DOCUMENT RESUME

ED 261 101 UD 024 387

AUTHOR Hodgkinson, Harold L.TITLE All One System: Demographics of Education,

Kindergarten through Graduate School.INSTITUTION Institute for Educational Leadership, Washington;

D.C.SPONS AGENCY EXXON Education Foundation, New York, N.Y.REPORT NO ISBN-0-937846-93-7PUB DATE 85NOTE 22p.PUB TYPE Reports - General (140)

EDRS PRICE MF01 Plus, Postage. PC Nov Available from EDRS.DESCRIPTORS *Access to Education; Birth Rate; Demography;

Differences; Dropouts; Early Childhood Education;*Educational Needs; Elementary Secondary Education;Family Status; Higher Education; Minority Groups;Population Distribution; *Population Trends; RacialComposition; Regional Characteiistics; SchoolDemography; *School. Holding Power

ABSTRACTThis report is a demographic study of the United

States education system from kindergarten through post-graduateeducation. Part 1 provides a briefing on the major demographic trendsthat form the framework of the analysis in terms of: (1) number ofbirths in different groups; (2) rate of age increase in variousgroups due to varying birth rates; (3) changes in family status; (4)differences in educational needs by region; and (5) education,including educational supply and job demand, and thegrowing need forday care and early childhood programs such as Head Start. Part 2concerns the retention of students through the school system to highschool graduation. Part 3 concerns the accessibility of college todifferent socioeconomic groups. Part 4 discusses retention ofstudents through college graduation in the context of the number ofyears it takes students to reach that goal. Throughout, suggestionsare offered on how to deal with the impact of increased minorities inthe educational system and how best to structure curricula to bettereducate the population as a whole. (CG)

***********************************************************************

Reproductions supplied by EDRS are the best that can be madefrom the original document.

***********************************************************************

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATIONNATIONAL INSTITUTE OF EDUCATION

EDUCATIONAL RESOURCES INFORMATIONCENTER IERICI

The document has been reproduced asreceived from the person or organizatron°Naming it

U Miner changes have been made to improvereproduction quality

Roma of view or opinions stated in this docur1111 n t do not necessanly represent otticnt NIE

position or policy

"PERMISSION TO REPRODUCE THISMATERIAL IN MICROFICHE ONLYHAS BEEN GRANTED BY

kLA-rk.e..List: 0-144.c.4.±A4-14,-e.

TO THE EDUCATIONALRESOURCESt INFORMATION CENTER (ERIC)."

_a

e System.

HistoScience

Lan uaMathematics

emograpbicss.

,tteation,

ergarten

ttate School

by Fiaxold L. liodgitinsOnn11 011

uCE TEE amTnnt ToREDUCATIONAL lEADEPSIM,

ALL ONE SYSTEM:_Eiernographics of EducationKindergarten- Through Graduate School

Harold-L. HodgkinsonInstitute for EducationalLeadership

Acknowledgments

It is a pleasure to record my debt to Mike Usdan andthe Institute for Educational Leadership for intellec-tual, logistical and moral support. Andrew Kriegerwas very helpful in assembling materials while LouiseClarke facilitated office matters..

The ideas herein are hardly unique; the relationsbetween themrhowever, are relatively unusual. FrankNewman, Ed Meade, Scott Miller, Bob Payton, Vir-ginia Hodgkinson, the Forum of Education Organiia-tion Leaders, and the Higher Education Secretariathave all contributed to my education. Although theproject was supported by the Exxon Education Foun-dation, and that support is gratefully acknowledged,the responsibility for the content of this report restswith the author. ,

Harold L. HodgkinsonWashington, D.C.June, 1985

2

ISBN 0-937846-93-71985

Institute for Educational Leadership, Inc.1001 Connecticut Avenue, N.W., Suite 310Washington, D.C. 20036 (202) 822-8405

Cover Design: Christina Laurej4

Table of Contents

Page #Introduction 1

Organization 2

Part One:Briefing on Major Demographic Trends 3

Part Two:Retention to High School Graduation 11

Part Three:Access to College 15

Part Four:Retention to College Graduation 17

Introduction

In the beginning of this report, it is important toinform the reader of one of the major perceptualassumptions behind it. Almost everyone who works ineducation perceives it as a set of discrete institutionsworking in isolation from each other. These institu-tions restrict the age range of their students:

Nursery schoolsDay- care centersKindergartensElementary schoolsJunior High SchoolsSenior High SchoolsTwo Year CollegesFour Year Undergraduate CollegesUniversities with Graduate ProgramsPost-Graduate Institutions

People working in each of the above institutionshave virtually no connection with all the others andlittle awareness of educational activity provided bythe Jta 1. Because of this, the school is defined as theunit, not THE PEOPLE WHO MOVE THROUGH IT.The only people who see these institutions as a systemare the studentsbecause some of them see it all.Striking as it seems, virtually all graduate studentscompleted the third grade at an earlier time in theirlives. It is our conviction that we need to begin seeingthe educational system from the perspective of thepeople who move through it. This is because changesin the composition of the group moving through theeducational system will change the system faster thananything else except nuclear war.

This report is mostly about demographicschangesin population groupings in the U.S. This is a relativelynew science (Kenneth Boulding says "Of all the socialsciences, demographics is most like the sciencofcelestial mechanics"we look for the huge unseenengines that make social systems work in certain ways).Demographics provides a truly new perception of edu-cational systems as people in motion. By knowing thenature of those coming into,first grade in the U.S., onecan forecast with some precision what the cohort ofgraduating high school seniors will be like twelve yearslater, and can reveal with very little error what theentering college .class will look like in the 13th year.Imagine economists predicting the Dow-Jones 13 yearsahead!

It is assumed that if people can begin to SEE theeducational system as a single entity through whichpeople move, they may begin to behave as if all ofeducation were related. It seems self- evident that sucha perception is good. The educational continuum ismuch like any other. The concept of a food chain inecology suggests that any alteration in the food chainwill affect all the organisms-at all points on the chain.Similarly, the Baby Boom of 70 'million people bornbetween 1946 and 1964 moved

/throughthe education

6

system like a very large mouse going through a verysmall snakeeach educational institution had toexpand enormously as the Baby Boom came through,then contract with equal severity as the Baby Boomaged and passed un. Changes as drastic as the BabyBoom now await us.

Exhibit 1The Baby Boom Ages

1980 (in percent)

males V females 85+. 80-84

75-7970-744 C _AO

60-6455-5950-5445-4940-4435-3930-3,25-29

,15 -1910-14'

5-9

5 4

2000

-4 5

(in percent)

males females 85+80-8475-7970-7465-6960-6455-5950-5445-4940-4435-3930-3425-29

(AMERICAN DEMOGRAMICS, JAN. 1983).

