A resource manual for dropout prevention and recovery program [June 1989]

A
Resource Manual
For
Dropout Prevention
And
Recovery Program
Georgia Department of Education Werner Rogers
. State Superintendent of Schools

Program Development and Student Support Division General and Vocational Instruction Office of Instructional Programs Georgia Department of Education 1766 Twin Towers East Atlanta, 'Georgia 30334-5040
June 1989
Federal law prohibits discrimination on the basis of race, color or national origin (Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964); sex (Title IX of the Educational Amendments of 1972 and Title II of the Vocational Education Amendments of 1976);br handicap (Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973') in educational programs or activities receiving federal financial assistance.
Employees. students and the general public are hereby notified that the Georgia Department of Education does not discriminate in any educational programs or activities or'in employment policies.
The following individuals have been designated as the employees responsible for coordinating the department's effort to implement this nondiscriminatory policy.
Title II - Audrey Reid, Vocational Equity Coordinator Title"VI- Josephine Martin, ASSOciate State Superintendent of Schools, Coordinator Title IX - Ishmael Childs, Coordinator Section 504 - Wesley Boyd, Coordinator
Inquiries concerning ,the applipation of Title II, Title IX or Section 504 to the policies and practices of the department may be addressed to the persons listed above at the Georgia Department of Education, Twin Towers East, Atlanta 30334; to the 'Regional Office for Civil Rtghts, Atlanta 30323; or to the Director, Office for Civil Rights, Education Departme[lt, Washingto~, D.C. 20201.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

QUICK REFERENCE GUIDE

v

ACKNOWLEDGMENT S

vii

PREFACE .....' . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . i x

INTRODUCTION

1

CHAPTER ONE: DROPOUT PREVENTION: STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM

Identifying the Problem The Extent of the Problem The Nature of the Problem Consequences of the Problem

1-1 1-6 1-13 1-25

CHAPTER TWO: ELEMENTS OF SUCCESSFUL DROPOUT PREVENTION AND RECOVERY PROGRAMS

Characteristics of Effective Schools

2-1

The Comprehensive Approach

2-7

The Program Planning Process

2-10

Program Types: A Problem of Category

2-15

Academic Programs

;

2-35

Comprehensive Competencies Program

2-42

Educational Clinics Inc

2-43

Exodus

2-44

Middle College High School

2-45

New Horizons

2-46

Peninsula Academies

2-47

Pregnancy and Teen Parent Programs

2-48

The Children's Aid Society/Hunter College

Pregnancy Prevention Program

2-55

New Futures School

2-56

Urban Middle School's Adolescent Pregnancy

Prevention Program

2-57

Substance Abuse Programs

2-58

Cambridge and Somerville Program for

Alcoholism Rehabilitation

2-68

Palmer Drug Abuse Program

2-69

School Intervention Plan

2-70

Preschool and Early Childhood Programs

2-71

Beethoven Pro j ect .......................... 2-7 7

Early Prevention of School Failure

2-78

Lee County Preschool Reading Program

2-79

Ysleta Pre-Kinder Center Program

2-80

Parent and Family Programs

2-81

Comer Process

','

2-90

Family Support Center

2-91

Model School Adjustment Program

2-92

Parent Training Program

2-93

Success in School Through Home

Intervention

2-94

i

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Multifaceted Programs

ALL-STAR Program

Atlanta Partnership of Education

& Business, Inc

Boston Compact

0

Communities in Schools

The Door

Project COFFEE

70001 Training and Employment Institute

Summer Training and Education Program

Tenneco Partnerships in Education

2-95 2-105
2-106 2-107 2-108 2-109 2-110 2-111 2-112 2-113

CHAPTER THREE: STATEMENT OF THE DROPOUT PROBLEM IN GEORGIA

State Response to the Problem

Model Georgia Programs

Coordinated Vocational Academic Education

Dropout Prevention/Reduction Using School-

Based Action Plans

Early Intervention Program

MACAD SUPER Program

Monte Sano Program

'.' . . . . . . . . . . ..

Optional Program with Training

Parenting Program

~

PASS--Partnership and Student Success

SPIRIT

Student Mentoring

Systematic Intervention in Language

Development. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..

Teens In Community Service (TICS)

3-2 3-5 3-6
3-8 3-12 3-14 3-17 3-18 3-20 3-22 3-24 3-26
3-29 3-31

CHAPTER FOUR: IN-SCHOOL SUSPENSION PROGRAMS

Suspension

. 4-1

Elements of Successful Programs

. 4-8

Steps in Establishing In-School

Suspension Programs

. 4-13

Model Programs

. 4-19

Alternative Learning Center

. 4-20

In-School Suspension and Saturday

School Program

. 4-21

Positive Alternatives to

Student Suspension

. 4-22

Student Referral Centers ................... 4-23

Statement of the .Problem in Georgia

. 4-24

Model Georgia Programs

. 4-31

Hamilton Alternative School

. 4-32

In-School Suspension Center

. 4-34

In-School Suspension Program

. 4-36

ISS Center Rockdale Alternative

School

..................

4-38 4-40

ii

TABLE OF CONTENTS

CHAPTER FIVE: SCHOOL CLIMATE PROGRAMS

Elements of Successful Programs

5-2

The Process of Improving School Climate

5-4

Effective School Climate Techniques

5-7

Model Programs

5-10

Kate Sullivan Elementary School

5-11

School Climate Improvement Process

5-12

Statement of the Problem in Georgia

5-13

Model Georgia Programs

5-15

School Climate Improvement Program

5-16

School Climate Program

5-18

CHAPTER SIX: DISCIPLINE

Truancy

6-1

Di sc i p1i ne

6-4

Alternative Schools

6-20

Model Programs

6-24

Attendance Control Center

6-25

Computerized Truant Officer

6-26

Kane County Truant Prevention Program

6-27

Services to Truants and Run-aways

6-28

Truants Alternative Program on Needs Early 6-29

Di sc i p1i nary Response Procedures

6-30

CHAPTER SEVEN: ANNOTATED DIRECTORY OF STATE-LEVEL PROGRAMS IN GEORGIA

Career Center Equity Projects

7-2

Coordinated Vocational Academic Education

7-4

Exceptional Children

7-7

In-School Suspension Program

7-8

Job Training Partnership Act.................. 7-9

Jobs For Georgia Graduates

7-12

Limited English Proficiency Program

7-16

Migrant Education Program

7-18

Office of Business/Education Partnerships

7-20

Parent Education Program

7-21

Projects to Improve Effectiveness

7-23

Remedial Education

7-25

School Climate Program

7-28

School Counseling

7-30

Schoo 1 Psychology

7-33

School Social Work in Georgia

7-34

Special Instructional Assistance Program

7-37

Special Services Unit

7-40

Student Support Teams

7-41

Teen Parent Education Progr.am

7-44

Vocational Education Program.................. 7-47

iii

TABLE OF CONTENTS

CHAPTER EIGHT: ANNOTATED DIRECTORY OF SCHOOL-LEVEL PROGRAMS IN GEORGIA

Dropout Prevention Programs: Alternative Academic Programs and Alternative Schools School-Business Partnerships Early Childhood and Elementary Programs Substance Abuse Programs Parent Involvement and Education Programs Pregnancy and Teen Parent Programs Job Training and Vocational Programs
Dropout Recovery Programs Multifaceted Programs In-School Suspension Programs School Climate Management Programs

8-5 8-20 8-25 8-35 8-40 8-47 8-54 8-68 8-72 8-76 8-89

APPENDICES

A. SUMMARY OF NATIONAL FINDINGS ON DROPOUTS .... A-3

B. SCHOOL NONCOMPLETION RATES

A-4

C. STATE BY STATE RATINGSr PERCENT OF

FRESHMAN WHO DO NOT GRADUATE WITH

THEIR CLASS

:................... .. A-5

D. FEDERAL LEGISLATION AND FUNDING

A-6

E. STUDENT'S REASONS FOR DROPPING OUT

A-7

F FACTORS WHICH CONTRIBUTE TO STUDENTS

DROPP ING OUT

A- 8

G. GEORGIA FORMULA FOR IDENTIFYING DROPOUTS

A-10

H. GEORGIA GRADUATION RATES

. A-12

1. STUDENT DISCIPLINE

A-16

J. SUGGESTED READINGS

A-55

K. INSTRUMENT FOR EVALUATING LOCAL DROPOUT PREVENTION PROGRAMS

A-77

L. INDEX OF GEORGIA PROGRAMS BY DISTRICT

A-79

REFERENCES

R-l

iv

QUICK REFERENCE GUIDE

The following chart provides a quick -reference guide to page numbers related to major topics covered in this manual. More
detailed titles and page numbers may be found in the Table of Contents and in the Index of Georgia Programs in Appendix I. Page numbers shown indicate the chapter and page within the
chapter, i.e., 3-4 represents Chapter 3, page 4.

-------------------------------------------------------------------

Topic

Page Number

-------------------------------------------------------------------

DROPOUT PREVENTION

General/National Topics

1-1, 1-6, 1-13, 1-25, 2-7, 2-10, 2-15

Georgia Topics/Programs

3-2, 3-5, 4-31, 5-13, 5-15, 7-1, 8-1

Counseling/Attitudes

2-58, 2-91, 2-105, 2-107, 2-110, 3-14, 3-26, 3-31, 7-40, 8-35

Academic/Schoolwide

2-35, 2-71, 3-8, 3-12, 3-17, 3-22, 3-24, 3-29, 3-31, 7-7, 7-16, 7-18, 7-23, 7-29, 7-36, 7-39, 7-40, 8-5, 8-25

Family/Teen Parenting

2-48, 2-81, 3-20, 7-21, 7-43, 8-40, 8-47

Social Services

2-108, 2-110, 7-30

Job Training/Assistance

2--110, 3~6, 3-18, 7-2, 7-4,
7- 9, 7-4 6, 8- 5 4

Community/Business

2-1, 2-106, 2-107, 2-110, 2-112, 2-113, 7-12, 7-20, 8-20

INSCHOOL SUSPENSION

4-1, 4-8, 4-13, 4-19, 4-24, 4-31, 7-8, 8-76

SCHOOL CLIMATE

2-1, 5-2, 5-10, 5-13, 5-15, 7-28, 8-89

DISCIPLINE CODES/STRUCTURE

6-1, 6-24, 8-76, A-25

v

vi

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
GEORGIA DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION
Peyton Williams, Jr. Associate Superintendent of
Instructional Programs William P. Johnson
Assistant Superintendent General and Vocational Education
James Conkwright Division Director Program Development and Student Support
Jerry Roseberry Unit Director
Student Support Services Mrs. Marilyn Beck
Dropout Prevention Specialist 404/656-2600
PROJECT STAFF
MGT Consultants 1033 La Posada Suite 360
Austin, Texas 78752 512/454-2893
Mr. Ed R. Allen, Jr. Project Director
Ms. Carol Borrego Dr. Robert Milne Dr. Jerry Ciesla Mr. Mike Pierce
vii

