DIVISION OF EVALUATION AND ACCOUNTABILITY

Transcription

1 Dallas Independent School District Post-Graduate Educational Pursuits of DISD Graduates: REIS DIVISION OF EVALUATION AND ACCOUNTABILITY Michael Hinojosa, Ed. D. General Superintendent

2

3 Dallas Independent School District Michael Hinojosa, Ed. D. General Superintendent Post-Graduate Educational Pursuits of DISD Graduates: REIS Robert Mendro and Marisela Abundis Approved Report of Evaluation and Accountability Robert L. Mendro, Ph.D. Assistant Superintendent Evaluation and Accountability Cecilia Oakeley, Ph.D. Associate Superintendent Evaluation and Accountability Denise Collier, Ed.D. Deputy Superintendent Curriculum and Instructional Services Dallas, Texas August 2006

4

5 Post-Graduate Educational Pursuits of DISD Graduates: REIS Evaluator: Analyst: Robert Mendro Marisela Abundis Abstract This report tracks the educational progress of eight DISD graduating classes, 1998 to The report uses data from the National Student Clearinghouse that tracks college and post high school educational enrollment at the majority of educational institutions in the United States. The results reveal several new aspects of college enrollment in the analysis of the enrollment patterns in the institutions tracked by the Clearinghouse. Specifically, the results show: A lower bound estimate of 60% of graduates attending postsecondary educational institutions is reasonable. A better estimate will be obtained when data from the University of Texas at Austin and the University of North Texas can be included in the results. A lower bound estimate of 10% of students graduating or completing a course of study at a post-secondary educational institution is reasonable. Again, a better estimate will be obtained when data from the University of Texas at Austin and the University of North Texas can be included in the results. The analysis of post-secondary educational pursuits is very timedependent. Several years are necessary to obtain estimates of what percentage of district graduates will ever enroll in these institutions. Four or more years are necessary before graduation rates from post-secondary institutions can be successfully estimated. Introduction In the DISD decided to revamp its previous method of tracking graduates and begin using data from the National Student Clearinghouse based in Herndon, VA. The Clearinghouse has cooperative agreements with the majority of four-year and two-year colleges and universities, private and public, as well as a number of specialized schools that offer one-semester to fouryear courses of study. This decision to use the Clearinghouse was made for several reasons: Prior methods involved attempting to contact graduates by phone. This method was always fraught with difficulties. High schools did not routinely keep accurate records of current student addresses and phone numbers. It was difficult to catch many graduates at home. The calling was labor intensive and time consuming. The Clearinghouse database is relatively accurate with the students it tracks. Although schools allowed students to opt out of sharing their enrollment records, students rarely do so. The Clearinghouse database, with important exceptions noted below, is very comprehensive. Most schools, colleges and universities provide information to the Clearinghouse. The Clearinghouse has information from over 2,800 institutions. Page 3 of 36

6 There were some differences and some problems noted with the process. Namely, The prior method not only provided information about college enrollment, but provided estimates of the number of students entering the workforce, entering the military, and opting to become homemakers and the number of students unemployed. Further, two universities important to district estimates of graduate educational pursuits, the University of Texas at Austin and the University of North Texas, do not provide data to the Clearinghouse. Also, the Dallas County Community College District did not begin providing data to the Clearinghouse until the year Since many district students attend these colleges, several estimates of college enrollment for 1998 to 2000 are inaccurate. A further problem arose when data were provided to the Clearinghouse. Middle College, and several ancillary schools and programs were not specified as campuses to the Clearinghouse. Since the Clearinghouse extracts students and reports by campus, graduates from these schools and special programs were not tracked. Regardless of the difficulties, the Clearinghouse approach provides better data on the postgraduate schooling of DISD graduates. The numbers are more comprehensive and more accurate. Methodology This report provides three ways of examining the post-graduate pursuits of DISD graduates. It examines by graduating class: The number and percentage of first time enrollments in schools, colleges and universities. The number and percentage of students currently enrolled in schools, colleges and universities. The number and percentage of students who graduated from schools, colleges and universities. The information is provided by school and for the total district. The information for the district is further broken down by the following student groups: White African-American Hispanic American-Indian Asian Low socioeconomic status Special education Limited English Proficient Talented and gifted Hispanic LEP Hispanic Never LEP Hispanic Exited LEP The district information for first-time enrollment is further examined by the length of time between graduation and first-time enrollment. The Clearinghouse provides information by calendar year. For example, in its statistics for 1998 is includes students who graduated in the spring, summer, and December of This report Page 4 of 36