Many changes are taking place now in the numbersand composition of the birth and immigrant groupsthat are beginning to enter elementary schools. Thesechanges will necessarily occupy the educational sys-tem for dt i-nt the next twenty years. By knowing whois entering the system, and how well they are progress-ing, everyone at all levels will have time to developeffective programs for the maximum educational gainsof all students.

It is our conviction that we need tobegin seeing the educational systemfrom the perspective of the people whomove through it.

As a result of such knowledge, we educators may yetbegin to think of educators at other levels in the "chain"as colleagues. In businesses, when Sales does well,Research and Development cheers, anchrice versa. Itis vital to Sales that R&D does wellthey need eachother's success for the success of all. But when ele-mentary °reading scores in big city schools go up (asthey have almost universally for the last seven years),one has to listen very carefully before it's possible todiscern anyone cheering at any university, even thoughit would be in their self-interest to do so. Similarly,our rapidly aging white middle class will find itsretirement income generated by an increasingly non-,white work forcea small cheer for increasing edu-cational and occupational attainments by minoritieswould seem to be in order!

This report is in part a demonstration of the depen-dency of each educational level for the others. It ishoped that this discussion will be stimulating andbeneficial to those who read this report and think aboutit.

ORGANIZATION:

This report is organized along four major dimen-sions:

1. Briefing on major demographic trends2. Retention to high school graduation3. The transition from school to college4. Completion of college programs

These seem to be four major characteristics of theeducational continuum, in that changes in any one willcreate changes in the other three. There is literaturedealing with each of our four. individual dimensions,but there are few models for our attempt to put thefour together.

2

Partpne: Briefing on Major Demographic Trends

Before starting on the four themes, it mace usefulto describe the demographic changes that form theframework of our analysis.

1. BIRTHS: one of the major tools of demographyis differential fertilitysome groups have a lot morechildren than others, and thus are over-represented inthe next generations. For example, it is clear that Cubans(1.3 children per female) and whites (1.7 children perfemale) will be LESS numerous in our futurea groupneeds about 2.1 just to stay even, which is the case forPuerto Ricans. However, Blacks (2.4), and Mexican-Americans (2.9) will be a larger part of our populationin the future. All these young people have to do isGROW OLDER and we have the future. In attemptingto explain differences in birth rates by region, we needto keep in mind that these regional differences aremostly ethnic--increased,birth rates in the "Sun Belt"are due to a large degree by minority births,. while"Frost Belt" declines are caused by the white popu-lations. See Exhibit 2 on page 4.

2. AGE: Mostly because of varying birth rates, theaverage age of groups in the U.S. is increasingly var-iousthe 1980 Census reveals that the average whitein America is 31 years old, the average Black 25, andthe AVERAGE Hispanic only 22! It should be easy tosee that age produces population momentum forminorities, as the typical Hispanic female is just mov-ing into the peak childbearing years, while the averagewhite female is moving out of them. This is why Cali-fornia now has a "majority of minorities" in its ele-mentary schools, while Texas schools are 46% minor-ity, and half the states have public school populationsthat are more than 25% nonwhite, while all of our 25largest city school systems have "minority majori-ties."

By the year 2020, most of the Baby Boom will beretired, its retirement income provided by the muchsmaller age groups that follow it. This is a demo-graphic argument, not an economic one. But if largernumbers are taking out, and much smaller numbersare putting in, the economics ate rather clear. Forexample, in 1950 seventeen workers paid the benefitsof each retiree. By 1992, only three workers will pro-vide the funds for each retiree and one of the threeworkers will be minority.

It is also clear that for the next decade, the onlygrowth area in education will be in adult and continu-ing education, with increases in elementary schools incertain regions. Perhaps more important, is that in1983 there were more people over 65 in America thanthere were teen-agers, and (because of the Baby Boomgrowing old) that condition remains a constant for aslong as any of us live. America will simply not be anation of youth in our lifetime. This is why by 1992,half of all college students will be over 25 and 20% willbe over 35.

MINIMININI91111

The mostly white Baby Boom, on the other hand,represents 70 million people who are middle-aged dur-ing the 1980's. During the 80's, age groups will exhibitthe following changes:

50%

0%

20%

50%

15-17 18-24 25-34 35-44 45-54 55-65 65 +

Exhibit 3Age Group Changes During

The 1980's

3. FAMILY STATUS: Major changes have takenplace in-the ways we live together. In 1955, 60% of thehouseholds in the U.S. consisted of a working father,a housewife mother and two or more school age chil-dren. In 1980, that family unit was only 11% of ourhomes, and in 1985 it is 7%, an astonishing change.

More than 50% of women are in the work force, andthat percentage will undoubtedly increase. Of our 80million households, almost 20 million consist of peo-ple living alone. The Census tells us that 59% of thechildren born in 1983 will live with only one parentbefore reaching age I8this now becomes the NOR-MAL childhood experience. Of every 100 children borntoday:

12 will be born out of wedlock40 will be born to parents who divorce before thechild is 185 will be born to parents who separate2 will be born to parents of whom one will diebefore the child reaches 1841 will reach age 18 "normally"

The U.S. is confronted today with an epidemicincrease in the number of children born outside ofmarriageand 50% of such children are born to teen-age mothers. Although the percentage of Black teen-age girls who have children outside of marriage ishigher than that of white girls, comparisons with othernations indicate that a white teen-age female is twiceas likely to give birth outside of marriage as in anyother nation studied. The situation is most strikingwith very young mothers, age 13 and 14. Indeed, everyday in America, 40 teen-age girls give birth to theirTHIRD child. To be the third child of a child is to bevery much "at risk" in terms of one's future. It appearsthat sexual activity among the young is no more fre-quent here than elsewhere; the major difference is theinability of American youth to get access to informa-

38

Exhibit 2Minority Enrollment as Percent of PublicElementary/Secondary School Enrollment,

by State

Less than 10.0 percent10.0 to 24.9 percent25.0 to 34.9 percent

10 35.0 percent or more

Percent minority enrollment in public elementary secondary schools was generally greatest in the Southernand Southwestern States and in California. The percent black enrollment was highest in the Southern Stateswhile the percent Hispanic enrollment was highest in New Mexico, Texas, California, and Arizona.(The Condition of Education, 1984 edition. A Statistical Report by the National Center for Education Statistics.)

9

4

tion about contraception. Information about abortionis similarly restricted, although the variations across

. states are wide-Mississippi reports 4 abortions per1,000 teen-age live births, while New York reports1,200 abortions compared to 1,000 teen-age live births.

There is a particular aspect of this situation that isvital-teen-age mothers tend to give birth to childrenwho are premature, due mostly to a lack of physicalexaminations and to their very poor diet while preg-nant. Prematurity leads to low birth weight, whichincreases these infants' chances of major health prob-lems due to the lack of development of the child'simmune system. Low birth weight is a good predictorof major learning difficulties when the child gets toschool. This means that about 700,000 babies of theannual cohort of around 3.3 million births are almostassured of being either educationally retarded or "dif-ficult to teach." This group is entering the educationalcontinuum in rapidly increasing numbers.