DROPOUT PREVENTION AND
RECOVERY TASK FORCE
Ms. Suzi Johnson-Herbert, Chairperson House of Representatives Mr. Lorenzo Benn House of Representatives Ms. Cheryl Carter
Washington Park Elementary School Ms. Bequi Coar
Monte Sano Demonstration School Dr. Charles Hill
Houston County Schools Mr. Pierre Howard Senate Dr. Edward Jonas
Atlanta City Schools Ms. Kate Pannell
Murray County Schools Mr. Raymond Ransom, Jr. Economic Opportunity Atlanta
Mr. Rick Stancil Governor's Children and Youth Program
Dr. Alfredo Stokes Dougherty County Schools
Dr. Charles Warnock Charlton County Schools
Mr. David Watts Governor's Office of Planning and Budget
Mr. Skip Yow Georgia School Boards Association, Inc.
vi i i

PREFACE In recent years, much attention has focused on the problems of at-risk students and dropouts. This manual has been developed to assist Georgia school systems in their efforts to address and respond to the dropout problem. It is part of an on-going effort to keep students in school and to encourage and provide additional education, training, and services for at-risk students and dropouts. The main purpose of this document is to facilitate the reduction of the Georgia dropout problem by promoting collaboration and networking between educators, school administrators, and program directors. The information presented in this manual reflects the unique needs and goals of the State of Georgia.
ix

INTRODUCTION
In 1985, the Georgia Legislature enacted the Quality Basic Education Act (QBE) , which mandated widespread educational reform in the Georgia public education system. One of the most important components of this reform legislation is the continued development, implementation, and funding of programs that specifically target the needs of at-risk students and dropouts.
The Georgia Department of Education estimates that approximately 25,000 to 30,000 students drop out of Georgia schools each year. A majority of these students lack essential basic skills--the ability to read and write well and compute simple mathematical problems. In addition, it is estimated that there are more than 700,000 adults in Georgia with less than an eighth-grade education. Five Georgia counties have illiteracy rates above 40 percent (Summerlin, 1987).
A review of the research literature on at-risk students and dropouts reveals that the dropout phenomenon is a complex and multifaceted problem that appears to develop early, has many individual and institutional causes and consequences, and is growing increasingly more acute each year (Hahn, 1987). The consequences of dropping out of school before graduation are severe and often result in individual economic disaster and a tragic waste of human potential and resources. Dropping out has been associated with increased teen pregnancy and infant mortality rates, substance abuse, high unemployment, low wages, high crime rates, higher welfare costs and less tax-revenue.
PUkPose:
The main purpose of this manual is to facilitate the reduction of the Georgia dropout problem by providing educators with the latest information available on atrisk students and dropouts, and effective programmatic solutions to the dropout problem.
Organization:
Chapter One reviews the research literature on the extent and nature of the dropout problem. It briefly describes some of the issues relating to the dropout
1

problem and summarizes the latest findings of several_ researchers and educators.
Chapter Two focuses on the elements essential to the development and implementation of successful dropout prevention and recovery programs. In addition, it describes dropout programs in operation around the nation which have proven effective in the prevention and recovery of dropouts. These programs are classified by program type so that the reader may readily locate a program related to a specific need.
Chapter Three discusses the status of dropout prevention and recovery efforts in the State of Georgia and includes descriptions of model Georgia programs. The selection of model Georgia programs was based on survey responses received from Georgia program administrators, school districts, and sponsoring entities. Most of the model programs described in this chapter were visited by project staff.
Chapter Four provides a summary of the research literature on in-school suspension programs. The chapter describes in-school suspension efforts in Georgia and includes descriptions of five model Georgia programs.
Chapter Five provides an overview of existing research on school climate improvement programs. School climate efforts in Georgia are reviewed and descriptions of two model Georgia programs are included.
Chapter Six is a general discussion about truancy, school behavior, and discipline issues. It summarizes the most recent findings of researchers and educators and provides descriptions of six existing programs.
Chapter Seven provides an annotated description of state-level dropout programs in operation in Georgia.
Chapter Eight provides an annotated description of eighty Georgia programs currently offering services to at-risk students and dropouts. The information contained in this chapter reflects survey responses from Georgia School Systems and sponsoring entities.
2

Conclusion The first and most apparent observation is that students drop out of school for neither simple nor easily identified reasons. Researchers agree that no two students leave school for the exact same reason or under the exact same circumstances. Secondly, the most crucial elements of the success of a dropout program are the quality and commitment of the program staff. Successful dropout prevention and recovery programs must meet the diverse needs of at-risk students and must be administered by a dedicated and capable staff. American educators, consequently, face a two-fold task: the identification and the implementation of succes'sful programs. This task is made more difficult by the lack of centralized information on programs providing educational opportunities, training, and services to atrisk students and dropouts. Obviously, improved communication and collaboration among researchers, educators, school administrators, and program directors are critical to the future of our youth.
3

en
-... !.c
:~ ~_~I'c00a
_0 -"U.-..
~:":U:T~c~
a =.. ~ e-r ~O
:I

CHAPTER ONE
DROPOUT PREVENTION: A STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM
Each year the number of students who leave school before graduation increases. It is estimated that 25 percent of all students nationwide, approximately one million students per year, drop out of school. A majority of these students are from urban areas or from low socioeconomic or minority backgrounds. Parents, educators, policymake~s, and the public in general have expressed serious concern over the increasing numbers of students leaving school before graduation as well as the severe individual and societal problems associated with dropping out. This increased concern over the large number of dropouts and the multi-dimensional problems facing them is evidenced by the growing number of reports, studies, and research articles about dropouts, and the increasing number of state and local initiatives being established to deal with this issue. According to one noted researcher, "more research has appeared on the problem of dropouts in the last two years than in perhaps the previous fifteen" (Rumberger, 1987).
It is clear from the existing literature that the dropout phenomenon is a very complex and multifaceted problem with a variety of causes and possible solutions. It appears that the problem develops early, has many causes and consequences, and grows increasingly more severe with each successive year (Hahn, 1987). Moreover, it is a problem which has many interrelated individual and institutional aspects that make the development and implementation of effective solutions challenging.
IDENTIFYING THE PROBLEM
A basic understanding of the magnitude and the nature of the dropout problem, and of the many factors and issues associated with this problem, is the first step in the development and implementation of effective programmatic solutions. A review of the research literature reveals that there are several difficulties which educators and researchers must overcome in order to develop effective solutions to the dropout problem. Foremost among these difficulties are:
o the lack of a uniform definition of a dropout among schools and school
1-1

districts, public and private agencies, and federal, state, and local governments;
o the lack of accurate and reliable data on the numbers of dropouts, the causes and consequences of dropping out; and,
o the lack of information on effective dropout approaches, techniques, and programs.

One of the most serious difficulties educators must overcome is the lack of a uniform definition of a dropout. There is a consensus among researchers and educators (DePauw, 1987; Morrow, 1987; Williams, 1986), that the lack of a standardized definition of a dropout:

o

allows reporting, collection, and

methodological procedures and practices

to vary widely among school systems and

public agencies;

o makes it difficult to interpret and compare dropout information and rates which are based on different methodological techniques;

o makes it extremely difficult to ascertain why students leave school;

o makes it difficult to monitor and evaluate the effectiveness of existing programs; and,

o

has kept many parents, educators,

administrators, and lawmakers from

understanding the nature, scope, and

dimensions of the dropout problem.

In School Dropouts: Survey of Local Programs, the United States General Accounting Office (GAO), reports that state and local dropout definitions and data collection practices vary widely. As a result, "there is no single reliable measure of the national dropout rate" and only informed estimates on the number and characteristics of at-risk students on the national level. The GAO further states that at the individual school and local school district level, reliable data are almost non-existent.

1-2

Doss and Sailor (1987) in "Counting Dropouts, It's Enough To Make You Want To Quit Too!", state that the main difficulty in applying any definition of a dropout is "making the definition specific enough to allow the determination of which students are dropouts and which are not." According to Doss and Sailor, the three major issues that must be considered in any definition of a dropout are "whom to count, when to count, and what to
count."

In a related study, "Toward a Definition of School Dropout," Patricia A. Williams (1986) states that the establishment of a standard definition of a dropout would provide a more detailed description.of the population under study and provide a measure which could be used to justify dropout prevention programs and to evaluate their results. According to Williams, a standard dropout definition would identify the unit of information to be measured by providing a useful and practical description of the dropout population and the school baseline population. Williams states that such a definition/description should specify:

o student grade levels;

o student ages;

o an accounting period for calculating the dropout rate;

o a time period for unexplained absences;

o acceptable alternative educational settings; and,

o

special inclusions and exclusions.

George Morrow (1987) in "Standardized Practice in the Analysis of School Dropouts," states that the number of students labeled as dropouts is directly determined by the definition of a dropout. According to Morrow, dropout rates vary and are incompatible due to differences in:

o

the target population;

o

the method used to compute the dropout

rate; and,

o the collection and coding of primary data.