7 rearranges the data provided by the Clearinghouse into graduating class arranged by school year. The Clearinghouse extracted the data for this report in December of While some of the students from the class of 2005 would enroll in schools, colleges and universities immediately, many have not yet done so. As discussed below, similar results affected the values from earlier classes as well. All results from recent classes have to be used with caution. Results Numbers of Students by Class Table 1 presents the official number of graduates for each class from 1998 to The official number is the number from the TEA AEIS report. (There is no number for the class of 2005 yet because the number of graduates is always reported with at one-year lag. The official 2005 data will not be available until August 2006.) The table also presents the number of records sent to the Clearinghouse. This number is slightly smaller than the official number of graduates because of problems with student identification. In the last column, the table gives the number of records returned by the Clearinghouse. As noted in the introduction, this number is smaller than the number of records sent because of the schools not included in the request. The difference in the number of records sent and the number returned ranges between 30 to 110, approximately, across the years. (Note: Because of their size, the tables appear at the end of the text for this report. Because of their length, the tables with school results appear in Appendices following the report.) The data in Table 1 show a steady increase in the number of graduates from 1998 to 2004 from approximately 5,600 to 7,000 with a slight decrease in The number of records sent from 1998 to 2004 totaled 17 fewer than the official enrollment. The number of records returned totaled 434 fewer than the number sent. This reflects the number of students from the schools not included in the original contract. Students Who Ever Attended Schools, Colleges, and Universities The number and percentage of students who ever attended schools, colleges and universities are given in Table 2. The values in Table 2 need a considerable amount of explanation because of the factors other than post-secondary enrollment. These factors affect the numbers reported. The figures for 1998 to 2000 are too low because of two factors. First, as noted, students entering a DCCCD campus from 1998 to 2000 were not included in the computations for 1998 to 2000 graduating classes. Students from the graduating classes of 1998 to 2000 who entered a DCCCD campus after the Clearinghouse began collecting their data are included in the values presented in Table 2. Again, as noted, students attending the University of Texas at Austin or the University of North Texas are not included in any graduating class. Therefore, all of the values in Table 2 must be considered as lower bounds to the true post-secondary entrance rates. Further, there is no acceptable way to procure that information for these classes. The values for these classes will always be too low. When the information for Middle College and other missing campuses is collected in , the values in Table 2 will change in ways that cannot be predicted. Depending on the post-secondary attendance rates for these missing students, the numbers attending schools, colleges and universities will increase but the percentages may increase slightly, remain approximately the same, or decrease slightly. (The small numbers of these students, 434 over eight years guarantees that their effect will be minimal. Most likely, overall percentages will remain the same.) Page 5 of 36