Indeed, every day in America, 40 teen-age girls give birth to their THIRDchild.

Several other family factors are important to cite -first, with over half of the females in the work force(and almost 70% if you only consider "working age"women), the number of "latch-key children"--othpsewho are home alone after school when adults a?e4lotpresent-has shown a major increase and will con-tinue to do so, as women increasingly opt for workAND children. (Of those mothers of one-year-olds, halfhave already returned to work.) The typical pattern,for, women today is (1) get settled in a job, (2) getmarried, and (3) have children, as opposed to the pre-vious pattern of entering the work force only after thechildren were mature enough to fend for themselves.There are at least four million "latch-key" children inthe U.S. of school age. Many of them think of home asa dangerous, frightening place, particularly if thereare no other children in the home. They "check in"with parents by phone. They spend many hours watch-ing TV and talking to their friends on the phone, andhave to make decisions about knocks on the door andphone calls from strangers. The evidence is not yet in,and some children may benefit from having familyresponsibilities while home alone, but many othersbecome problems at school.

There is some very good news also-there is todaya solid and relatively well-established Black middleclass family structure in the U.S. Access to the politicalstructure has yielded.247 Black mayors in the U.S.,and 5,606 Black elected officials in 1984, along with3,128 elected Hispanic officials. Forty-four percent ofthe entering freshman class at the University of Cali-fornia, Berkeley in fall, 1984 was minority, while Har-vard's entering class was 20% minority. In some major

American cities, Blacks have been able to move to thesuburbs. Here are the ten highest rates:

Blacks InMetro Area

Blacks inCore City

Blacks inSuburbs

Miami 281,000 87,000 194,000 (69%)Newark 406,000 191,000 215,000 (52.9%)D.C. 870,000 448,000 422,000 (48.5%)L.A. 943,000 504,000 439,000 (46.5%)Atlanta 525,000 283,000 242,000 (46%)Oakland 263,000 159,000 104,000 (39.5%)St. Louis 319,000 206,000 113,000 (35.4%)Birmingham 240,000 158,000 82,000 (34.1%)Philadelphia 883,000 638,000 245,000 (27.7%)

I

41

Cleveland 345,000 251,000 94,000 (27.2%)

This is not to say thiit suburban housing is not seg-regated, but simply that there is more choice availablein the system today. One unfortunate thing is that thepercentage of Black two-income families is decliningas a percent of all Black households, meaning thatBlacks now distribute themselves over a much widersocioeconomic range than in the past. (Politiciansseeking "The Black Vote" will have to be very carefulin the future, as will politicians courting any suppos-edly "special interest group.") Between 1970 and 1980,the percentage of women, as well as minorities, inprofessional and managerial jobs virtually doubled.See Exhibit 4.

There can be little doubt that affirmative action pro-grams were responsible for at least some of these gains-firms doing business with the Federal governmentincreased their minority work force by a fifth, whilefirms not doing business with the government increasedminorities by only an eighth.

The other side of this coin is the rapid increase inthe number of poor households headed by a femaleBlack or Hispanic. Ninety percent of the increase inchildren born into poverty is from these households.Although two of three poor children are white, thepercentage of Black children living with one parentwho are poor is much higher, and those children whostay in poverty for more than four years (only one inthree poor children does) are heavily Black. A childunder six today is six times more likely to be poor thana person over 65. This is because we have increasedsupport for the elderly, and gown ment spending forpoor children has actually DECLINED during the pastdecade. The result is an increase of over two millionchildren during the decade who are "at risk" frombirth. Almost half of the poor in the U.S. arc children.

Today, we are a nation of 14.6 million Hispanics and26.5 million Blacks. But by 2020 we will be a nationof 44 million Blacks,dnd 47 million Hispanics-evenmore if Hispanic immigration rates increase. The totalU,S. population for 2020 %%In be about 265 millionpeople, a very small increase from our current 238million-and more than 91 million of that figure willbe minorities (and mostly young, while the mostlywhite Baby Boom moves out of the childrearing years

5 10

1970 I=1980

Exhibit 4

Officials & Managers

18.5

10.2

4.01.9 A 1.9

1777A-1Blacks Women Hispanics

COnstruction Trade Apprenticeships

19.3

Mincirities

4.32.5

Blacks

Professionals

37.2

Women Hispanics

Government Executives

Blacks

11

Women

by 1990, creating a "Baby Bitst" that will again bemostly white, while minority births continue toincrease).

We need to say a word about the third growing non-white sector of our nation, Asian-Americans. At themoment they are a much smaller group than Blacksand Hispanics (about 3.7 million in 1980), but theirgrowth potential from immigration is very great forthe next decade--they. currently represent 44% of allimmigrants admitted to the US. However, their diver-sity is very great: -

Sixty percent of Asian-Americans are foreign-born,yet the average Japanese-American speaks Eng-lish a .his /her native language, while almost noIndoel ine$e do.Almos 30% of Asian-Arnericans arrive in the U.S.with four years of college already completed-39% of all Asian-American adults are college grad-uates.Their SAT verbal scores are far below white aver-ages; their math SAT scores are equally far abbvewhites.Because of increased Indochinese immigration,language problems among Asian-American youthwill increase.Asian-American youth are heavily enrolled inpublic schools; a high percentage graduate andattend college. (Although access to college is wide-spread, hiring and promotion discriminationagainst Asian-Americans is also common.)Because of their competence in math and thephysical sciences, Asian-Americans represent adisproportionate share of minority students atmany of the highest rated universities.

Most important, by around the year2000, America will be a nation in whichone of every THREE of us will be non-

) white. And minorities will cover abroader socioeconomic range than everbefore, making simplistic treatment oftheir needs even less useful.

As we review this material, it is easy to be comfortedby the data on increased access for minorities to goodjobs, to political leadership, and to owning their ownbusinesses. However, it is equally clear that what iscoming toward the educational system is a group ofchildren who will be poorer, more ethnically and lin-guistically diverse, and who will have more handicapsthat will affect their learning. Most important, byaround the year 2000, America will be a nation inwhich one of every THREE of us will be non-white.And minorities will cover a broader socioeconomicrange than ever before, making simplistic treatmentof their needs even less useful.

4. REGION: Although the "Sunbelt" has shown highincreases in growth percentage, the U.S. is very muchan Eastern-dominated nation and will remain so wellpast the year 2000. An easy way to see this is to lookat the percentage of our 237 million population whoreside in each of the four time zones:

Exhibit 5Of 237 Million Population, Percentage

that Resides in Each Time Zone

WEST MOUNTAIN CENTRAL

In 1985, we can see that the declines in the MiddleAtlantic and New England states that were character-istic of the 70's have now been slowedoutmigrationfrom most of these states has been matched by inmi-gration, leaving us with a new question: how do thepeople moving out compare with the people movingin? For example, Colorado is now the state with thehighest percentage of its population possessing a col-lege degree, but a very large number of these degreeswere acquired in auother state, at that state's expense,while Colorado has enjoyed the talents of the collegegraduates moving in.