1-3

Morrow stresses that the standardization of a dropout definition and dropout rates requires the following three" practices be consistent:
o the definition of a dropout;
o the time frame; and,
o the definition of the overall school baseline population.
In addition, Morrow (1987) states that
the creative educational programming needed for the improved education of today's youth cannot thrive until common, meaningful measures of success are accepted and input variables are controlled. A standardized definition and computation procedure provides the measure of success and is the first step in encouraging local districts to confront the problem.
A review of the research literature reveals that there is very little information available on effective dropout approaches, techniques, and programs. Stephen Hamilton (1986) in "Raising Standards and Reducing Dropout Rates," states that the research on dropout prevention programs yields a "surprisingly small number of reports" and that only a few of these reports "offer both program descriptions and data indicating program effectiveness."
Andrew Hahn (1987) in "Reaching Out to America's Dropouts: What to Do?" states that dropout data and program information are measures of program effectiveness. He stresses that "the story-behind-the story in effective dropout programs lies in implementation, casework, evaluation, and long-.term follow-up activities." Hahn's review of dropout studles indicates that these essential program practices are only occasionally addressed in the research literature.
Dale Mann (1986a) in "Dropout Prevention--Getting Serious About Programs That Work," states that, in general, "conclusive evidence documenting significant program effects is even more rare than careful evaluation in the [dropout] field." In a related article, Mann states it is clear that most districts are doing a lot of things but that the findings
1-4

related to these program efforts are not being adequately researched and/or analyzed.
Mann suggests that the first step in finding out what works best is the construction of a framework or taxonomy which categorizes dropout programs according to differences in outcomes. However, this is seldom done since the measurement of program differences often depends on the analysis of curriculum, "data about objectives, learner diagnosis, program content, program delivery, resources, pupil progress evaluation[s]" and information about other program components that are frequently unavailable or statistically incomparable. Mann concludes that the process of determining the effectiveness of dropout programs is seriously hindered by the fact that there is "no clear-cut, widely accepted framework for categorizing dropout programs" (Mann, 1986a, 1986b).
In "Can We Help Dropouts? Thinking About the Undoable," Mann (1986b) states that the categorizing of dropout programs is further complicated by the large number and variety of program types currently being used. Mann . reports that
a taxonomy was used recently to analyze dropout-related activities reported by a dozen U.S. public school districts ... six major headings were divided into seventy-one subcategories ... [a] content analysis of [the] programs submitted ... resulted in 360-plus entries scattered randomly over the major and minor headings.
Like Mann, Karen Green and Andrea Baker (1986) conclude in "Promising Practices for High-Risk Youth in the Northwest Region," that a set of criteria for judging the effectiveness of specific program strategies simply does not exist. They state that nearly every article and report they reviewed had "a somewhat different list of characteristics for successful intervention programs," and "only a few even attempted to organize their list into general categories." They note that
... the bottom line for judging the worth of a program or course usually includes a combination of the following: reduction in dropout rate, reduction in attendance and behavior problems, and improved achievement (as measured through credit completion, GPA, test scores, etc.) ...
1-5

Green and Baker further report that many programs simply lack the funds or the longitudinal data to evaluate their efforts systematically. According to Green and Baker, much of what is known to be effective in the prevention and recovery of dropouts is based on reports and studies which provide program descriptions and analyses of existing dropout approaches and strategies. Green and Baker state that most recommendations for dropout programs come from practitioners--program directors and their staffs, who have dedicated years to working with children who are at risk of dropping out. Green and Baker emphasize that practitioners "know what works for their students, even if their districts have not been able to conduct thorough evaluations."
Most researchers agree that the technology and personnel for gathering and processing essential [dropout] information and data are currently available (Barber and McClellan, 1987). However, this is of marginal benefit until the definition of a dropout and the methodology used for deriving dropout rates are standardized, and analyses and accurate comparisons can be made within and across school districts and state lines (Barber and McClellan, 1987). Every recent major dropout study and report has recommended that a standard dropout definition, uniform reporting and collection procedures, reliable methodological techniques, and program evaluation standards be established or adopted among schools, school districts, public and private agencies, and federal, state, and local governments.
THE EXTENT OF THE PROBLEM
A review of the research literature on dropouts reveals many varying estimates and analyses of the dropout problem. Most reports and studies (Committee on Education and Labor, 1986; Education Commission of the States, 1985b, Hahn, 1987) estimate that the national dropout rate is between 14 to 29 percent--a figure that represents approximately one million students who leave school before graduation each year. Moreover, the dropout levels in large urban school systems such as New York, Philadelphia, and Chicago are estimated at 40 to 50 percent or higher (Barber and McClellan, 1987; Education Commission of the States, 1985).
1-6

As previously stated, data on the number of dropouts vary due to inconsistencies in terms and definitions and in data collection and computing methods. The aforementioned factors account for most of the differences in the estimates of the number of dropouts and dropout rates. However, several studies have shown that the incidence of dropping out among school-aged youth also varies according to the age, sex, ethnicity, socio-economic status, language background, and geographic location of the specific individuals and/or populations being examined.
There are two basic sources of dropout information-national surveys and school district data and/or reports. National surveys provide general education progress information and data on samples of individuals (GAO, 1986). These surveys usually give a representative idea of what is happening in the nation in terms of dropouts (Committee on Education and Labor, 1986b). School district dropout information and data usually are based on local school district attendance records, and usually indicate higher estimates of the dropout problem than national surveys.
One of the most recent national reports on the dropout problem was conducted by the GAO in 1986. In School Dropouts: The Extent and the Nature of the Problem, the GAO (1986) reports that the Current Population Survey (CPS) shows that in
... October 1985, there were about 4.3 million dropouts age 16-24, of whom about 3.5 million were white, about 700,000 were black, and about 100,000 were other races. Fourteen percent of youth age 18-19 were dropouts--16 percent of young men and 12 percent of young women.
CPS data also s~ow that for the past ten years, the dropout rate for youth 16-24 has remained roughly the same--about 13-14 percent. For white youth, the dropout rate has been generally steady for the past decade, while for blacks, the dropout rate has slowly declined.
In a subsequent study, the GAO (1987) finds that the majority of dropouts are:
1-7

o white;

o between the ages of 15 and 18 years of age;

o

from low socioeconomic backgrounds; and,

o

live in urban areas.

Figure 1 Characteristics of Dropout Program Participants is a summary of the findings from the 1987 GAO study.

Although long-term dropout rates have declined and stabilized, the continuing severity of the dropout problem and disturbing trends in the incidence of dropping out have created a great deal of concern and a call for action among parents, educators, researchers, policymakers, and the public in general. Studies and reports indicate that "although a higher proportion of American youth complete high school today than 20 years ago, the absolute number of dropouts is still increasing, particularly among low income and minority youth" (Committee on Education and Labor, 1986).

Moreover, several emerging factors and trends indicate a worsening of the problem! Sherraden (1986) and the GAO (1986) cite the following:

o the percentage of 17- to 18-year olds who are not high school graduates has increased from about 24 percent in 1972 to 28 percent in 1982;

o the increased enrollment in the public schools of minority populations who have always had higher dropout rates than the white population;

o

the continued decline in high school

achievement levels since the late 1960's;

o the continuing illiteracy problem--40 percent of black and Hispanic students can be classified as functional illiterates as compared to 16 percent of white ,students;

o the steady increase in the unemployment .rate for black youth over time;

1-8

FIGURE 1. CHARACTERISTICS OF DROPOUT PROGRAM PARTICIPANTS

Race/Ethnic Origi!l
-I~-~~---- 4% Other
_-........- - - - - - - ' - ; - - Hispanic Black

Socioeconomic Status
-11-----'''''''---- 4% High
- ..._ . - - - - - - . . - - Middle

--.:llIIlIo.,-----.r-- White

----1Ir- Low

Years of Agg

Location
Over 18 Under 15 17-18 15-16

Rural Suburb Urban

Source:

United States General Accounting Office. 1987. School Dropouts: Survey of Local Programs. Washington, DC: Government Printing
Office. (GAO / HRD - 87 -1 a8) .

1-9

o an increase in the gap between black and white youth who seek employment--chronic joblessness is concentrated among poor and minority youth who have dropped out of school;
o the number of states that have recently passed legislation to raise academic course requirements for high school graduation;
o an increase in the educational requirements of work; and,
o the use of dropouts as an indicator to judge the performance of the nation's and state's school systems.
Anthony Cipollene (1986), states in Research, Program, and Policy Trends in Dropout Prevention: A National Perspective that "consistent patterns emerge from the data on dropout figures." The most significant of these patterns are:
o white students drop out at lower rates than do black or Hispanic students;
o dropout rates vary by sex--white and Hispanic males are more likely to drop out than white or Hispanic females and blacks females drop out more often than black males;
o students from low socioeconomic backgrounds have the highest dropout rates;
o dropout rates are higher in urban areas; and,
o students enrolled in vocational programs have a higher dropout rate than those students enrolled in either academic or general programs.
The GAO (1986) reports that in 1982 about 13 percent of
white youth, 17 percent of black youth, and 19 percent
of Hispanics dropped out of school before graduation. In a reJ-ated study, "Dropouts in Perspective," Michael Sherraden (1986) states that among 20 to 24 year olds,
1-10

the dropout rate for Hispanics is 40.8 percent; for blacks, 23.2 percent; and for whites, 14.6 percent.
Most reports indicate that the dropout rate for black youth has declined from roughly 25 percent in 1967 to slightly less than 20 percent in 1976. The dropout rate for black youth appears to have stabilized and has remained at approximately the national average in the last few years (Steinburg, 1984).
Studies reveal that the dropout rate for Hispanic youth has been steadily increasing from about 30 percent in 1974 to about 40 percent in 1979 (Sherraden, 1986). Some estimates place the current rate at 50 percent or slightly higher. The dropout figures for Hispanics include both English-speaking and non-English-speaking youth. Some studies suggest that dropping out is more prevalent among non-English-speaking Hispanic youth than other non-English-speaking youth. It appears that nonEnglish-speaking backgrounds are indicators of socioeconomic disadvantage and early academic failure-factors which appear to contribute significantly to the dropping out of at-risk students (Steinburg, 1984).
Recent studies show that dropout rates for ethnic and/or racial groups vary by family income levels. Many researchers indicate that income levels may be more significant than ethnic and/or racial background in predicting which students are at-risk of dropping out. One study reports that in 1977, among those families with incomes under $10,000 a year, the percentage of white 14-17 year olds not enrolled in school was nearly twice as high as the percentage for black youth (Sherraden, 1986). Other studies show that among youths aged 16 to 17 from families whose incomes are less than $10,000, the overall dropout rate for Hispanics is slightly higher than the rate among white non-Hispanics and that in fact, at four different levels of poverty among those aged 14-30, Hispanic dropout rates were two to three times higher than the rate for poor white nonHispanics (Steinburg, 1984).
Studies have also found that dropout rates vary by geographic region. Moreover, regional rates are different for various ethnic and/or racial groups. Researchers report that dropout rates for white youth are highest in the southern and western section of the United States. The highest rates for black youth are in the northeastern and northern section of the nation. Among Hispanics there is very little difference in
1-11

regional dropout rates. It appears that dropout rates for all racial and/or ethnic groups are highest in urban areas rather than in suburban or rural locations (GAO, 1986). A number of studies have examined and compared school district data and information. These studies have found that the
.. . estimates of the dropout levels in many urban school systems vary widely, but [estimates] often fall within the 40 percent to 50 percent range, considerably higher than the national average (Barber and McClellan, 1987).

This brief discussion of the dropout problem

underscores the fact that there are many varying

estimates of its extent. It is clear that there is no

single method used to count the number of dropouts or

to measure dropout rates. As stated previously, every

recent major dropout study and report has recommended

that a standard dropout definition, uniform reporting

and collection procedures, reliable methodological

techniques, and program evaluation standards be

established or adopted among schools, school districts,

public and private agencies, and federal, state, and

local governments.