8 The considerably lower rates of students attending schools, colleges and universities from the classes of 2002 to 2005 are almost certainly due to time factors. The ability to track students in a given class across multiple years offered new insights into postsecondary attendance patterns. The patterns in Table 2 initially presented a puzzle. It was apparent that the percentages for 2005 would be low since the students that did not immediately enroll in schools, colleges and universities would not be reflected in the numbers. The smaller percentages from 2001 to 2004, however, were a surprise. This prompted an investigation into when did students first attend school after graduating. It is reported in the next section. The net result of the investigation, however, is that the results from 2001 are the most reliable estimate of the post-secondary enrollment rate. With these considerations in mind, the results in Table 2 indicated that the post-secondary enrollment rate of 60% for the class of 2001 is the best estimate of the lower bound of the real figure. The values from the classes of 1998 to 2000 are too low because of the lack of DCCCD data. The values for 2002 to 2005 are most likely too recent. Finally, the lack of UT Austin and UNT data make this a lower bound. Examination of the student groups is best limited to the class of 2001 for the reasons just noted. white, Asian and TAG student groups show the highest post-secondary enrollment with percentages above 70%. African-American, Hispanic-Never-LEP, and Hispanic-Exited LEP have percentages around 60%. LEP students have rates near 40% and Special Education students have rates near 25%. Again, it must be emphasized that these figures will change as a function of time and that they are lower bounds. Table A in Appendix A presents the initial enrollment percentages by year by high school. Again note that Middle College was not included in these data. Also note that students attending UT Austin and UNT are not included in these values. The Effects Of Time On Post-Secondary Enrollment Rates To determine the effects of time on the rates of enrollment in post-secondary education institutions, the dates of initial enrollment were categorized into 6-month periods following graduation. Table 3 presents the values by time intervals. The numbers and percentages in do not add up to the total for ever-enrolled students presented in Table 2 because starting enrollment date information from the Clearinghouse is missing for some students. The percentages do present an interesting pattern, however. Of the 60% of the class of 2001 who ever enrolled, 57% could be classified by time interval. Of the 57%, only 37% enroll in the first 6 months. In months 7 to 12, another 5% enroll, months 13 to 18 another 6%, months 19 to 24 another 1%, and more than 24 months, another 8%. Clearly, the percent enrolling in schools, colleges and universities is a time-dependent value. Even two years after graduation, a significant percentage of students are still enrolling in an institution for the first time. One consequence of this is that many of the numbers and percentages computed and presented in this report will change in subsequent reports. As graduates decide to enroll in a postsecondary institution and the results are obtained annually, the results will have to be adjusted. No doubt, at some future point results will stabilize sufficiently where major adjustments are not needed. However, the data in Table 3 suggest that within several years of graduation, results will remain unstable. Because of the late entry of DCCCD data into the Clearinghouse system, estimates of when results stabilize will have to await examination of the data from 2001 onwards. Students Currently Attending Schools, Colleges, and Universities The number and percent of students who were attending post-secondary educational institutions at the time the Clearinghouse extracted the data (December 2005) are presented in Table 4. These data show a clear progression with the students most recently graduated, the class of Page 6 of 36

9 2005, having the largest percentage of students enrolled and the smallest percentage currently enrolled for the class of Again, this illustrates the fact that, each year, the values in this report will change. Every graduating class still has a significant proportion of students currently enrolled. By student group, the highest percentages of students currently enrolled are between 40 and 50 percent for the white, African-American, Asian, and TAG groups. The lowest percentages are below 20% for the special education, and LEP groups. Table B in Appendix B presents the current enrollment percentages by year by high school. Again, note that Middle College was not included in these data. Also note that students attending UT Austin and UNT are not included in these values. Students Graduated or Completing Studies at Schools, Colleges, and Universities The number and percent of students who graduated from or completed studies at a postsecondary educational institution are presented in Table 5. This is another variable that is time dependent. The percentage of graduates is highest for the class of 1998 at 10% and falls through 2001 to 5%. Classes later than this include mostly data from students at schools with a course of study less than 4 years. Again the value of 10% for students in 1998 presents a lower bound for the post-secondary graduation rate. Students who went to UT Austin and UNT would not be included. Also, students who entered the DCCCD and completed a course of study in are not included in the totals. Also, as noted, graduation rates are time dependent so more accurate estimates of graduation rate will be obtained in the next two years. The temptation to proclaim the graduation rate of 10% as too low must be resisted. There are no reliable data available nationally on what percent of urban, economically disadvantaged students attend or graduate from post-secondary educational institutions. Further, post-secondary institutions rarely publish data on their graduation rates by student subgroup. Clearly, these data are time dependent and a database needs to be established before values can be attached to this rate. By student group, in 1998, the highest graduation rates are between 18 and 27 percent for the white, Asian, and TAG groups. The lowest graduation rates are below 7 percent for the special education and LEP groups. Table C in Appendix C presents the number and percentages graduated from a post-secondary institution by year by high school. Again note that Middle College was not included in these data. Also note that students attending UT Austin and UNT are not included in these values. Summary The data from the Clearinghouse illustrate the fluid nature of attempting to estimate postsecondary educational pursuits of district graduates. Here enrollment in and completion of these pursuits is time-dependent and dependent mostly on the inclination of the student. Some start early, some later. Some finish, some are still attending, some never will finish. This noted, however, several points stand out: A lower bound estimate of 60% of graduates attending post-secondary educational institutions is reasonable. A better estimate will be obtained when data from the University of Texas at Austin and the University of North Texas can be included in the results. A lower bound estimate of 10% of students graduating or completing a course of study at a post-secondary educational institution is reasonable. Again, a better estimate will be Page 7 of 36