In addition, the national decline of about 13% inpublic school students of the 1970-1980 decade breaksdown to zero decline in about 12 "Sunbelt" states andover 25% in some "Frostbelt" states. There will be twomajor education agendas in the next decade: (1) plan-ning for growth (kindergarten through graduate school)in 12 states, and (2) planning for continuing declinesin secondary school populations in most of the rest.But few states with growth projections have noticedthat the increased youth cohort is an increasedMINORITY pool--"minority majorities" are possiblein the next decade in the public schools of ten states.

712

0

In addition, the Bureau of LaborStatistics has stated that of the currentgroup of college students, one in five willgraduate and work in a job that requiresno college education at all.

5. EDUCATION: The higher education system isfacing some major problems in term: of the work whichwill be done by its graduates. For example, over 18.000doctorates will be awarded in the humanities duringthe 1980's with only a "handful" of jobs available forthem in teaching. Doctoral scientists and engineersare more employable, and their Lumbers have grownsince 1973 by 52%, to 364,000. However, only one ineight is female, and they are mainly in biology (20%),sociology/anthropology (27%), and psychology (28%).Few minorities are represented: Blacks are only 1.3%of doctoral scientists, Hispanics 0.6%, while Asianswere 7.7% although they are only 1.5% of the U.S.population. (And in all U.S. graduate engineering pro-grams, 43% of the students are foreign students. Thirty-six percent of all math and computer science graduatestudents are foreign studerts.)

In addition, the Bureau of Labor Statistics has statedthat of the current group of college, students, one infive will graduate and work in a job that requires nocollege education at all. In 1972, one in seven workershad a college degree, while in 1982 one worker in fourdid. Our economy is very good at generating new jobsbut most of them are low-paying service jobs whichrequire little education. The problem is not a declinein "quality" jobs, but rather an increase in the numberof college graduates, from 575,000 per year enteringthe work force annually during the 1960's to 1.4 mil-lion college graduates going to work annually duringthe 1970's. The problem may be alleviated in the nextdecade due to the decline of about 5 million youth inthe 18-24 year old cohort, which may bring educa-tional supply and job demand into better balance.

Our public schools have about finished a major sea-son of state-based educational reforms. As of February,1985:

43 states have strengthened high school gradua-tion requirements, including 15 that require "exittests" of high school seniors14 states have adopted some version of "meritpay"37 will lure the best college students into teachingthrough scholarships and other incentivesAlthough standards have been made "tougher,"only a handful of states have appropriated addi-

. tional moneys for counselling and remediation forthose who will need assistance in reaching thestandards.

With the increased percentage of women (especiallymothers) in the work force, the issues surrounding day

8

care and early childhood education are coming to thefore.The successes of Head Start and similar programshave focussed new energy on the potential of earlyintervention programs for solving some of the educa-tional and social problems that crop up later.

The number of youth eligible for Head Start typeprograms will increase in the next decade, as the num-ber of children in poverty continues to expand. Povertyis more common among children than any other agegroup. In 1983, the poverty rate was:

25-

20-

15-

10-

Exhibit 6Poverty Rate 1983

25

21

*.:a4u004 >,

8 T:

S. .,44 C.f) 14

14

12

ti

In 1983,14 million children lived in poverty--about40 %of the poor population. We have already seen thatchildren in poverty come from certain kinds of house-

, holds. In 1983, childhood poverty was 40% amongethnic minorities, but 14% among non-minority chil-dren. Fifty percent of children in female-headed house-holds were in poverty compared to 12% in male-pres-ent households. Thirty percent of children in centralcities were in poverty in 1983, but only 13% of childrenin non-central portions of cities. From 1959 to 1969,childhood poverty fell sharply, declining by about 6.5million, despite an increase of 9% in the child popu-lation during the decade. From 1969 to 1979, child-hood poverty increased, but slightly and erratically.From 1979 to 1983, however, the number of childrenin poverty grew by 3.7 million, and the rate grew from16 to 22 percent, the highest level in 21 years. Althoughthere was do decline in childhood poverty in 1983,such rates are quite dependent on economic condi-tions; if the present recovery continues it may be thatchildhood poverty will be reduced. The only thing weknow with certainty is that the number of childreneligible for Head Start type programs has increasedby at least 1/3rd, while the programs are being level-funded in 1985.

13

26

24

22

20

18

16

14

12

10

8

6

4

2

0I i I I

Exhibit 7Poverty Rate Among Children,

Ages 0-17

1 I I 1 1 I 1 I i I QI I l 1 1 1 1 1 I

59 -61 63- 65 67 69 71 73 75 77 ,79 81 83

YEAR

NOTE: Rates slightly underestimated because of exclusion of older unrelated children and, since 1979, unrelated subfamilies. Ratesbefore 1966 adjusted downward fur consistency with later years. (Poverty Among Children, Congressional Budget Office, December 3,1984).

Given the fact that only around 400,000 children areactually in Head Start, while at least three million areeligible, one of the best state strategies for improvingtheir future would be the, establishment of a state-wideHead Start system. Phasing in such a system mighttae a number of years, but no innovation could assuregreater cost savings in terms of future services (pris-ons, drug control centers) that would not be needed.Head Start programs work.

914

To summarize the education consequences of demo-graphic changes:

1. More children entering school from povertyhouseholds.

2. More children entering school from single-par-ent households.

3. More children from minority backgrounds.4. A smaller percentage of children who hal,e had

Head Start and similar programs, even thoughmore are eligible.

5. A larger number of children who were prema-ture babies, leading to more 'warning difficultiesin school.

6. More children whose parents were not married,now 12 of every 100 births.

7. More "latch-key" children and children from"blended" families as a result of remarriage ofone original parent.

8.. More children from teen-age mothers.9. Fewer white, middle-class, suburban children,

with day care (once the province of the poor)becoming a middle class norm as well, as morewomen entet the work force.

10. A continuing decline in the level of retention tohigh school graduation in virtually all statesexcept for minorities.

11. A continued ;Imp in the number of minorityhigh school graduates who apply for college.

12. A continued drop in The number of high schoolgraduates, concenteated most heavily .in theNortheast.

_-

13. A continuing increase in the number of Blackmiddle class students in the entire system.

14. Increased numbers of Asian-American students,but with more from Indonesia, and with increas-ing language difficulties.

15. Continuing high drop-outs among Hispanics,currently about 40% of whom complete highschool.

16. A decline in the number of college graduateswho pursue graduate studies in arts and sci-ences.

17. A major increase in part -tine college students,and a decline of about 1 million in full timestudents. (Of our 12 million students, only about2 million are full' time, in residence, and 13-22years of age.)