.

The information presented in this section is from studies and reports conducted by different agencies, independent researchers, and organizations. Most of these reports and studies conclude that the dropout phenomenon is a very severe and widespread problem on which more accurate and reliable data and information is needed. Several of these reports suggest the need for specific information concerning:

o the magnitude of the current problem;

o trends in overall school enrollment and in the elementary school grades in particular;

o estimates as to whether the problem is likely to increase or decrease over time;

o

demographic information and the general

characteristics of the children who are

entering school systems; and,

o

the impact of changes in the school

population.

1-12

A summary of national dropout rates and general dropout information from the GAO and other sources is included in the appendices.
THE NATURE OF THE PROBLEM
The lack of accurate information and data about dropouts makes it extremely difficult to ascertain why students leave school before graduation. However, researchers concerned with at-risk students and dropouts have analyzed the dropout problem from several different perspectives. Most agree that students drop out of school before graduation as a result of a complex set of individual student, familial, peer, social, economic, and school characteristics and conditions, either in combination or in conflict with one another (GAO, 1987; McDill, Natriello, and Pallas, 1985, 1986; O'Connor, 1985; Rumberger 1981, 1987).
Figure 2 shows some of the general relationships between the factors associated with students dropping out of school before graduation (Georgia Department of Education, 1988). Researchers and educators emphasize that the causal effect of these characteristics and factors cannot be fully determined since many are interrelated and are the direct result of, or exacerbated by deeply-rooted economic, social, and institutional problems and conditions.
Trends
The GAO states that the "reasons students drop out are tied to a plethora of youth problems, some more common in minority populations." The Education Commission of the States (ECS), states in Reconnecting Youth that overall, "youth problems are increasing," and that "the traditional ways of integrating generations and ethnic groups into the mainstream are under stress." The ECS (1986) points out several trends which indicate that youth problems in the U.S. are growing:
o the number of children living in poverty is increasing--up from 16 percent in 1970 to 22 percent in 1985. Almost one-half of black children and one-thir~ of Hispanic children come from homes with incomes below the poverty level;
1-13

Background*

M::d1er - Is a Dropout -HQLow
Educational Expectations -Works

low Socb-

~

,.....

Economic Stalus

L::J

I ~ I .....
~

Frequent Moves 2 + SchoolslYear

Both Natural P-a he Not In The Home

Parents Don' Monitor In or Oul-oISchooI Adivlies Close

R.cwEIhnIel" .Ion. I. no' feclo, In dropping ou .. 111_ _ ",.ny po..,bl. p.,h. 10 dropping ou
Entry I. po..,b, , .ny polnr. bUI u.u."y ocCU,,.,., In .'uden". achocllng. In,.,.,,l1011 I. po..,b, , .ny. ".g. on .ny p.'h 10 dropping our. bu. Ih. clo..r 10 Ih clu., dropoul ....n.. Ih. mo" Inlen.I... I. Ih. r.. qulred Inl.,nnllon.

The Paths to Dropping Out**

Associated Characterlsllcs"

Intermediate C:Jnracterlstlcs'"

Direct Correlates"

Decision

1;3: L

Few or No

Economic Herdshlp

low

Success. .

Temperament or leaming Style Is Incompatible w~h Instruction
It~

- Sell-Esteem ~'--1
L

t
......,

t - Absenteeism

:i

1:.:-

t-3
gj
td
~
:exnl b:J

H

Special

Educalion

Placement

.....

High Ability

Needs Not Mel

(Boredom)

~

:-

Values Incompatible WJIh School's Values or porlCies
Failed Courses Or Grades
t
Onear Mont

- ... tow
~ Achle"em.n'

AlienaUon
-non participation In school adiv~ies

4-

-

I

Disruption

t

'.,.

Seeking

- DROPS OUT

~ ot-3
t1
~N
td td

-passive: uninllOlved

~~

Success
I Elsewhere 14
1

-

H
Z
Gl
. 0c::

-p8l1r.1 are low,

t-3

outside 01 school
or none

~~

Failure

IL

~

I

-linle or no pos~lve

oontaet w~h adu"s

!nschools

Pregnency and

I Years Behind pllQIS

l-.4-J

I~

Parenthood

7/88

~

II

SOURCE: The Georgia Department of Education. 1988.

o drug and alcohol abuse--up 60-fold since 1960;
o teenage pregnancy--up 109 percent for white females and 10 percent for nonwhite females since 1960;
o female-heads-of-households--23 percent up from 12 percent in 1970;
o teenage homicide--up 200 percent for Whites, and 16 percent for non-whites since 1950;
o teenage suicide--up 150 percent since 1950;
o teenage crime--arrests doubled from 1960 to 1980; and
o teenage unemployment--up 35 percent for non-whites, 60 percent for whites since 1961.
In Promising Practices for High-Risk Youth in the Northwest Region, Karen R. Green and Andrea Baker (1986) report that dropping out of school is a highly individualized process.
There is overwhelming agreement that no single factor is more important than any other in predicting who is likely to drop out of school ... More important, there is general consensus that dropping out is not necessarily related to intelligence; children of all levels of ability and intelligence drop out of school.
The reasons why students drop out of school before graduation are highly individualized, making it difficult to pinpoint anyone factor of a student's ultimate decision to leave school. In spite of this, researchers have identified several characteristics that have a positive correlation with dropping out.
Several studies have identified the variety of reasons students have given for leaving school before graduation. The Committee on Education and Labor (1986a) and the GAO (1986) both report that students leave school for the following reasons:
1-15

o poor grades;

o not liking school;

o marriage or marriage plans;

o pregnancy; and,

o

a preference to work instead of going to

school.

Both these reports caution that "self-reporting is affected by youths' perception of their circumstance[s]" and students' reasons may be inaccurate.

The U.S. Department of Education (1986a) reports in What Works: Research About Teaching and Learning that poor grades is the primary reason cited by students for leaving school before graduation.

Figure 3 identifies the top five reasons students give for dropping out reported by the U.S. Department of Education (1986a).

Barber and McClellan (1987), in "Looking at America's Dropouts: Who Are They?", examine the reasons students give for dropping out. According to their research, student reasons for dropping out include:

o attendance problems;

o

lack of interest in school;

o boredom;

o academic problems or poor grades;

o problems with teachers; and,

o

family problems or responsibilities.

Barber and McClellan's complete list is included in appendix E.

A comprehensive analysis of the dropout problem requires that certain assumptions are made about the underlying conditions and inter-relationships among factors. This is especially true if successful procedural and

1-16

FIGURE 3. REASONS FOR DROPPING OUT OF HIGH SCHOOL

Reasons Had poor gr'...des

1982

C;'ose ~o war:::

Did :10( :;e!: :long Wltrl ce3.c::ers

_______I

Was preg!i:ll1t

o

10

20

30

Percent citing reason for droppmg out

c::::::J Males

_

Females

40

50

SOURCE:

U.S. Department of Education. 1986. What Works: Research About Teachina and Learni~a. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.

1-17

programmatic solutions are to be developed and implemented. Appendix F includes a list of major factors and characteristics--demographic, individual, peer, economic, familial, and school-related--which researchers have associated with a student's decision to drop out of school before graduation.

The demographic factors listed in appendix F are those variables and factors that appear with recurring frequency in statistical analyses of the dropout problem. These are:

o

individuals from low socioeconomic

backgrounds;

o members of racial or ethnic minorities;

o male students;

o

individuals whose parents have low

educational or occupational levels;

o

students to whom English is a second-

language; and,

o

students in central city or urban

schools.

Students with these characteristics appear to have a higher incidence of dropping out than other students. Researchers caution that these demographic factors only provide a descriptive profile of those students most at risk of dropping out of school. These factors provide very little information as to why students with these demographic characteristics drop out.

Russell W. Rumberger (1987), in "High School Dropouts: A Review of Issues and Evidence," states that there are a "host of individual factors associated with dropping out." He states that, generally,
... dropouts have lower levels of self-esteem and less sense of control over their lives than other students. They have poor attitudes about school and low educational and occupational aspirations.

Similarly, Beck and Muia (1980) find in "A Portrait of a Tragedy: Research Findings on the Dropout," that

1-18

... dropouts nearly always display feelings of alienation (rootlessness, hopelessness, and estrangement) from their schools, homes, neighborhoods, and/or society in general.
Beck and Muia (1980) explain that these feelings are caused by the perception of having suffered great injustices or rejection due to the student's language, race, culture or religion. Moreover, the authors, believe that many students' poor academic performance may be due to learning disabilities which make math, spelling, and reading difficult. They also state that students' feelings of alienation may be compounded by their lack of success in school. Hahn, Danzberger, and Lefkowitz (1987) state in Dropouts in America: Enough is Known for Action, that feelings of low self-esteem may contribute to the incidence of early marriage, criminal behavior, and substance abuse among at-risk students and school dropouts.
The influence of friends or peers on a student's decision to drop out has not received a great deal of attention in the research literature. However, a few studies indicate that there does appear to be a correlation between peer affiliation and school completion rates. Silvia Brooks Williams, in IIA Comparative Study of Black Dropouts and Black High School Graduates in an Urban Public School System,lI states that high school graduates and dropouts both express a need to feel part of a group and to feel that they belong to the mainstream of school life. Williams found that a dichotomy exists in peer relationship between dropouts and graduates and that IIgraduates and dropouts reported no association with each other. 1I According to Williams, dropouts lack a network of peer support and appear to benefit less from "the ancillary aspects of educational exchanges including peer group relationships. II Moreover, Williams found that IIgraduates participated in school-related activities while the dropouts did not. 1I Williams concludes that
... school assume[s] a central place in the life of graduates and their peers; it [does] not for dropouts, who remain in the periphery surrounded by a peer group not wedded to success in school.
1-19

