real facts, not based on fear-driven and inaccurate assertions.
Not until 1940 did the high school graduation rate reach 50 percent. The graduation rate dropped during World War II, as young men went into the armed forces, but rose to 70 percent by 1970. By 1990, the four-year graduation rate reached 74 percent and remained virtually flat until 2010. (See graph 32.) In 2012, the Department of Education announced that the four-year graduation rate had reached 78.2 percent in 2010, the first significant increase in three decades. Nevada and the District of Columbia had the lowest graduation rates, while Wisconsin and Vermont had the highest. Headlines about the high school graduation “crisis” refer to the apparent long-term stagnation of the four-year graduation rate. This is the figure often cited by the secretary of education, other government officials, and many academics to raise alarms about the condition of American education.1
The crisis talk that has been so common in recent years has fastened on dropout rates and graduation rates as sure signs of the low quality of American education, but the picture is more complicated. The persistent four-year rate of 75 to 78 percent may signify that nearly a quarter of our young people, for whatever reasons, are unable or unwilling to complete their studies in the traditional four years. Or it may signify that many high schools are maintaining standards for graduation and not granting degrees to those who are not qualified to graduate.
The U.S. Department of Education uses the four-year completion rate as the gold standard; this method produces the lowest possible graduation rate. It does not account for students who take more time to graduate or who earn a GED.
The four-year graduation rate is one way to measure graduation rates, but it is not the only way. Many young people take longer than four years to earn a high school diploma. Some graduate in August, not May or June. Some take five or six years. Others earn a GED. When their numbers are added to the four-year graduates, the high school graduation rate is 90 percent.2 (See graph 33.)
Thus, it is accurate to say that only about three-quarters of American students get a high school diploma in four years. And it is accurate to say that the graduation rate of 2010 (which was 78 percent) is only a few points higher than it was in 1970, when it was 70 percent. But it is also accurate to say that 90 percent of those between the ages of eighteen and twenty-four have a high school diploma.
In contrast to the current rhetoric of crisis, Lawrence Mishel and Joydeep Roy of the Economic Policy Institute analyzed census data for the past four decades, not four-year graduation rates, and concluded that “there has been remarkable progress in raising both high school completion rates and in closing racial/ethnic gaps in high school completion.” In reviewing the debate among scholars, Mishel and Roy offer a valuable guide to the different ways of calculating graduation rates.3
Mishel and Roy recognize that some students take longer than four years to get their high school diplomas. Some get a GED instead of a four-year diploma. By the time the census counts high school graduates in the eighteen- to twenty-four-year-old cohort, 90 percent have a high school diploma. It’s true that a GED does not carry the same prestige as a four-year diploma, and economists say that holders of the GED do not earn as much as those with a four-year high school diploma. But most colleges accept a GED as evidence of graduation, and those with a GED have a chance to get postsecondary education and are likely to earn more than high school dropouts. Whatever its drawbacks, the GED is nonetheless a high school diploma, and for many young people whose high school education was interrupted, for whatever reason, it is a lifeline.
Federal data show that the proportion of people between the ages of eighteen and twenty-four who are not presently enrolled in high school and who have earned either a high school diploma or an alternative credential, including a GED, is 90 percent. This rate includes people who may have earned their high school degrees in another country, but it does not include those who are in the military (almost all of whom have high school degrees) and those who are incarcerated (who are less likely than their peers to have high school diplomas).4 Unlike the four-year graduation rate, which has increased slowly, the completion rate for this age group has trended steadily upward for the past thirty years.
Looked at this way, the narrative is transformed from a story of stagnation and crisis to a story of incremental progress.
Most of these additional diplomas were earned by the age of eighteen or nineteen. Among that age group, 89 percent had a high school diploma. In other words, within one year after the traditional four-year program, the graduation rate went from 75 percent (or 78 percent) to 89 percent.
Among young people between the ages of eighteen and twenty-four who were Asian/Pacific Islanders, the completion rate was 96 percent. Among white youths, it was 94 percent. Among black youths, it was 87 percent. Among American Indians/Alaska Natives, it was 82 percent. Among Hispanics, it was 77 percent.5 (See graph 34.)