18. A major increase in college students who needBOTH financial and academic assistance. A greatliaison between the offices of student financialaid and counseling will be essential.

19. A continuing increase. in the number of collegegraduates who will get a job which requires nocollege degree. (Currently 20% of all ,:ollegegraduates.)

20. Continued increases in graduate enrollments inbusiness, increased undergraduate enrollmentsin arts and sciences COURSES but not majors.

21. Increasing numbers of talented minority youthchoosing the military as theireducational route,both due to cost and direct access to "high tech-nology."

22. Major increases in adult and continuing edu-cation ;outside of college and university set-tingsby business, by a ,vernirtent, by other non-profits such as-United Way, and by for-profit"franchise" groups such as Bell and HowellSchools and The Learning Annex.

23. Increased percentage of workers with a collegedegree. (From one in seven to one in four today.)

10

15

Part Two: Retention to High School Graduation

The first and perhaps most important point to bemade in this discussion is to point out the direct linkbetween state level economic development and highschool retention. In a state that retains a high per-centage of its youth to high school graduation, almostevery young person becomes a "net gain" to the statewith a high school diploma, there is a high probabilityof that person getting a job and repaying the state forthe cost of his/her education, through taxable income,many times over. However, in a state with a poorrecord of retention to 'high school graduation, manyyouth are a "net loss" to the state, in that without ahigh school diploma, the chances of that student get-ting work, and thus repaying the state for that person'seducation, are very small indeed. Additionally, thaty5iung person is unlikely to leave the state, becomingafpermanent economic burden to that state's economy.

The following table presents the top and bottom/states in retention to high school graduation, along/ withwan two variables that do NOT predict retention 16-/ els:

RetentionTeacherSalary

Per PupilExpend.

Minnesota # 1 (86.0%) 22nd 16thNorth Dakota 2 (84.9%) 40th 40thIowa 3 (84.8%) 27th 24thSouth Dakota 4 (82.8%) 47th 37thWisconsin 5 (82.3%) 8th 12thNebraska 6 (81.3%) 41st 21stMontana 7 (80.9%) 28th 13thKansas 8 (80.5%) 36th 29thUtah 9 (80.2%) 25th 45thWyoming 10 (80.0%) 6th 15th

* * *

California 41 (68.0%) 10th 22ndKentucky 42 (67.3%) 31st 46thAlabama 43 (67.1%) 3Sth 46thNorth Carolina 44 (67.1%) 29th 36thTennessee 45 (66.7%) 45th 48thNew York 46 (65.9%) 7th 2ndGeorgia 47 (64.3%) 33rd 49thFlorida 48 (63.7%) 32nd 27thLouisiana 49 (63.4%) 39th 40thMississippi 50 (61.8%) 50th 50th

Certain things are obvious from these tables. A largemajority of the high-retention states are located in theMidwest, a majority of the low retention ones are inthe Southeast. Ethnic diversity is greater in the lowretention states, which are also more urban. It alsoshould be clear that neither teacher salary nor perpupil expenditure is a good indicator of a state's reten-tion ability, while pupil-teacher ratio turns out to havea much better predictive level than eitherof the others.(The range for pupil-teacher ratio varies from 15.0 to1 in Wyoming to 23.1 to 1 in California, while evengreater variation can be obtained in big cities com-

pared to suburbs, and elementary schools comparedto high schools.) Why is teacher/student ratio relatedto retention when teacher salary and per pupil expen-diture are not? The question needs further analysis.

We are more aware than ever that iflarge numbers of youth fail in schooland work, the consequences for us allare severe.

In context, the retention data take on a differentaspect. We have made great strides since the turn ofthe Century in increasing the educational level of ourcitizensin 1900, only about 10% of the youth cohortgraduated from high school. By 1950, 25% of Blackyouth and 56% of white were graduating, whiie in1978, 75% of Black youth were graduating and 35% ofwhites. (Historical data on Hispanic youth is hard tocome by, but it appears that today about 60% graduatefrom high school.) As a result of this major increase in"productivity," higher education benefitted doubly inthe 1970'sonce from the increased numbers of theBaby BOom, once again from the higher "yield" of highschool graduates. In 1947, only about 28% of youthattended college, 'While today, more than 50% willattend some form of postsecondary education. In oprentire pgpulation, the percentage= with high schooldiplomas has risen from around 13% in 1910 to 24%in 1940, and 70% in 1981. Today, one in fix.lr workershas a college degree. This more highly educated adultpopulation (and work-force) has added greatly to theeconomic progress of our nation. We are more awarethan ever that if large numbers of youth fail in schooland work, the consequences for us all are severe.

High school drop-outs have a rather typical profile.They are usually from low-income or poverty settings,often from a minority group background (although notoften Asian-American), have very low basic academicskills, especially reading and math, have parents whoare not high school graduates and who are generallyuninterested in the child's progress in school, and donot provide a support system for academic progress.English is often not the major language spoken in thehome, and many are children of single parents. Drop-outs are heavier among males than femalesmalestend to leave school to get a job (which usually turnsout to be a failure), while females tend to drop out inorder to have a child. Drop-outs are generally boredin school, they perceive themselves accurately as fail-ures in the school culture, and are usually very alien-ated from school.

Our survey of states' revealed that as of 1984, vir-tually no state passed "reform" legislation that con-

"'State Use of Demographic Data for Educational Planning." Avail-able from IEL for $2.

tained specific plans to provide remediation to thosewho ,did not meet the higher standards on the firsttrythus, almost all states were willing to have ahigher drop-out rate from secondary schools in theirstate, even though the economic (leaving out the social)costs of this position will be very high indeed. Earlyin 1985, several states began to be responsive to th'sposition, although a majority of the "reform" stateshave, in essence, moved up the high jump bar fromfour to six feet without giving any additional coachingto the youth who were not clearing the bar when itwas, set at four feet. This is bad coaching, and worseeducational policy. Benjamin Bloom, noted psychol-ogist, has been very convincing in showing that amongthe truly excellent performers in a wide range of fieldsfrom sports to music, natural talent is less of a factorthan hard work and persistence. If we have standardswe wish EVERY student to attain, some will requiremore assistance than others. The ideal is to have allstudents meeting the higher standards. Most stateshave not behaved as if they shared this ideal.

Eliminating low performers from thepublic schools was seen as a way ofdisplacing the problem, not solving it.Out of school, these students presentmore of a social and economic problemthan they do IN school,-

4 .1

Manlocalities, howevd, have developed excellentdrop-out prevention programs. Particularly useful arethe programs which combine intensive, individual-ized training in the basic skills with work-related proj-ects. Vocational education and work-study strategiesseem to work well, as does the "alternative high school"pattern. When the relation between education and workbecomes clear, most of these potential drop-outs canbe motivated to stay in school and perform at a higherlevel. (These work-related strategies are more likely tobe successful with male students.)