Economic Factors
According to Rumberger (1981, 1987), economic or financial factors also influence students' decisions to leave school. He estimates that approximately 20 percent of dropouts report that they left school because they want or need to help support their families. Rumberger states that male dropouts cite economic reasons--home responsibilities, good job offers, or financial difficulties more often than females. Approximately, 40 percent of Hispanic males cite economic reasons for dropping out. Rumberger cautions that it is difficult to ascertain whether the decision to work is made before the student drops out of school or whether students leave school first, and then realize the need to find a job.
Hahn, Danzberger, and Lefkowitz (1987) state that most dropouts "leave school to take entry level jobs that offer only ,limited employment potential." Moreover, they find that dropouts "rarely understand how careers are begun," and as a result, they frequently "underestimate the value of schooling and formal credentials" in the workplace. In addition, Hahn and his colleagues note that "studies show that dropouts are strongly motivated to succeed in the workplace" and "that youngsters want to work and do work when opportunities are available." They also state find that many dropouts see the military as a way to a better future. Hahn and his colleagues find that "for many dropouts, the military is the safety net of last resort." They report that approximately one-third of new recruits in the armed services have not graduated from high school. Hahn and his associates stress that dropouts do not understand and do not discover until too late that "only the better recruits find temporary or permanent careers in the military." They find that the main problem is that the motivation to work or join the military is too stronq for the schools to hold students that want or need to work.
Family Indicators
There are several family background characteristics which have been associated with the dropout problem. Beck and Muia (1980) state unequivocally that
... no matter what other variables are at work, the nuclear family is of critical import in the consideration of the dropout problem ... the dropout is the product, generally, of an inadequate family.
1-20

According to the Education Commission of the States (1985), the research literature proposes that "various indicators of disconnection, such as dropping out, . truancy, delinquency, and poor academic performance, are linked to family structure and family education support variables."
The most important family factor or indicator is socioeconomic status (SES). "Studies have found that dropout rates are higher for students from families of low socio-economic status, no matter what particular factors are used to measure that status" (Rumberger, 1987). Poverty correlates closely with school failure. Generally, poor students are three times more likely to become dropouts than students from more economically advantaged homes. Schools with higher concentrations of poor students have significantly higher dropout rates than schools with fewer poor students (CED, 1987).
The research literature indicates that students from low socioeconomic backgrounds are "disadvantaged" because they grow up in poor or minority households which have characteristics that limit children's ability to succeed in school. According to the Committee For Economic Dev~lopment (CED) , "children born into poverty often suffer from debilitating deprivations that seriously impair their ability to learn" and "slow their intellectual and social growth." Moreover, many children are raised with expectations that are very different from those that predominate in schools oriented toward middle-class values. The CED (1987) states that children from low SES backgrounds are educationally disadvantaged since they are unable and unprepared to take advantage of the educational opportunities and/or resources available to them (CED, 1987) .
In the United States, education has traditionally provided an escape from poverty for the children of the poor. Many students born into low socioeconomic families have the parental support, the positive "role models, and the determination to succeed in school" despite their backgrounds (CED, 1987). However, there are large numbers of students whose family structure has broken down and does not provide the support necessary for success in school. The Education Commission for the States (1985) estimates that
1-21

... two-thirds of the students we are concerned about drop out because they have given up on the school as a vehicle for their success. They do not believe it will work for them because it hasn't worked for them all their lives. They do not have the desire, hope, and motivation that schools tend to reward. School are for someone else ... these young men and young women see small futures for themselves.

School-Related Indicators
The most important indicators of whether a student will drop out of school before graduation are school-related characteristics and factors. These factors usually focus on either the characteristics exhibited by students in the school environment or on the institutional characteristics of schools and the educational system as a whole. Most of the research on the dropout problem has been concerned with identifying and documenting those factors which correlate school failure with the student characteristics (Wehlage and Rutter, 1987). However, several studies indicate that the interaction between the student and the school environment is the crucial relationship in determining if a student drops out of school before graduation.

Very little information is available on the institutional characteristics of schools and their impact on at-risk students and dropouts. Several researchers (McDill, Natriello, and Pallas, 1985, 1986; Rumberger, 1981; and Wehlage, 1986) have inferred certain relationships and interactions which they believe affect youth in general, and dropouts in particular. Poor academic achievement and behavioral problems are the two factors researchers most often associate with school failure and the dropping out of students. These factors are usually measured through the incidence of:

o

low or failing grades;

o

low test scores;

o

grade retention, especially a lag of one

or more years in age or grade level;

o

absenteeism;

o

truancy; and,

1-22

o

discipline problems that result in

detention or suspension of the student.

The Committee on Education and Labor (1986a) finds that
... independent of limited educational skills being overage in itself is a major predictor and it certainly is the strongest predictor for the likelihood of low-income youth dropping out.

While all the aforementioned factors and/or characteristics describe potential dropouts, they do not explain why some students may eventually choose to drop out of school before graduation and others choose to remain.

Alienation
Researchers theorize that low academic achievement, school behavioral problems, and dropping out are the result of an "accumulated sense of alienation" that arises from the interaction of school experiences and family background. It appears schools contribute to this sense of alienation by narrowly defining academic success and using this term to describe only those students at the top of their class ranking who are destined for college. Therefore, schools are inadvertently labeling the majority of the school population--dropouts and non-college bound graduates-as academic and social failures (Wehlage, 1986).

Studies suggest that the differential treatment of college bound students (special college preparatory courses, teacher attitudes and expectations, school discipline procedures and the overall focus of school priorities) damages the vulnerable self-image of at-risk students. Researchers (McDill, Natriello, and Pallas, 1985, 1986; Wehlage, 1986) have identified several institutional characteristics which appear to aggravate the potential dropout's sense of alienation and poor self-image:

o

the overcrowding of schools and

classrooms;

o poor physical facilities;

1-23

o

schools of substandard quality

-equipment

-educational materials;

o impersonal authority structure between adults and students which appears arbitrary, unfair, and ineffective;

o negative or indifferent attitudes and expectations of teachers;

o conscious or unconscious racial or ethnic prejudice and/or discrimination;

o lack of teacher autonomy which limits teachers' responses to the needs of students;

o undifferentiated curriculum which narrowly defines academic success;

o an inadequate or fragmented school support network with little or no coordination with social service agencies; and,

o badly implemented educational reform policies and procedures.

Gary Wehlage (1986) states in "At-Risk Students and the Need for High School Reform," th~t these factors create a school environment which at-risk students with poor self-esteem associate with academic frustration and failure. Wehlage theorizes that students with an accumulated sense of alienation recognize that school and society have rejected them. He asserts that students react by rejecting the school or institution through poor academic achievement, behavioral and/or discipline problems, and ultimat~ly, dropping out of school.

A review of the research literature reveals that the extent to which school-related factors contribute to a student's decision to drop out of school are not well understood by researchers, teachers, and administrators. It appears that certain interactions between student and institutional characteristics and conditions alienate individual students. It is not clear if various schoolrelated characteristics such as poor academic achievement and behavioral/discipline problems are produced by school experiences, or if these

1-24

characteristics are symptoms of underlying attitudes, behaviors, and problems brought to school by the student.
More recently, there has been a great deal of concern among educators and researchers that the current educational reform movement will further increase the number of students dropping out of school (Archer and Dresden, 1987; Hamilton, 1987; McDill, Natriello, Pallas, 1985, 1986; Mann, 1987; Rumberger, 1981, 1987; Wehlage, 1986; Wehlage and Rutter, 1987). Stephen Hamilton, a Cornell University researcher, states in "Raising Standards and Reducing Dropout Rates," that the implementation of educational reform emphasizes higher standards in schools. Hamilton asserts that higher standards will increase dropout rates if significant changes are not made in school organizational structures and in classroom practices and procedures.
In "The Cultural Context of Dropping Out," Margaret LeCompte (1987) asserts that the American
... educational system has not changed to bring it into congruity with the social, economic, and philosophical reality of what has become a post-industrial, multiethnic society.
LeCompte stresses that
changes in the technology of work and characteristics of the labor market as well as widespread expansion of educational opportunities have inextricably linked educational attainment and employment.
There is a growing consensus that if we fail to understand the severity of the dropout problem and neglect to take action, the future of the nation is at risk. Many researchers and educators beli~ve that the current system will create an educational underclas~ composed of the poor and minorities--blacks and Hispanics--who are uneducated, undereducated, unprepared, and unemployable" (National Alliance of Business, 1986; Horn, 1987).
Andrew Hahn (1987), in "Reaching Out to America's Dropouts: What To Do," states that
1-25

.. the clear conclusion of [his] and most other reports is that dropping out is a problem not confined to a handful of minority students who couldn't learn. It is a systemic failure [of the American educational system which mandates widespread reform] .

CONSEQUENCES OF DROPPING OUT

There are many severe individual and societal consequences associated with dropping out. Researchers warn that lIit is unclear how much of the differential between dropouts and graduates is attributable to dropping out as opposed to other factors II since dropouts come from disadvantaged backgrounds and frequently have other problems that make the determination of causality difficult (Pallas, 1987) .

Research indicates that at-risk students and dropouts do not realize the far-reaching negative consequences of their decision to leave school before graduation. For example, the Committee on Education and Labor (1986a) finds that dropouts
... fail to see that they simultaneously set in motion an unfortunate sequence of events that will continually rob them not only of a high school diploma, but also a better job, higher wages, the ability to participate in the democratic process as informed voters, and more importantly, [the ability] to help their own children.

Researchers agree that by dropping out students are severely limiting their economic and social futur~s and giving up on themselves. Figure 4 shows some of the employment problems facing youth in general and dropouts in particular. Studies show that leaving school before graduation is only the beginning of the problems dropouts will have to face. The literature (Cippilone, 1986; Committee on Education and Labor, 1986b; Education USA, 1986; National Alliance of Business, 1986; Orr, 1987; Pallas, 1987; Rumberger, 1987) indicates that dropouts:

o

have a low level of academic skills--

dropouts become the functional

illiterates of our society, and most lack

the basic ability to read and write well;

1-26

~
FIGURE 4. DROPOUT UNEMPLOYMENT

High School Graduate and Dropout Unemploy.nent by Race, 1982

Teenagers Employed, 1985

I-' I N -.l

Graduates Whites Blacks

Dropouts Whites Blacks

Whita

Hispanic

Black

Source: Employment and Training Report to the President, 1982. U.S. Department of Labor.

Source: The First Friday Report, April 5.
1885, Full Employment Action Council.

