Frontline empowers strategic K-12 leaders with school administration software to proactively manage your human capital, business operations and special education.
For 25 years our team and products have been built as a result of seeing real needs within districts.
Frontline gives your teachers, staff, and administrators all of the tools they need, all in one place.
About half of a million high school students drop out of school each year. That’s almost 1,500 dropouts a day or one every 63 seconds.
However, high school graduation is an essential milestone that has large and lasting impacts on both personal and societal wellbeing. Therefore, maximizing the number of American students who earn a high school diploma is paramount to our public and democratic health.
Evidence suggests that a high school diploma is the ticket to future success. Greater educational attainment is associated with positive outcomes including increased job opportunities, higher likelihood of employment, and higher pay.
About 70% of jobs in the United States require a high school diploma or equivalent, making employment less attainable for high school dropouts.
As a result, less than half of high school dropouts were participating in the workforce between 2021 and 2022, compared to over two-thirds of high school graduates who were not enrolled in college. And even when high school dropouts find employment, they earn much less than their high school and college-educated peers.
In 2021, the median annual earnings for 25 to 34-year-old full time employees with a Master’s degree was more than double the median annual earnings of those who had not graduated from high school.
But the financial impact is only the beginning – school attainment is also associated with health outcomes.
Those who complete more schooling tend to live happier, healthier, and longer lives. For instance, an additional four years of education is associated with a lower prevalence of heart disease and diabetes and on average, 25-year-old men with a bachelor’s degree outlive those without a high school diploma by nearly a decade (Hummer & Hernandez, 2015).
Further complicating the health-related implications, adults without a high school diploma are four times as likely to lack health insurance as those with a bachelor’s degree. Associations between school attainment and mental disorders (Breslau, Lane et al., 2008) and school attainment and incarceration (Duke, 2018) have also been detected.
Main Takeaway: A high school diploma is a ticket to future success.
That ticket to future success is not an exclusive admit-one for the student who graduates. That’s because the impact of a single student graduating reverberates throughout the community (and even society) at large.
A higher graduation rate is associated with lower unemployment, higher wages, increased tax contributions, decreased demand for social services, decreased crime, and increased political participation (Belfield & Levin, 2007; Levin et al., 2007).
Moretti (2007) calculated that increasing the high school completion rate of all men ages 20-60 just 1% would save the US approximately $1.4 billion each year. When you account for inflation, those savings increase to about $2 billion dollars.
Improved education could also save taxpayers billions in public assistance costs like those made available through cash, food, and housing support programs (Magnuson et al., 2007).
Main Takeaway: Higher graduation rates are the ultimate win-win: better for the graduate, and better for society at large.
Acknowledging the advantage that a high school diploma provides, the Every Student Succeeds Act (2015), requires states and local educational agencies to report adjusted cohort graduation rates (ACGR) and develop their own strategic plans for boosting them.
The ACGR is calculated by dividing the sum of the number of students who earn a regular diploma in four years and the number of students with cognitive disabilities who graduate with an alternate diploma, by the number of students in the entire cohort for the graduating class. The law also requires that the ACGR be disaggregated by the following 6 subgroups:
Several risk-factors, including membership to some of these sub-groups, have been identified as early warning indicators for school drop-out.
Status risk factors include demographic and historical aspects that are predictive of dropout but cannot be changed (Clemens et al., 2020), like qualifying for free or reduced-priced lunch, having a disability, or being an English learner (DePaoli et al., 2018).
Alterable risk factors, like a students’ attendance, behavior, and course performance, are those that can be reduced through intervention strategies, including policy and/or practice changes (Clemens et al., 2020).
These factors, commonly referred to as “The ABCs,” are the most predictive of high school dropout (Allensworth, 2013; Mac Iver & Messel, 2013) and are used in early warning systems to systematically predict and improve student outcomes.
See Table 1 for examples of data used to predict a student’s risk level for each indicator.
Table 1 - Dropout Risk Factors Related to the ABCs
Attendance
Behavior
Course Performance
Early warning systems can be implemented as early as kindergarten and use predictors to begin forecasting which students will be on-track to graduate high school. While that might seem much too early to know how students will develop, catching students early also gives them the best chance at positive future outcomes.
That’s the goal: intervene as early as possible so that even students with irreversible predictors like being an English learner don’t lead to a drop out. On that note, it’s important to remember that indicators don’t cause the outcome (ever heard correlation does not equal causation?).
Well-kept systems populated with robust data that is easy to navigate and interpret can help districts identify those who are not on track for the purpose of providing targeted interventions. It is important to note however that “Early warning indicators are used only for prediction—they do not cause students to drop out. Rather, they should be treated as symptoms of the dropout process that is in progress” (Scala, 2015, p. 8).
It is important to note however that “Early warning indicators are used only for prediction—they do not cause students to drop out. Rather, they should be treated as symptoms of the dropout process that is in progress” (Scala, 2015, p. 8).
Stressful life events related to housing, money, criminal or legal issues, accidents or health problems, suspensions, pregnancy, and personal relationships amplify potential for dropout (Dupéré et al., 2018).
Identifying a causal link between a single risk factor and dropping out is difficult. According to Freeman et al., 2015, “the likelihood that a student will drop out increases when multiple risk factors are present” (p. 291). Therefore, a composite of students’ risk factors should be created to inform intervention efforts.
Much research on dropout positions it as a binary construct, grouping all dropouts in a single category to compare against graduates.
More recently, researchers have acknowledged that nuances within the group exist, suggesting that students disengage with school for different reasons, their disengagement manifests in different constellations of risk-factors, and efforts to re-engage them should vary accordingly.
An analysis of nearly 2,000 American students who dropped out of high school resulted in the identification of three significantly different classes or types of dropouts (Bowers & Sprott, 2012).