The state survey that was a part of our project indi-\cated a widespread sense that much more needs to bedone in this area. Most frequently mentioned wereprograms that stress the basic skills, stimulating amore personal and caring attitude on the part of allstaff in dealing with potential drop-outs, and identi-fying and intervening earlier in the education of poten-tial drop-outs. More and more sophisticated counsell-ing was mentioned often, as was a variety of efforts tocoordinate the work of family, schobl and social wel-fare agencies in keeping potential drop-outs in school,and increasing their educational success.

We also discovered a widespread concern that thecurrent spate of state-based "reform" legislation willonly increase the group of push-outs to be added tothe drop-outs. Eliminating low performers from thepublic schools was seen as a way of displacing the

12

problem, not solving it. Out of school, these studentspresent more of a social and economic problem thanthey do IN school. If there were other institutions thatformed a "safety net" to catch the drop-outs fromschools, one might feel differently about it. (The GED,for example, may be a useful device for some studentswho seize the initiative, but not all.) But no such safetynet exists, at least for educational purposes.

There are times when the "definitivenegative" assessmentthis programNEVER workscould be more usefulthan the "ambiguous positive"itmight work but you can't tell.

Given the basically local nature of such drop-outprevention programs, there exists a major need tocoordinate and share information on what works andwhy. If each of the 14,000 school districts has to begintheir drop-out prevention program from scratch, muchinventing of wheels will be done. Some characteristicsof successful programs are not difficult to ascertainsmall settings with low student-teacher ratios, person-alized attention to student needs, materials and teach-ing formats that stress the immediate and practical,stress on the basic academic skills, and consistent pat-terns of rewarding student achievement. The hallmarkof the "continuation school" seems always usefulaway of keeping in touch with the student after gradu-ation, and particularly allowing the school to serve theneeds of older students who have left school but wishto return for a diploma or GED. Different subculturesand regions will have to tailor these general notionsto their area, but a large percentage of what works inone place will work in another. And in addition, if aprogram fails completely in one location, it is likely todo the same in others. (There are times wnen the"definitive negative" assessmentthis programNEVER workscould be more useful than the"ambiguous positive"it might work but you can'ttell. The ideal recommendation might be "You couldtry A to F and see what, works best for you, but don'ttry Git NEVER works." Negative knowledge is veryimportant in making a profession out of a field.)

One of the widely held views among educators inter-viewed in this project is that we intervene too late inthe course of a student's development, that certainparts of the profile Oa drop-out prone student may bevisible as early as the third grade. To allow these soresto fester until the eleventh grade is to virtually guar-antee that the student will drop out. Many of the newerday care approaches integrate meaningful learningeven at pre-school levels, largely to increase the.child'sself-cor gdence as a learner and to begin preparationfor basic skills teaching when the child enters school.Key to all of these early intervention programs is someform of home support. Not only is this important whenthere are cultural differences the school must negoti-

17

ate, but particularly with children who do not speakEnglish, and in whose homes English is not spoken.This crucial problem seems to be easing sorn2whatwith Mexican-Americans, as most of the "Spanish only"speakers are older adults, and an increasing numberof youth report familiarity with English as well asSpanish. The problem intensifies, however, for Indo-chinese immigrants and their children, who often cometo school having no familiarity with English.

Such programs are not inexpensive. But comparedto the cost of neglect, (it costs about $25,000 to have aprisoner spend a year in a state penitentiary, aboutone-third of the cost of having a student at a statecollege), dealing with potential high school drop-outsearly may turn out to be one of the biggest bargainsavailable. It-is important to observe that our positionis not incompatible with high standards of studentperformance, we simply feel that every student shouldhave the maximum opportunity to achieve these highstandards.

What should we expect in terms of performance ofschools in producing high school graduates? Certainly,each decade has yielded better returns than the pre-vious decade, in terms of retention to high school grad-uation, while declines in academic achievement remainquite scattered by age, region, and ethnicity. There isno reason to say that other states could not do as wellon retention as Minnesota, whose per pupil spendingis no greater than many other states. If about 14% ofwhite students are dropping out, and 24% of Blackstudents, is there any reason to believe that the ratesfor Black students could not be moved to those forwhites? And if 40% of Hispanics do not finish highschool, is there any reason to believe that this numbercould not be cut to the 24 % Black rate, or to the 14%white rate? Females of whatever ethnic backgrounddrop out less than malesis there any reason to thinkthat male rates could not be made to match those offemales? The answer to all these question is NOyetthere are some clear indications that the decade of the1980's will show a decline in retention for virtuallyevery group discussed. Since 1980, the national figurefor all students has declined from 76% high schoolgraduation to 73%. The unintended fall-out from thespate of "excellence" state reforms will undoubtedlycut the number even further.

Few factors are emerging on the equity side, exceptfor a number of locally developed and often very cre-ative and productive programs to improve retentionin public schools. These programs need to be puttogether into a coherent framework, both at the stateand larger levels. The higher education community,instead of seeing this issue as a spectator sport, needsto get involved in trying to improve retentionafterall, this will be their bread and butter very shortly.Organizations like the Education Commission of theStates need to begin to encourage states to follow theirreform legislation with implementing legislation tomake sure that every youngster has a reasonableopportunity to achieve theSe new standards. To do so

13

18

Since 1980, the national figure for allstudents has declined from 76% highschool graduation to 73%. Theunintended fall-out from the spate of"excellence" state reforms willundoubtedly cut.the number evenfurther.

would be in everyone's best interests, both short andlong term. As with a food chain, changes at one levelin the educational continuum will have direct andpredictable consequences for other levels in the "chain."Higher educational leaders have not been used to scan-ning the environment before them, particularly theeducational environment. During the coming decade,this kind of information will be a necessity for anystrategic planning in higher education. Similarly, publicschool leaders will have to be more acute in lookingcarefully at who is moving into and out of their dis-trict, and who is being born.

J. rI

Part Three: Access to College

The first point to be made is that enrollments inhigher education have benefitted greatly from two fac-torsfirst, the 70 million Baby Boomers who haveswollen collzge admissions for two decades, and sec-ond, a majoi increase in the percentage of youth whohave graduated from high school and are this in aposition to attend collegefrom less than 50% in 1946to 73% today. (But as the slope of the youth declineincreases in most states in the years to come, andretention rates to high school graduatkn continue todrop, higher. education will have to get used to gettinga smaller percentage of a declining total.)

The range and diversity of highereducation in the U.S. is a source ofconstant amazemententeringfreshman at some institutions knowmore than graduating seniors fromothers.