SOURCE:

The Education Commission of the States. 1985. Reconnecting Youth: The Next Stage of Reform Denver, CO: Education Commission of the States.

o show less cognitive growth as measured by standardized tests;
o have difficulty finding employment when they leave school and over their entire lifetimes and unemployment rates are usually twice as high as for graduates;
o earn 12 to 18 percent less that high school graduates and this disparity is growing;
o are less likely to have skilled jobs;
o are less able to learn new skills and adapt to a changing work environment based on new technologies;
o have fewer opportunities for successful employment, training, and/or additional education;
o are more likely to be on welfare rolls;
o have poorer health both physically and psychologically--total mortality, suicide, and higher admissions to state mental hospitals are higher for dropouts;
o have lower levels of political participation;
o have less social mobility; and,
o are at greater risk for involvement in criminal activities and substance abuse.
More recently, there has been a great deal of concern expressed over the societal consequences of the dropout problem. Researchers note that the social consequences of dropping out are greater today than in the past. Many studies indicate that the large number of students leaving school before graduation costs the American economy billions of dollars each year. The most serious societal consequences of dropping out cited by researchers (Cippilone, 1986; Committee on Education and Labor, 1986; Education USA, 1988; National Alliance of Business, 1986; Orr, 1987; Pallas, 1987; Rumberger, 1987) are:
o forgone national income;
o forgone tax revenue;
1-28

o increased demand for social services-welfare, medical assistance, and unemployment assistance;
o increased criminal activity and increased law enforcement costs;
o reduced political participation;
o reduced intergenerational mobility;
o poor levels of health and higher medical costs;
o the perpetuation of the cycle of poverty;
o a shortage of educated, prepared, and, motivated workers;
o increased costs faced by business and industry for remediation expenses, higher supervisory time, and poor product quality; and,
o reduced American productivity.
In addition to the individual and societal consequences listed above, the same researchers cite several trends which taken together with the increasing severity of the dropout problem, forewarn of an i~pending crisis. The most significant of these trends are that:
o the character of the schools is changing dramatically--more children are from the population considered most at-risk, i.e. minorities and the poor;
o the middle class, the gifted, the nonconforming, and the very young joining the exodus from public schools;
o academic standards are being raised in schools;
o the U.S. labor force is becoming smaller--the number of young people in the workforce will shrink by nine percent over the next 14 years;
1-29

o the demographic composition of the "labor force is changing--becoming increasingly young, poor, and minority--the groups most likely to drop out of school;
o the new jobs becoming available demand educated workers who can understand and operate high technology computer-related equipment;
o a majority of new jobs require some education or technical training beyond high school;
o the U.S. has shifted from an industrial economy to a service and information based economy;
o the U.S. continues to lose unskilled jobs to low-cost foreign labor; and,
o the U.S. faces increased competitiveness in foreign markets.
It is clear from the research literature that the dropout problem is a complex and multifaceted problem. The dropout problem affects students of all ages, racial and ethnic backgrounds and income levels. It is also apparent that no two students drop out of school for the same exact reasons. Moreover, it is obvious that the consequences of dropping. out are very severe and negatively impact the physical well-being, the mental health, and the economic future of individuals, their families, and American society in general.
1-30

m
.c. c3r
0.
'0::1
c0 -
-0 '1J-
m.c"O "an0cn
3
!:. 5.

CHAPTER TWO
ELEMENTS OF SUCCESSFUL PROGRAMS
The research literature indicates that a variety of dropout programs are being undertaken which focus on prevention, recovery and re-entry, remedial education, employment skills, and job training. Most of the information available on successful program practices is based on what program directors and staff say works, program descriptions, and analyses of existing dropout approaches and strategies (Green and Baker, 1986; Mann, 1986b). In Promising Practices for High-Risk Youth in the Northwest Region, Green and Baker state that
.. . practitioners who have dedicated years to working with children who are at risk of dropping out know what works for their students, even if their districts have not been able to conduct thorough evaluations.
This chapter briefly reviews the characteristics of effective dropout programs most often cited by researchers, educators, and practitioners. The first section reviews and discusses the research literature on effective schools. The second section briefly describes the comprehensive program approach. The third section reviews the program planning process. The last section of this chapter discusses specific types of dropout programs: academic, pregnancy and teen parent, substance abuse, early childhood and elementary, parent and family, and multifaceted programs. Descriptions of existing programs are included with each program category.
CHARACTERISTICS OF EFFECTIVE SCHOOLS
Researchers and educators usually describe successful dropout intervention efforts by listing the common characteristics and program services offered by different types of programs. In their study, Green and Baker review reports from 18 effective dropout programs and formulate a list of shared characteristics. A summary of their findings is listed below:
Staffing: Nearly every dropout prevention program requires well-qualified, experienced, caring teachers. The importance of the teacher's ability to establish rapport with individual at-risk students and to develop and maintain personal relationships is crucial.
2-1

Curriculum: The program curriculum must be relevant and meaningful for high-risk students and based on real-life experiences and goals.' Many programs emphasize personal development, preparation for work, and incorporating basic skills remediation [with] other academic work.
Methodology: Effective programs are small, with low student/teacher ratios. There is almost universal agreement that instruction should be individualized in terms of pace, ability, and content. Also, group work is included to teach appropriate group behavior and foster social bonding. Most effective programs emphasize the need for students to experience success; clear expectations and standards based on realistic (attainable) goals; immediate feedback and clear, valid criteria for evaluating performance; and consistent and appropriate rewards and sanctions.
Administrative Support: Most successful programs have the support and commitment of the district or main school.
Green and Baker also state that many of the characteristics and recommendations for effective program practices for at-risk students and dropouts are similar in detail. There are, they note, a few studies and reports that stand apart from the others due to their "specificity and comprehensiveness." The most notable of these works are summarized on the following pages.
The effective school approach emerged as a response "against the ideas that low achievement by poor children was due to certain inherent disabilities" (Hess, Wells, Prindel, Liffman, and Kaplan, 1987). This approach emphasizes the potential of schools to overcome the influence of student background characteristics and to reduce the number of students who are not successful in school (Green and Baker, 1986).
Stewart C. Purkey and Marshall J. Smith (1983), in "Effective Schools: A Review," have analyzed and studied most of the current research findings on school effectiveness. Purkey and Smith state that academically effective schools are distinguished by their culture which consists of "a structure, processes, and the
2-2

climate of values and norms that emphasize successful teaching and learning." In addition, Purkey and Smith (1983) state that
... school improvement rests on a conception of schools that links content with process to arrive at a notion of school culture. Content refers to such things as the organizational structure, roles, norms, values, and instructional techniques of a school and the information taught in the curriculum. School process refers to the nature and style of political and social relationships and to the flow of information within the school ... This mix of interconnected characteristics is unique to each school and provides each with a definite personality or climate ... The literature indicates that a student's chance for success in learning cognitive skills is heavily influenced by the climate of the school.

Purkey and Smith (1983) also identify the sustaining organizational characteristics of an effective school:

o autonomous school-site management;

o

instructional leadership;

o

staff stability;

o curriculum articulation and organization;

o school-wide staff development;

o parent involvement and support;

o

school-wide recognition of academic

success;

o maximized learning time; and,

o district support.

In addition, there are four process variables that are elements of school culture and therefore, determine the success or failure of a school as a place of learning. These are:

o

collaborative planning and collegial

relationships;

o

a sense of community;

2-3

o clear goals and commonly shared high expectations; and,

o

order and discipline.

Purkey and Smith state that "these variables are the dynamic of the school, they seem responsible for an atmosphere that leads to increased student achievement. II Moreover, they state that within this framework of organizational and structural variables, the new school climate develops over time as individuals begin to think and behave in new ways. According to Purkey and Smith (1983) this process
... suggests a participatory approach based on the notion that how a school moves toward increasing effectiveness is critical. How a school changes will determine the stability and longevity of the new culture it seeks.

Gary Wehlage, a researcher at the Wisconsin Center for Educational Research, has developed a model of effective schools based on field-study evaluations of existing programs. Wehlage (1983) states that each of the programs he reviewed was

.~.shaped by local circumstances and the perceived needs of students, within the structure authorized by the school administration ... while each program is unique, there are common characteristics that contribute to success with students.

Wehlage (Wehlage, 1983; Wehlage, Rutter, and Turnbaugh, 1987) identifies four major program characteristics of his effective program model for atrisk students and the key issues associated with each. These are:

1.

Administration and Organization

size

autonomy

2.

Teacher Culture

optimism

extended role

professional accountability

collegiality

professional rewards

2-4

3.

Student Culture

family atmosphere

cooperative learning

supportive peer culture

4.

Curriculum and Instruction

individualized

cooperative

experiential

Administration and Organization: Wehlage (1983) states that effective programs for at-risk students are relatively small in size: 25 to 60 students and two to six faculty members. According to Wehlage, small program size provides flexibility in administration and organization, allows the faculty to develop personal relationships with each student and to be more responsive to the individual needs of students.

Wehlage (1983), finds that program autonomy is just as important as program size. He reports that each of the programs he reviewed was run by a small group of teachers. Furthermore, each of these programs has established its own identity by having a unique name and having its own space and facilities. According to Wehlage, program autonomy is evident in those programs that establish and strictly enforce program standards such as program admission and dismissal criteria, curriculum, and credit arrangements. Wehlage (1983) states that program autonomy is important because
... it gives teachers a sense of program ownership. Teachers feel empowered. They have control over important factors that allow them to be effective with their students. They have the mandate to take initiative and respond to students in ways that are either not usually practiced, not considered appropriate, or not possible in the regular school program. The best programs empower teachers with both the authority and the responsibility to solve problems others have not been able to solve.

Teacher Culture: Teacher culture refers to the set of
shared beliefs, values, goals, and assumptions that guide the daily operation of a program. Foremost, Wehlage (1983) states teachers must be "optimistic about student success, but realistic in the judgment of
individual academic abilities." In addition, teachers must see themselves as responsible for the "whole
child," they must deal with the psychological and social

2-5

development of their students, and be concerned about the individual needs and interests of their students. Furthermore, Wehlage stresses that while teacher's academic expectations may vary, uniform expectations about behavior must be followed. Attendance, punctuality, completion of assignments, trustworthiness, and responsibility standards must be maintained. Wehlage emphasizes that teachers must be accountable for both their students' successes and their failures.
Another key characteristic of teacher culture is collegiality. Team work, joint decision-making, sharing in successes, group activities are all essential in holding programs together. According to Wehlage (1983), this means that building student success and an effective program take precedence over personal differences and prerogatives. Also, Wehlage states that teachers working with at-risk students must find the experience professionally and personally rewarding.
Student Culture: Wehlage (1983) states that students value the family atmosphere characteristic of most of these programs. Students appear to like programs where they feel comfortable with both the adults and the other students. More importantly, Wehlage (1983) finds that effective programs provide
... an accepting but not uncritical atmosphere ... criticism is offered in a constructive manner and students see this as quite different from the attitudes they encounter in regular classrooms (Wehlage, 1983).
Cooperative learning is another characteristic of effective programs. At-risk students usually have not been successful in traditional, competitive classroom situations. Cooperation is emphasized through team learning, games, tournaments, and other activities which encourage students to acknowledge their need for help and to seek peer or adult assistance.
According to Wehlage, one of the most important characteristics of an effective program is the development of a supportive peer culture. A supportive peer or student culture reinforces attitudes towards school, program rules, goals, and student achievement or progress. Furthermore, a supportive peer culture helps establish a sense of belonging for the individual student.
2-6