The lowest graduation rate (63 percent) was found among Hispanic youths aged eighteen to twenty-four who were born outside the continental United States. Many of the Hispanic youths in this age group are recent immigrants who never attended American high schools.
As with the graduation rate, there are different ways of calculating the dropout rate. One is called the “event dropout rate.” It measures the percentage of youths from age fifteen through twenty-four who dropped out of grades 10–12 in a twelve-month period, from October to October. The other is called the “status rate,” which includes all dropouts between the ages of sixteen and twenty-four who lack a high school diploma, regardless of when or where they left school (some in this group may be immigrants who never attended school in the United States). The status rate is always higher than the event rate because the status rate includes all dropouts.
Let’s look at the event dropout rate. Federal data say this about the event dropout rate: “On average, 3.4 percent of students who were enrolled in public or private high schools in October 2008 left school before October 2009 without completing a high school program … Since 1972, event dropout rates have trended downward, from 6.1 percent in 1972 to 3.4 percent in 2009.”6 Another federal report in 2013 broke down the dropout rate by race and ethnic group as follows: for whites, it was 2.3 percent; for blacks, 5.5 percent; for Hispanics, 5.0 percent; for Asians, 1.9 percent; for American Indians/Alaska Natives, 6.7 percent.7 (See graph 35.)
So far, no dropout crisis. Let’s look at the status rate, which casts a wider net than the event rate. In October 2009, three million people between the ages of sixteen and twenty-four were not in high school and did not have high school diplomas (this number does not include incarcerated youths). They accounted for 8 percent of all those in this age group. Some undoubtedly were recent immigrants who never attended high school in the United States. To be sure, it is terrible that three million young men and women do not have high school diplomas, because their life chances and their future income will be reduced for lack of the diploma.
But it is important to know whether the situation with dropouts is getting worse. After all, the definition of a “crisis” is that matters are getting worse than they were and are reaching a critical point.
Here is what the federal data show: “Among all individuals in this age group, status dropout rates trended downward between 1972 and 2009, from 15 percent to 8 percent.” Asian/Pacific Islanders have the lowest dropout rate at 3 percent. Among whites, the dropout rate was 5 percent. The black dropout rate was 9 percent. The Hispanic dropout rate was 18 percent.8 (See graphs 36 and 37.)
And look at the trend over time in the status dropout rate.
Among whites, the dropout rate in 1972 was 12 percent. That is the proportion of whites between the ages of sixteen and twenty-four who were not enrolled in school and did not have high school diplomas. By 2009, the dropout rate for whites was down to 5 percent.
Among blacks, the dropout rate in 1972 was 21 percent in this age group. By 2009, the dropout rate for blacks was down to 9 percent. That is impressive progress.
Among Hispanics, the dropout rate in 1972 was 34 percent. By 2009, it was down to 18 percent. That is impressive progress, too.
We can’t keep crying wolf when we are making progress. The progress has been slow and steady. But it is progress. We are moving in the right direction.
It would be best if no one dropped out. It would be best if everyone earned a high school diploma, but the crucial fact to note is that the data contradict the narrative of crisis. The dropout rate is trending downward. We are moving forward. We are making progress. The dropout rate has actually been cut by about 40 percent overall between 1972 and 2009 and reduced even more for blacks and Hispanics, the groups that are most at risk for dropping out.
Another criticism leveled at the schools is that the high school graduation rate is not rising as fast as it is in other countries. The United States used to have the highest high school graduation rate in the world, but other nations have overtaken us and are now producing more high school graduates than we are. This is true. As we have seen, the four-year high school graduation rate has been relatively flat for many years, hovering at about 75 percent and only recently rising to 78 percent. At the same time, other nations were increasing their high school graduation rates. Nations such as the Republic of Korea, the Slovak Republic, the Czech Republic, Poland, Slovenia, Canada, Sweden, the Russian Federation, and Finland have boosted their high school completion rates, while we have not.9 (See graph 38.)
Of course, with all international comparisons like this, it is never certain that all these nations are describing the same institutions or the same level of academic demand. That is also true even in a nation like ours where the rigor of a high school diploma varies considerably from place to place.