For those who do graduate from high school (plusthe increasing but somewhat imisible thousands whoacquire the GED,),. t here is SOME college or universitythat will probably accept them. The range and diver-sity of higher education in the .0.S. is a source of con-stant amazemententering freshmen at some insti-tutions know more than graduating seniors from oth-ers. The B.A. is certainly not a learning "floor" thatguarantees a minimum level of competence which alldegree holders can exhibit. As long as each institutionattracts the right student mix for its particular missionand level, the system seems to work quite well. Indeed,it thrives on diversity, which is fortunate given thediversity inherent in the U.S. population. Communitycolleges, for example, have a disproportionate enroll-ment of Black and Hispanic students, while on theother hand, the 1984 entering freshman class at theUniversity of California, Berkeley was only 56% v 'trite!(The Berkeley situation is partially explained 13.! itsexcellence in math and the physical sciences, and thustheir minorities are heavily Asian-Ainerican.) JCLAalso has become heavily non-white, without loweringits admissions standards at all. In fact, this fall's enter-ing class at Harvard was 20% minority, and was selectedfrom the top sixth of the applicant pool, whereas adecade ago Harvard was only 10% minority, and thestudents were selected from the top third. While dou-bling their selectivity, Harvard has doubled the num-ber of minority students at the same time.

But when we leave the community colleges and the"blue chip" institutions, there is a large group of insti-tutions, public and private, that have not increasedtheir minority populations over the last decade. Giventhe decline in white graduates of secondary schools

that faces us until at least 1994, these institutions willhave to face up to some difficult decisions. However,comparatively few of these institutions will close,compared with the pastsince 1900, we have closedabout 200 institutions of higher education every twodecades. However, we have founded almost as manynew ones as closures, so that the institutional "net"remained fairly constant through the years. The makeupof institutions did go through a restructuring duringthe sixties and early seventies when we were openinga new community college every WEEK. In the nextdecade or two, closure rates will probably not be bal-anced out with starting rateswe will have more"deaths" than "births." Because of the great politicaldifficulty in closing a public institution of higher edu-cation, a large number will continue to exist simplybecause they will not be allowed to diethe legisla-ture will serve as their heart-lung machine. A verylarge number of state colleges, designed to serve theneeds of a sector of a state, are simply not located nearany population centers, yet for them, the issue will notbe survival but significance. The most difficult prob-lems will be institutions that got the "greatness" dis-ease in the 1960's, added many unneeded graduateprograms, and assumed that student enrollments wouldincrease forever.

It is likely that as the number of highschool graduates declines more steeplyfrom now to 1994, and fewer studentsare spread across the same number ofinstitutions, the commendablespecificity of college catalogues andbrochures may be lost, as someinstitutions try to attract anyone who iswarm and breathing to their openingclass.

The declines will be heavily suburban, 18.24 yearsold, full time, as well as white and middle class. Pri-vate colleges and universities, now enrolling about22% of all students, will be the most "at risk," not onlybecause they run a larger share of their budget fromtuition revenues, but because "caps" on student finan-cial aid will make the choice of a private college animpossible one for many middle class parents. How-ever, the Congress at this writing has not been totallyclear on cuts in student assistance.

It is our view that the access issue needs to be definedcarefullyone criterion would be access to SOMEinstitution of higher education; a second would beaccess to the BEST institution for that particular stu-dent. On the first criterion (thanks especially to corn-

1519

munity colleges) access has become virtually universalfor any high school graduate, anywhere in the country,regardless of race, sex, age or class. On the secondcriterion, we undoubtedly have a long way to go,although access to the best institution can be improwdby better institutional publicity at the college level sothat the student knows what the institution expects,plu., better guidance from secondary schools andemployers, so that the student's aspirations are real-istic and clear.

The question behind the question: whyisn't higher education more appealing toAmerica's minority high schoolgraduates?

It is likely that as the number of high school grad-uates declines more steeply from now to 1994, andfewer students are spread across the same number ofinstitutions, the commendable specificity of collegecatalogues and brochures may be lost, as some insti-tutions try to attract anyone who is warm and breath-ing to their opening class.

At the same time, the very small number of "highlyselective" institutions will probably be as selective asever, perhaps even more so, and their pool of appli-cants is likely to be even more diverse by ethnicity,sex and class than before. For example, it may be quitenormal today for the bright son of a Black collegegraduate to think of applying to Yalegood news forYale, not such good news for the Black colleges, in thatmany of their best potential recruits are eagerly soughtafter by a number of other institutions.

Access discussions usually center on whether or notinstitutions of higher education are willing to admithigh school graduates regardless of sex, ethnicity orclass. By and large, access to SOME college or univer-sity is possible today for every high school graduate.But today, one out of eight "highly able" high schoolgraduates chooses not to attend college. Twenty-ninepercent more Blacks graduated from high school in1982 than in 1975, but Black enrollment in collegedropped 11% during the period. High school gradua-tion rates for Hispanics increased 38% during the 1975to 1982 period, while Hispanic college enrollmentdeclined 16%.

The question behind the question: why isn't highereducation more appealing to America's minority highschool graduates? Access is a relatively meaninglessidea if people arc not interested in the thing to whichaccess is allowed. We know little about why a largernumber of minority high school graduates is produc-ing a smaller number of colleggstudents. Declines infinancial aid, lack of relationship between a collegedegree and a good job, inadequate high school coun-selling programs for minorities, are all mentioned aspossible contributors. Many minority youth are fullyaware that a college degree no longer guarantees access

16

to a high level job. It may even be that many minorityhigh school graduates will get a job for a few yearsafter high schoorgraduation, then enter some postsec-ondary program at a later date. It is certain that manytalented minority youth are finding military serviceto be a very appealing way to gain further education,particularly in "high tech;'

At the moment, most of this is hypothetical, butcertainly some doubt can be cast on the notion thathigher education is an essential part of the AmericanDream for an increasing number of bright and accom-plished students of whatever ethnic background. Thisis certainly the kind of issue that should begin to drawtogether the various faculty, administrative and boardleadership from schools and colleges to see what canbe done to improve access, retention and performanceat all educational levels. With a decline of about 5million in the youth cohort, it would be in everyone'sbest interest to make the school-cullege transition easyand productive for the largest number of qualifiedstudents.

Lifelong learning is here today for abouthalf of the American adult populationready or not.

On the other hand, diversity is the American hall-mark, and recent successes of the military and busi-ness worlds in their educational endeavors suggests avery different postsecondary world. Most institutionswith which we are involved, from hospitals and localgovernments to museums and the workplace, todayhave an educational arm. Lifelong learning is heretoday for about half of the American adult popula-tionready or not. Colleges and universities are a partof this picture, but only a part (12 million of about 40million people being educated past high school). Giventhe demography plus the disaggregation of the provid-ers of educational services, the portion of the total piefor colleges and universities will continue to declinethey will have a relatively constant place in a rapidlyexpanding universe. At the moment, ten million work-ers are taking eighteen million courses a year, most ofthem offered "in-house" by the company's own edu-cation staff. This is a minimum figure.