Curriculum and Instruction: Wehlage (1983) states that the individualized approach and the cooperative learning approach are essential in teaching at-risk students. More importantly, Wehlage has found that effective programs emphasize the experiential approach, the use of real-life problems in the curriculum. Wehlage (1983) stresses that
... the most significant insight gained from [the] study was the effectiveness of an experiential curriculum. There are both classroom and non-classroom dimensions to this learning. At the heart of an experiential curriculum component is the involvement of students in community service career internships, political/social action, community study, and outdoor adventure. These activities place the student in roles different from their customary one. These new roles provide opportunities for student involvement with people and institutions not accessible in the traditional curriculum. Such experiences are designed to be educational because teachers are involved in selecting and monitoring the activities and because teachers help students reflect on what they have experienced.
Wehlage states that "this model for at-risk high school students is designed to achieve a broad set of goals that promote the interests of both the individual and society." He further states that "programs must be attractive to youth and teachers alike" and that "an inventive curriculum can provide students with knowledge, services, and experiences that stimulate cognitive, personal, and social growth" (Wehlage, Rutter, and Turnbaugh, 1987).
THE COMPREHENSIVE APPROACH
Most researchers agree that it is difficult to establish a framework of effective dropout program approaches and strategies since there is no single approach or strategy that is effective for all students in difficulty. Researchers (Hahn, Danzberger, and Lefkowitz, 1987) note that
... it is not practical to formulate broad policy customized to the individual needs of each student, but it is critical that
2-7

initiatives in education and employment respond to the different segments of the youth population. Youngsters in trouble in school and at the workplace do not constitute an undifferentiated mass. Therefore, efforts to intervene on their behalf must respond to their distinct and varied needs.

Novak and Dougherty (1981) in "Dropout Prevention: An Overview," state that given
... the multitude of reasons why students drop out of school, the individual needs of the students, and the unique factors influencing the local environment and setting, no one program is appropriate for every school, student, and/or community. A comprehensive K12 dropout prevention strategy that provides certain basic elements [and] allows the local school community to choose and adapt the elements to meet their needs [is required].

Novak and Dougherty (1981) stress that a comprehensive approach should be multidimensional and offer a variety of services which can be tailored to meet the unique characteristics of a school and community. The program should be both preventive and therapeutic in nature. In addition, Novak and Doughtery state that a comprehensive strategy that effectively encourages and helps students stay in school should have the following characteristics:

o

center on the students;

o

serve all students;

o

offer a comprehensive scope of services;

o

coordinate resources and personnel (both

in-school and out-of-school);

o

adaptable to various school settings and

school populations; and,

o

incorporate feedback and evaluation

information into the system for

improvement.

It appears that the variety of problems affecting dropouts requires that effective interventions focus on the entire student and begin at the earliest possible age. Moreover, a comprehensive approach requires a

2-8

".. . far greater integration and coordination of the social service, child welfare and educational systems than has been attempted up to now" (Hahn, Danzberger and Lefkowitz, 1987).
Russell Rumberger (1987), a University of California researcher whose most recent works have explored dropout problems and issues, suggests that a comprehensive dropout prevention and recovery strategy should include the following elements:
o different programs designed for different types of dropouts;
o an appropriate mix of educational and noneducational services in each program;
o accurate and timely identification of students with a high risk of dropping out; and,
o programs designed for early prevention, late prevention [retention], and recovery.
In "Can We Help Dropouts? Thinking about the Undoable," Dale Mann (1987a) states that complex problems require ambitious solutions and that a comprehensive solution to the dropout problem implicates "everyone--schools, youth employment programs, civic agencies, parents, communitybased organizations, -business and industry.1I Mann describes the key elements of effective dropout programs as the four C's--cash, care, computers, and coalitions. A more thorough description of the four C's follows:
cash--basic skills teaching and learning, by itself, is not enough; but neither is putting an at-risk student to work; there needs to be a link between learning and earning; there needs to be experience with both schooling and paid employment.
care--lots of personal contact; there is no substitute for an adult's concern; programs must be small; teachers must have high expectations, use a wide range of instructional techniques, and care about student progress; students must be challenged to succeed at feasible tasks and have the opportunity to take initiative and to show responsibility.
2-9

cornputers--the use of computers is twofold-instructional management and student management; schools can use computers to support both teaching and learning through computer-assisted instruction techniques (CAr); computers can be used to identify at-risk students and track their progress.
coalitions--increasing the interaction between schools and community agencies and business organizations; we need to learn from one another--sharing good practices and resources; building professional networks; coordinating efforts among agencies and organizations.
Research indicates that the successful development and implementation of dropout and recovery programs requires local educators, administrators, and program directors to carefully evaluate the need for services in their area and to target their program responses toward meeting those needs. Gary Wehlage (1983) stresses that "the particular details of a program will necessarily be shaped by local circumstances, resources, and the talents of those involved." The research literature indicates that effective responses to the dropout problem are as highly individualized and complex as the problems that confront at-risk students and dropouts.
THE PROGRAM PLANNING PROCESS
Jose A. Cardenas (1988) in "Formulating a Plan for Dropout Prevention" states that it is necessary to organize the dropout problem into discrete areas within a school or school system's comprehensive plan. The plan provides a framework that allows school personnel to assess present conditions and to determine the extent to which the plan identifies areas requiring further action and the development of additional responses. According to Cardenas (1988), the areas of dropout prevention activity which schools must address are:
o philosophy of education;
o governance;
o scope and sequence;
o staffing;
2-10

0

curriculum;

0

co-curriculum;

0

student personnel services;

0

non-instructional needs;

0

parental involvement; and,

0

evaluation.

Peck, Law, and Mills (1987) in Dropout Prevention: What We Have Learned, offer a series of recommendations and guidelines for designing, planning, and implementing dropout prevention programs. These recommendations are:
o needs assessment and planning efforts should be broadly based;
o prevention efforts should include all levels K-12, with an emphasis on early intervention;
o organizational variables, policies and procedures affecting the school's ability to meet the needs of high-risk youth should be revised;
o schools should reassess the relevance of all their educational programs;
o a positive school climate should be a high priority in the school and in the classroom;
o programs should continually expand their networking and capacity to create linkages across groups;
o staff should be carefully selected; and,
o on-going staff development should be built into the program.

Cox, Holley, Kite, and Durham (1985) in their Study of High School Dropouts in Appalachia identify the components typically found in dropout programs, their sequence, and the functional relationship between components. These components are:

2-11

o determination of need for a program; o identification of program advocates; o establishment of a program rationale; o identification of underlying cause/need; o planning based on identified cause/need; o identification of at-risk pupils; o development of a referral system; o determination of appropriate treatments; o assurance of pupil return to regular
program; o development of outreach/recovery
activities; o provision of in-service training; o provision of school and system
orientation; o development of job placement activities; o development of follow-up activities; o development of effectiveness measures; o development of a feedback system; and, o assurance of system assimilation. Figure 5 shows the interrelationships among components of this dropout program model. Cox, Holley, Kite, and Durham (1985) note that ... while all these components are highly recommended for inclusion in a dropout reduction/remediation program, local conditions, available resources, and cause/need likely will dictate the emphasis that should be placed upon each component.
2-12

FIGURE 5

Determination ol .....d lor _ progrlll1

STOP
A. . Declllon

)

YES/~nlilicaIlOn

~/

01 provnlll

IdvOUl81

I

L-.

PI_MIRV based
00 luenll~tdd
eausa' noted

f-

Identilicolloo ol_Hili< pupils

~

De.elopmeOl of. r..."ill
Iyulm

Euabli.nmenl
01 _ program I - rational.

Idemille_lion olunderlYlRg
causaineed

f-

0'Determination appropriilli. uI.uneots

Assurance 01
f - pupil return to f regular progroml

r - - - De.elOpment
L-. oloutreachl
nco".ry acllvlUot

Prow'IIion ot in-laNKa
uamlu"

ProvlllOtI of
~-- lCIlool ana 'yllom orMotiUon

--

ProvlllOn of contmuon\,

'--

OrllnlitllOn

--

Development of job pJacement
iIICUVIlI.1

Oevelopment o' ,UecuvenaSl
measure,


DeveJopment 01 _ leeLllH>cl<
Iylltlm

f--

To approprrate previoul
component

t

Assurance uf Iyu~m ilUlml&.uon

H

STOP

'-.-

Develop.llent ollollow up
M&;Uvllu=1

I---

Dropout Program Model.

SOURCE:

Cox, J. Lamarr, Judy Ann Holley, R. Hayman Kite, and Wanda Y. Durham. (1985) . Study of High School Dropouts in Appalachia. Washington, DC: Appalachian Regional Commission.

2-13

The authors stress that several of these program components are of such critical importance that they must be emphasized regardless of constraints. These are:

0

identification of cause/need;

0

planning based on cause/need;

0

development of effectiveness measures;

and,

0

development of a feedback system.

The correct identification of the problem and the subsequent planning process provide the basis for assessing available resources and directing them toward the real problem. Effectiveness measures and a feedback system are critical components since they provide a self-correcting mechanism for the program model. The collection and analysis of program data and information indicate whether or not the program is accomplishing its goals and objectives, and identifies those aspects of the program that are not effective and need to be modified.

According to Novak and Dougherty (1981), the specific dropout prevention approach selected and developed within a school or a school district is influenced by several factors. These factors are:
o the characteristics of the students identified to receive services;
o the characteristics of the community in which the programs and activities operate;
o the setting and characteristics of the school(s) and education system;
o the federal, state, and local legal and ethical considerations;
o the scope of the approach selected;
o the types of programs and activities implemented;
o the people involved; and,
o the goals and objectives established for the program.