The three student profiles below illustrate these classes.
Brian - Obviously At-Risk
Nina – Quiet
Kabree – Involved
Districts can take a proactive approach to identify students, like Brian, Nina, and even Kabree, who are at-risk of dropping out by analyzing the student-level data they already collect related to the early warning indicators.
However, collecting data points on multiple indicators for several hundred if not thousand students each year can quickly inundate a district making it difficult to glean meaningful insights and identify those in immediate need of intervention.
For every student, districts document grades, achievement test scores, diagnostic and progress monitoring assessment scores, attendance records, discipline referrals, detentions, suspensions, demographic information, Individualized Education Plan status, English learner status, and extracurricular activity involvement.
Early warning systems depend on accurate and efficient data compilation and analysis. However, student-level data is often input by different people and stored in different spreadsheets or databases, making it more challenging for districts to analyze the risk-factors in concert and create composite profiles of at-risk students.
Software may assist in organizing student-level data and automating risk-analyses for each student based on data inputs.
Figure 1 displays an example of one district’s early warning system that was created by a software analysis tool using the district’s existing data. The system provides a score ranging from 0-2 for each indicator based on district-established thresholds. A score of 0 indicates the lowest risk and a score of 2 indicates the highest risk for each indicator. In this district, students earn a 0 for coursework or grades if they have A’s, B’s, and C’s only. Students like Nina who have two or more D’s and/or F’s earn a 2 indicating a higher level of risk.
Figure 1 – District-Level Early Warning System Dashboard
With a student analytics software system, districts can easily review historic data to ensure that their established thresholds are effectively identifying dropouts and those who continuously struggle with disengagement.
For instance, if your district decided to use less than 90% attendance as your metric for highest risk but then discovers that several students with 94% attendance dropped out the previous year, you can adjust the threshold to catch future dropouts more accurately.
An analysis tool can also provide a composite risk-level based on each student’s scores for the three indicators combined.
For this district, the levels range from No Risk to High Risk. Students who earn 0 points across the three indicators are marked as “No Risk” whereas students who earn five or more points are marked as “High Risk.”
Using this software, teachers and administrators can quickly identify those most at risk and intervene quickly.
Figure 2 shows that the system classifies Kabree as low risk, but not no risk, because while her academics and attendance are on track, her recent disciplinary episodes earned her a point for behavior.
Figure 2 – Student Risk Analysis
Using a comprehensive student-analytics software, teachers and administrators who want more information about a specific student, like Kabree, can easily access it by clicking on his or her name. The action will transport them to a student report page, like the one depicted in Figure 3, that presents all available data on the selected student.
Figure 3 – Student Report Page
To contextualize a student’s performance on a particular indicator, a district can zoom out to district-level data and see how the student compares to his/her peers.
For instance, Figure 4 displays the student-level behavior data across an entire district.
Figure 4 – District-wide Student-level Behavior Data
The benefits associated with earning a high school diploma are well-documented and schools are poised to help students achieve this essential milestone. Districts are already doing a lion’s share of the work by collecting data on early warning indicators for each student. More than that, there are districts and school leaders that know their students by name, strength and need.
They are the real heroes aggregating street-level data that goes beyond what an early warning system can provide. By taking it just one step further and adopting a software analysis tool, they can turn disparate data points into meaningful insights about those students who are on track to graduate and those who are at-risk of dropping out.
This is just one way district offices can support campuses in their work of knowing every young person by name, strength, and need. Prioritizing speed to insight around those who are struggling within the organization allows a building to focus its resources on fostering an environment more comprehensive in its’ development and nurturing of all young individuals.
As part of a comprehensive approach to dropout prevention, schools need to employ strategies that not only identify students at risk using early warning indicators, but also provide actionable steps to keep these students engaged and motivated.
Several evidence-based strategies have been found to be successful in reducing dropout rates. Let’s explore 5 of them.
A proactive approach that combines early identification of at-risk students with effective, evidence-based interventions can significantly reduce dropout rates. Utilizing a student analytics software system to organize available student data can greatly assist in the process of utilizing EWI data to identify students who may need support, but ultimately a successful drop out prevention program requires a concerted effort from educators, administrators, parents, and students themselves, but the benefits - both individual and societal - make this effort invaluable.
How Mercedes ISD empowers district and campus leadership with easily accessible student data.
Explore the single biggest question that district leaders can ask and answer with data to drive greater student outcomes and achievement
See how districts are blending last year’s performance, state or national assessment and other student data sets to inform summer professional learning plans and identify students who need additional support.
Fill out the form below, and we’ll be in touch to schedule your personalized demo.
The Frontline Research & Learning Institute
The Frontline Research & Learning Institute generates data-driven research, resources and observations to support and advance the education community. The Institute’s research is powered by Frontline Education data and analytics capabilities in partnership with over 10,000 K-12 organizations and several million users nationwide. The Institute’s research reports and analysis are designed to provide practical insights for teachers and leaders as well as benchmarks to inform strategic decision-making within their organizations.
The Institute Advisory Council is a team of Frontliners who provide knowledge, critical thinking and analysis to deliver content that matters to the K-12 community.
Brady Brucato
Sr. Partner Program Manager
CyLynn Braswell
Sr. Advisor, Analytics
Heather Taylor
Karlie Termotto
Sr. Customer Service Manager
Kenny Riley
Education Solutions Executive
Kevin Agnello
Product Manager, Human Capital Analytics
Lassaad Fridhi
VP, Chief Information Security Officer
Mitchell Welch
Principal Solutions Consultant
Nanci Schwartz
Instructional Writer
Natalie Kay
Sr. Director, Public Relations
Phill Carr
Sales Director
Ryan Estes
Customer Marketing Manager
Stan Wisler
Strategic Account Advisor
Susan Walters