The Baby Boom is now in the peak middle years ofearning and learning. Adult education is the only growthcomponent possible in postsecondary education. Thisuniverse will continue to expand until the Baby Boombegins to retire in 2000, but higher education will onlydevelop a limited share of this area, which is appro-priate in an increasingly diverse world of educationproducers and consumers.

a

20

Part Four: Retention to College Graduation,INEMIMIr

o-Studies done over the last twenty years affirm a

central truth. of 100 students admitted to a four-yearbachelors program, less than 50 (about 46) wouldgraduate, on time, from the institution. they entered.If one extends the time to seven years, about 70 of ouroriginal 100 would have graduated from SOME insti-tution by that time. It seems important to point outthat the "template" for undergraduate education (eightsemesters of instruction straight through to gradua-tion) has not been the path taken by even a simplemajority of students over the years. Our response hastended to be criticizing part-time and older studentswith family and job responsibilities rather than revis-ing the template so that the length of a student's edu-cation is variable. Often we show a fierce dedicationto the TIME of an education while appearing confusedabout its CONTENT or OUTCOMES. But less than halfof the undergraduate students seem to agree with the"straight through" principle.

We also know that unlike the high school drop -out,the college drop-out who is not a flunk-out tends tohave as good a grade average as those who stay, ofteneven better. Major reasons students give for droppingout of college are heavily financial, but this is some-times the easist explanation for what may be a verycomplex issue. It would appear that many, if not most,drop-outs are in reality STOP-outs who simply haveto do something else before resuming their studies.

Often we show a fierce dedication to theTIME of an education while appearingconfused about its CONTENT orOUTCOMES.

Yet they are often treated by the college or universityas persons who have left higher education forever. Atthe moment, we have no effective and economical sys-tem to routinely track students who move from onecampus to another, making the effectiveness of reten-tion" efforts difficult to assess if retention is taken tomean graduation from another institution than thatin which the student originally enrolled. Some stu-dents SHOULD transfer, others SHOULD stop out forawhile, yet they are currently recorded as casualties. ,

The issue of retention to college graduation hasfocussed as an important one in the last several years,as institutions come to realize that even with, a smallerfreshman class, an improved retention rate can meanthat the total student enrollment need not shrink, if ahigher percentage. of students stay for four years.(Indeed, one,can raise some real questions about aninstitution with 1,000 freshmen, 500 sophomores, 200juniors and 100 seniors, in the sense of community andsolidarity, especially if the senior seminar of eight stu-dents is subsidized by the required freshman lecture

17

1111111111

course of 800.) Such sy stems seem designed to increaseattrition, both due to the "sink -or- swim" attitude forfreshmen and the over indulged senior. One answer tothis problem is to "front-load" the Lull iculum pro-v ide more resources in the first year than the nextthree, in four -year programs, as recommended in theNational Institute of Education report, "Involvementin Learning. Realizing the Potential of American HigherEducation."'

. . . most potential drop-outs inacademic difficulty are sending signalswhich no one can hear. This is becausethere is no standard faculty examinationuntil the MIDDLE of the first term . .

The largest number of drop-outs occur in the fresh-man year very early in the first term, most potentialdrop-outs in academic difficulty are sending signalswhich no one can hear. This is because there is nostandard faculty examination until the MIDDLE of thefirst term, by which time behaviors which impedeproper study arc already firmly in place. Some insti-tutions are now using "early warning systems"aev -eral small tests or written work required in the firsttwo weeks for entering students. In this way, studentswho are having trouble will be told while there is stilltime to modify their study and classroom behavior.Some institutions have increased their retention con-siderably after developing such programs. Many drop-outs and flunk-outs are bright enough to do good col-lege work, but have never learned how to study effec-tively, nor how to take tests and do good wri t ten work.

Given the realities of student mobility, and the factthat less than half of them do the "correct" thing ofgraduating "on time," it might be useful to consideran alternative strategyconverting drop-outs to stop-outs. In the stop-out strategy, the student is not seenas a total failure, but rather as someone who has someadditional tasks to complete before the college pro-gram is completed. The goal is the development of aset of decision rules which guide the student into readi-ness to return to some college at some future time. Ina carefully drawn program of this sort, the institutionbenefits by the student who may return at a later dateto complete the work, and also by the kind of wordof-mouth praise for the college that this program candevelop. (Many community colleg2s do this kind ofprogram very well.),

Surprisingly, many standard indicators do not pre-dict dropping out. High school rank in class and GPA

2A Final Report of the Study Group on the Conditions of Excellencein American Higher Education. Sponsored by the N1E. Presentedto the Secretary of Education and the Director of the Nation..!Institute of Education. October 1984.

21

only predict about half the cases, and those mainly inthe first college year. SAT scores have a small abilityto predict college grades, and no ability to predictdrop-outs. Having clear educational and vocationalgoals helps the college CPA prediction but doesn't tellus who will drop out. There are several good ones:

We are just entering an era in whichyouth will be in short supply inAmerica.

students with good study habits stay in college, thosewhose needs are compatible with what the campusenvironment encourages also tend to stay.

Our earlier discussions would suggest that even moreentry level students in the future will be in need ofboth financial and academic assistance. Although over80% of institutions now report offering "remediat ion"courses and programs for entry level students, it is notclear what the level of financial and intellectual com-mitment to these programs is. In many cases, a teacherwho works in the developmental area is not eligiblefor promotions and tenure, even though success in thisrole can be crucial to hundreds of students who canbecome successful college students with some support.Higher education may have to put additional' humanand dollar resources, as well as intellectual commit-ment, into this area in the future just to stay even onenrollments.

The task will be not to lower thestandards but to increase the effort.

We are just entering an era in which youth will bein short supply in America. Fast food restaurants areone indicator of the future,virtually every one has a'now hiring'sign in front. We are not fully used tohaving an excess of young people in America. If a new19 year-old employee doesn't work out, fire him/herand get another, if a freshman doeSn't work out, replacehim/her with another, if the army recruit doesn't adapt,replace him/her, etc. For the next fifteen years at least,we will have to work harder with the limited numberof young people we have to work with, whether we arein higher education, business or the military. Ifa youngperson fails the first time, we may have to help themsucceed the second time rather than summarilyreplacing them. They will be scarce for a long timeas long as we live, there will be more people over 65than teen-agers in America. How do we balance theinterests of both?

18

The Bottom Line:

The rapid increase in minorities among the youthpopulation is here to stay. We need to make a majorcommitment, as educators, to see that all our studentsin higher education have the opportunity to performacademically at a high level. There will be barriers ofcolor, language, culture, attitude that will be greaterthan any we have faced before, as Spanish-speakingstudents are joined by those from Thailand and Viet-nam. The task will be not to lower the standards butto increase the effort. To do so will be to the directbenefit of all Americans, as a new generation of peoplebecome a part of our fabric, adding the high level ofenergy and creativity that has always been character-istic of groups who are making their way in America.Their numbers are now so large that if they do notsucceed, all of us will have diminished futures.That is the new reality.

22

o

\