Furthermore, the data may be interpreted in various ways, because so many variables are involved. And the data may be presented in a negative or a positive light. When the U.S. Department of Education described the international data (drawing on the same sources as the previously cited report from OECD), it showed impressive growth for the twenty-seven OECD nations but a flat line for the United States. In the OECD as a whole, the proportion of the population from age twenty-five to sixty-four with a high school degree rose from 65 percent to 72 percent between 2001 and 2008, while it remained steady in the United States, going from 88 percent to 89 percent.
Most OECD nations saw large growth in the high school graduation rate among the youngest group (ages twenty-five to thirty-four), as compared with those who were fifty-five to sixty-four. “The United States was the only country in 2008 where the percentage of 25- to 34-year-olds who had completed high school did not exceed the percentage of 55- to 64-year-olds who had completed high school.” At both ends of the age spectrum, the high school graduation rate in the United States was 88–89 percent.10 Our growth is flat because our rate is so high.
The United States had a higher graduation rate in 2009 than the average for the OECD nations, whether looking at the population from twenty-five to sixty-four or looking only at the youngest group, from twenty-five to thirty-four. The other nations are gaining while we remain stuck at 89 percent.
Can we raise our high school graduation rate above the 90 percent range? There are two ways to do that. One is to make sure that every student gets the necessary preparation and support in the early grades so that he or she is well prepared for high school. The other is to lower standards to meet an artificial target, which is pointless.
This is a dilemma. If we focus solely on producing a higher graduation rate—as many U.S. school districts are doing now—then the value of the high school diploma might be weakened by lowering standards and awarding diplomas to poorly prepared students. Many districts are reaching to meet the goal by putting low-performing students into “credit recovery” courses, where they earn lost credits in a few days of low-level studies. Or the students make up credits by taking an online course, where they can easily pass undemanding tests, tests where they may be allowed to guess the answer until they get it right or where they are able to get the right answer by searching for it online. Just getting the graduation rate up is not a sufficient goal. More time and energy must be spent preparing students in the early grades so that they are academically ready to meet the expectations of a high school diploma. Perhaps our current graduation rate numbers are inflated; the more we concentrate on raising the graduation rate instead of raising the quality of education, the more likely it is that we will have high school graduates who are not well prepared for work or postsecondary education or being a good citizen.
One recent proposal to end “the dropout crisis” noted that the current emphasis on “college for all” was discouraging students who were at risk of dropping out. The author, Russell W. Rumberger, leads the California Dropout Research Project. What discouraged students need most, Rumberger argued, is not a college-preparatory curriculum (since they are not college bound) but an education that promotes their motivation, perseverance, and self-esteem. They need an education that develops their academic and vocational interests. Most job openings for the foreseeable future don’t require any postsecondary education, he noted, and these students could qualify for many jobs. But these students need a high school diploma just to get in the door. They need support and encouragement to stay in school, and they need high school courses that will prepare them to enter the job market. If we are serious about reducing the dropout rate, Rumberger suggested, we would desegregate schools because concentrated racial segregation and poverty contribute to dropping out. He pointed out that “two-thirds of all high schools in the United States in 2002 with more than 90 percent minority enrollments had fewer than six in 10 students remain in school from 9th to 12th grade.” If we really want to make a difference, we would take action to strengthen families and communities by reducing poverty and racial segregation.11
Black and Hispanic youths who attend high-poverty, racially isolated schools have serious problems. Large numbers are not completing high school. Our efforts should focus on reducing the causes of their disengagement from school, part of which has to do with being unprepared for high school work and part of which results from the circumstances in which they live.
The constant talk about “crisis” can be debilitating since it is based on distortions. It can make people feel that all their efforts are in vain. It can make them cast aside the necessary but difficult courses of action and grab at any proposal that offers a quick fix, no matter how illusory. That way lies wasted time and resources. It is better to know the facts and to have a realistic understanding of the problem than to be driven by a sense of panic.
People tend to work harder if they know that their hard work is productive. If we recognize the good work that so many principals, teachers, parents, youth counselors, school psychologists, and social workers have done over the years, they—and we—wouldn’t feel hopeless about conquering problems. Could we do better? Certainly. We should not despair. We have made progress and can make even more progress if we persist and have a realistic grasp of the problems.