10 obtained when data from the University of Texas at Austin and the University of North Texas can be included in the results. The analysis of post-secondary educational pursuits is very time-dependent. Several years are necessary to obtain estimates of what percentage of district graduates will ever enroll in these institutions. Four or more years are necessary before graduation rates from post-secondary institutions can be successfully estimated. Page 8 of 36

11 Table 1 Numbers of Graduates, Records Sent to the Clearinghouse, and Number of Records Returned Year Official Number of Graduates Number of Graduates Sent Number of Records Returned Total Page 9 of 36

12 Table 2 The Number and Percent of Students Who Ever Attended Schools, Colleges and Universities Graduating Class Group # % # % # % # % # % # % # % # % White African American Hispanic American Indian Asian Low - SES SPED LEP TAG Hispanic - LEP Hispanic Never - LEP Hispanic - Exited - LEP Total Page 10 of 36

13 Table 3 Initial Post-Secondary Enrollment of All Students By Number of Months Enrollment Follows Graduation Months 1 to 6 7 to to to 24 More than 24 After Graduation Year # % # % # % # % # % Page 11 of 36

14 Table 4 The Number and Percent of Students Currently Attending Schools, Colleges and Universities* Graduating Class Group # % # % # % # % # % # % # % # % White African American Hispanic American Indian Asian Low - SES SPED LEP TAG Hispanic - LEP Hispanic Never - LEP Hispanic - Exited - LEP Total *As of December 2005 Page 12 of 36

15 Table 5 The Number and Percent of Students Who Graduated From or Completed Studies at Schools, Colleges and Universities Graduating Class Group # % # % # % # % # % # % # % # % White African American Hispanic American Indian Asian Low - SES SPED LEP TAG Hispanic - LEP Hispanic Never - LEP Hispanic - Exited - LEP Total Page 13 of 36

16 APPENDIX A Page 14 of 36

17 Table A Number and Percent of Students Enrolling in a Post-Secondary Educational Institution By High School TEA School Class Number % 1 BRYAN ADAMS W. H. ADAMSON A. MACEO SMITH MOISES E. MOLINA HILLCREST Page 15 of 36

18 Table A Number and Percent of Students Enrolling in a Post-Secondary Educational Institution By High School TEA School Class Number % 7 THOMAS JEFFERSON KIMBALL LINCOLN L. G. PINKSTON FRANKLIN D. ROOSEVELT Page 16 of 36

19 Table A Number and Percent of Students Enrolling in a Post-Secondary Educational Institution By High School TEA School Class Number % 14 W. W. SAMUELL SEAGOVILLE HIGH SCHOOL SOUTH OAK CLIFF H. GRADY SPRUCE SUNSET Page 17 of 36

20 Table A Number and Percent of Students Enrolling in a Post-Secondary Educational Institution By High School TEA School Class Number % 21 W. T. WHITE WOODROW WILSON DAVID W. CARTER NORTH DALLAS SKYLINE CENTER Page 18 of 36

21 Table A Number and Percent of Students Enrolling in a Post-Secondary Educational Institution By High School TEA School Class Number % 26 TOWNVIEW SCI/ENG MAGNET JAMES MADISON TOWNVIEW BUSINESS WASHINGTON ARTS MAGNET TOWNVIEW HEALTH PROF Page 19 of 36

22 Table A Number and Percent of Students Enrolling in a Post-Secondary Educational Institution By High School TEA School Class Number % 37 TOWNVIEW EDUC & SOC SVCS TOWNVIEW PUBLIC SERV GOV TOWNVIEW TALENTED & GIFT Page 20 of 36

23 APPENDIX B Page 21 of 36

24 Table B Number and Percent of Students Enrolled in a Post-Secondary Educational Institution As of December 2005 By High School TEA School Class Number % 1 BRYAN ADAMS W. H. ADAMSON A. MACEO SMITH MOISES E. MOLINA HILLCREST Page 22 of 36

25 Table B Number and Percent of Students Enrolled in a Post-Secondary Educational Institution As of December 2005 By High School TEA School Class Number % 7 THOMAS JEFFERSON KIMBALL LINCOLN L. G. PINKSTON FRANKLIN D. ROOSEVELT Page 23 of 36

26 Table B Number and Percent of Students Enrolled in a Post-Secondary Educational Institution As of December 2005 By High School TEA School Class Number % 14 W. W. SAMUELL SEAGOVILLE HIGH SCHOOL SOUTH OAK CLIFF H. GRADY SPRUCE SUNSET Page 24 of 36

27 Table B Number and Percent of Students Enrolled in a Post-Secondary Educational Institution As of December 2005 By High School TEA School Class Number % 21 W. T. WHITE WOODROW WILSON DAVID W. CARTER NORTH DALLAS SKYLINE CENTER Page 25 of 36

28 Table B Number and Percent of Students Enrolled in a Post-Secondary Educational Institution As of December 2005 By High School TEA School Class Number % 26 TOWNVIEW SCI/ENG MAGNET JAMES MADISON TOWNVIEW BUSINESS WASHINGTON ARTS MAGNET TOWNVIEW HEALTH PROF Page 26 of 36

29 Table B Number and Percent of Students Enrolled in a Post-Secondary Educational Institution As of December 2005 By High School TEA School Class Number % 37 TOWNVIEW EDUC & SOC SVCS TOWNVIEW PUBLIC SERV GOV TOWNVIEW TALENTED & GIFT Page 27 of 36

30 APPENDIX C Page 28 of 36

31 Table C Number and Percent of Students Graduated or Completed Study at a Post-Secondary Educational Institution By High School TEA School Class Number % 1 BRYAN ADAMS W. H. ADAMSON A. MACEO SMITH MOISES E. MOLINA HILLCREST Page 29 of 36

32 Table C Number and Percent of Students Graduated or Completed Study at a Post-Secondary Educational Institution By High School TEA School Class Number % 7 THOMAS JEFFERSON KIMBALL LINCOLN L. G. PINKSTON FRANKLIN D. ROOSEVELT Page 30 of 36

33 Table C Number and Percent of Students Graduated or Completed Study at a Post-Secondary Educational Institution By High School TEA School Class Number % 14 W. W. SAMUELL SEAGOVILLE HIGH SCHOOL SOUTH OAK CLIFF H. GRADY SPRUCE SUNSET Page 31 of 36

34 Table C Number and Percent of Students Graduated or Completed Study at a Post-Secondary Educational Institution By High School TEA School Class Number % 21 W. T. WHITE WOODROW WILSON DAVID W. CARTER NORTH DALLAS SKYLINE CENTER Page 32 of 36

35 Table C Number and Percent of Students Graduated or Completed Study at a Post-Secondary Educational Institution By High School TEA School Class Number % 26 TOWNVIEW SCI/ENG MAGNET JAMES MADISON TOWNVIEW BUSINESS WASHINGTON ARTS MAGNET TOWNVIEW HEALTH PROF Page 33 of 36

36 Table C Number and Percent of Students Graduated or Completed Study at a Post-Secondary Educational Institution By High School TEA School Class Number % 37 TOWNVIEW EDUC & SOC SVCS TOWNVIEW PUBLIC SERV GOV TOWNVIEW TALENTED & GIFT Page 34 of 36