2-14

Novak and Dougherty state that individuals developing dropout programs must be sensitive to the broad consequences of different strategies or approaches and must be committed to the specific program and activities implemented. According to Novak and Dougherty (1981), the implementation of dropout programs involves four basic activities:
1. acceptance of a strategy;
2. identification of specific dropout program components;
3. implementation of a delivery system; and,
4. evaluation of the program.
A review of the research literature on the planning and implementation of dropout programs reveals that more coordination and organization is needed. The severity and scope of the dropout problem require
... a coordinated effort and comprehensive planning [which] encompass the entire school program. What's more, the various levels of education, each of which has traditionally operated in relative isolation, will need to work in concert to improve the entire educational pipeline (Webb, 1987).
In addition, the continued funding of dropout programs by federal, state, and local governments and private sector sponsors requires that programs, more than ever, be well-organized and accountable for the success and failure of their efforts.
PROGRAM TYPES: A PROBLEM OF CATEGORY
This section discusses several types of dropout programs and the services and techniques most commonly used by each. As stated previously, "there appears to be no clear-cut, widely accepted" framework for categorizing dropout programs (Mann, 1987a). Dale Mann suggests that dropout programs should be categorized by differences among programs that are related to differences in outcomes. This is often impractical, due to the complexity of the programs and the assortment of problems facing at-risk students and dropouts, and a
2-15

lack of program evaluation data. Green and Baker, in their review and evaluation of program descriptions, find that
... programs often [report] multiple focuses, indicating recognition in many cases of the variety of needs [of] at-risk youth ... and the importance of providing an integrated program which enables teachers to deal with the whole child (Green and Baker, 1987).
The comprehensive nature of most dropout programs makes it difficult to categorize these programs into exclusive and definitive groupings. A review of dropout program descriptions indicates that there are several very general criteria on which program types may be based. The five categories listed below are not meant to be a definitive list of dropout program types, but merely a grouping of the most identifiable differences among programs. A review of the research literature reveals that dropout programs are usually grouped according to the following categories:
1. the age or grade level of students-preschool, elementary, middle/junior, high school;
2. the level of intervention--prevention, retention, recovery/re-entry;
3. targeted populations of at-risk students-teen-age parents, substance abusers, truants, discipline problems;
4. the type of approaches or strategies used-peer counseling, parental involvement, tutoring, school/business partnerships; and,
5. the focus of program services--academic, enrichment, remediation, counseling, multifaceted.
It is important to note that there are program components and approaches which appear to be common to most program types. As a result, there is considerable ov~rlap among programs and a great similarity among the students targeted, program components and strategies, services provided, and the level of intervention.
2-16

Grade Level
Ideally, dropout program should focus on all grade levels, K-12. However, most dropout programs target secondary school students. The goals and objectives, characteristics, and services of programs vary with the grade level of the students targeted. Many of these age and grade differences closely parallel program category differences.

Preschool and Elementary Programs: Programs for prekindergarten and elementary school children contain many of the same elements and components which character~ze prevention programs. Targeted pre-kindergarten and early childhood programs emphasize the "active participation of both the children and their parents because the parents are often young, poor, and in need of help themselves" (CED, 1987). Accordingly, to the Committee for Economic Development (1987), effective preschool and early intervention programs should include the following components:

o

parenting education of both mothers and

fathers, family health care, and

nutritional education;

o

quality child-care arrangements for poor

working parents that stress social

development and school readiness;

o

quality preschool programs for all

disadvantaged three- and four-year olds;

o

prenatal and postnatal care for pregnant

teens and other high-risk mothers, and

follow-up health care and developmental

screening for their infants;

o

early and sustained intervention into the

lives of at-risk children; and

o

programs and policies that are tailored

to meet the needs of the whole child

within the context of school, family,

and community.

(Programs for young children are discussed in more detail in the Early Childhood and Elementary Program section of this chapter).

2-17

Middle and Junior High School: Middle and junior high schools represent a critical transition period for adolescents. This is the point at which many student problems become more serious and "at which dropping out is apt to occur, particularly for children who have had to repeat grades" (CEO, 1987). There are several characteristics that effective middle or junior high schools appear to have in common. It is important to note that many of these characteristics are similar to those identified in the previous section on effective programs. According to the Committee for Economic Development (1987), the five fundamentals of a effective middle school are:
1. strong leadership from the principal, which includes a sense of mission and the ability to allocate resources;
2. solid structure and curriculum, including an emphasis on extracurricular activities;
3. a positive image that helps attract students and staff;
4. the development of a strong teaching and support staff; and,
5. a system of accountability, rewards, and incentives for both students and staff.
Furthermore, the CEO (1987) recommends that "students would benefit most if their schools undertook some of the same structural changes" needed in all public schools--changes that have been "tailored toward the particular developmental needs of the young adolescent." According to the CEO (1987), these structural changes include:
... smaller schools, smaller classes, and more individualized instruction; better guidance counseling; greater parental involvement; and specialized teacher training and recruitment.
High School: At-risk high school students are the group most difficult to target with generalized program approaches. Dropout programs which target high school students need to be carefully designed to meet the particular needs and deficiencies of at-risk students and to "encourage these students to remain in school" (CEO, 1987). Effective approaches (Hahn, Danzberger, Lefkowitz, 1987) used by dropout programs for high school students include:
2-18

o

mentorship and intensive, sustained

counseling directed toward the troubled

student;

o

an array of social services, including

health care, family-planning education,

and infant care facilities for

adolescent mothers;

o

concentrated remediation using

individualized instruction and

competency-based curricula;

o

an effective school-business

collaboration that provides on-going

access to the mainstream economy;

o

improved incentives;

o

year-round schools;

o

heightened accountability for dropouts

at all levels of the public education

system--schools, school districts, and

states; and,

o

the involvement of parents and community

organizations in dropout prevention.

The Committee for Economic Development (1987) recommends that programs for at-risk high school students should emphasize the use of alternative programs and
... alternative schools within larger high school structures; improved guidance counseling; meaningful work experiences; and extracurricular activities.

Level of Intervention
Dropout programs can be categorized according to the primary focus of program goals--prevention, retention, or recovery. The level of intervention among programs varies according to the severity of the problems confronting individual students and the resources and services available in the local community. It is important to note that there is considerable overlap among the strategies and approaches used in each of these levels.

2-19

Prevention: Prevention programs usually focus on providing information on specific problems such as learning disabilities, sexual abuse, drug abuse, and adolescent pregnancy. These efforts also focus on identifying at-risk children and adolescents and on providing information and services that can forestall the development of more serious problems.

The National School Safety Center (1987) states that

... because the dropout problem affects home and community life, resolution necessarily involves parents, community members, law enforcers, juvenile justice personnel and youth-serving professionals.

The NSSC (1987) emphasizes that all these groups must work with educators to form a support network which prevents students from dropping out of school. In addition, the NSSC recommends the following strategies:

o

clear attendance policies;

o

school staff training;

o parent support;

o academic aid;

o

attendance record reviews; and,

o building student self-esteem.

In a similar study, the Florida Department of Education (1986) identifies six approaches commonly used in dropout prevention programs. These are:

o

alternative curricula approaches;

o

counseling approaches;

o

incentive approaches;

o

parent involvement approaches;

o

tutorial approaches; and,

o

work-related approaches.

There is a consensus among researchers that prevention programs should not be launched until adequate resources and services for at-risk students are in place, since

2-20

increased publicity and awareness increases the number of students seeking assistance.

Retention: Intervention/retention programs focus on "the needs of identified at-risk students" (Peck, Law and Miles, 1987). Typically, these students exhibit one or more of the characteristics common of atrisk students such as low grades, low test scores, and behavior/discipline and truancy problems. The most successful intervention/retention programs appear to be those that specifically target at-risk students and provide access to comprehensive educational, employment, health, and sOGial services (CED, 1987). Generally, retention and intervention programs utilize a wide-range of program approaches and strategies. Most retention programs focus on improving the academic performance of at-risk students and on providing access to services that facilitate the student's continuation in school.

Catherine Batsche (1984) in "Indicators of Effective Programming for School to Work Transition Skills Among Dropouts," identifies three program factors that are considered to be extremely important in retaining atrisk students. These factors are:

o the teacher[s] are seen as approachable;

o

rules are established and communicated to

students; and,

o performance standards are also clearly communicated to students.

Batsche also finds seven other factors that are important in retaining dropouts. These factors are:

o clearly defined learning outcomes;

o methods appropriate to task[s];

o the provision of counseling services;

o the content of the program meets expectations;

o

realistic job-related training is

provided;

o teachers talk to students as equals; and,

2-21

o the sequence of learning is defined and communicated to students.

The NSSC (1986) states that when dropout problems appear, schools must initiate efforts to interrupt and change unacceptable student behavior patterns. The NSSC identifies the following intervention strategies:

o counseling;

o

adopt-a-student programs;

o

alternative classes;

o public awareness programs; and,

o

interagency teams.

Recovery/Re-entry: Recovery/re-entry programs target those individuals who have already dropped out. Kathleen K. Thiel (1985) in "Reentry Program for Dropouts in Adult Settings," states that
... in general, successful programs for young adults reentering the educational system are sensitive to the stresses faced by young adults, possess a warm and flexible environment, provide a clear understanding of what teachers expect of students, offer individual counseling and curricula relevant to individual student needs, and offer students continuous constructive feedback.
Thiel also states that
... the type of programs available for out-ofschool youths range from those sponsored by community colleges and public schools to those offered by educational agencies in conjunction with employment and training programs.
According to Thiel, the types of programs most commonly available for out-of-school youth include:
o technical schools;
o outreach programs; and,
o continuing education high schools.

2-22

According to Hahn, Danzberger, and Lefkowitz (1987), recovery/reentry programs use rehabilitative strategies to respond "to the different needs, abilities and motivations of a diverse group within the overall dropout population." Typically, recovery/re-entry programs offer many of the same services provided by prevention and retention/intervention programs. Researchers (Hahn, Danzberger, and Lefkowitz, 1987) indicate that services for students no longer in school often include:

o

alternative program settings that focus

on improving motivation, skills, and

self-esteem;

o

alternative educational options such as

GED programs;

o

dropout basic skills emphasis; .

o

assessment and identification of

individual needs and appropriate follow-

up;

o

vocational training/work experience

combined with education in basic skills;

o

linkages among service providers;

o

support services--drug and alcohol

education linked with housing, health,

employment and training programs, and

services for teen-age mothers;

o

private sector involvement--subsidized

employment, internships, tutoring and

mentorship programs, provision of

facilities or funding; and,

o

training of staff and long term

evaluation of the success of the

program.

Targeted Populations
Dropout programs are often targeted toward special populations with special needs. The most common of these are:
o truancy, discipline and in-school suspension programs;

2-23

o pregnant students and teen parent programs;

o

substance abuse programs;

o migrant student programs;

o

special education programs; and,

o program for minority students--hispanics or blacks.

Targeted programs attempt to respond to the unique factors and/or characteristics of a specific group of at-risk students, and provide services which specifically address their needs. Program approaches and the types and level of services provided by each program vary according to local demand and the availability of resources and services.

(Substance Abuse and Pregnancy and Teen Parent Programs are discussed in more detail in subsequent sections of this chapter. In-school suspension and discipline are discussed in Chapters Four and Six, respectively.)

Types of Approaches or Strategies

As stated previously, there are a variety of factors which contribute to the dropout problem. Moreover, there are program approaches and strategies which appear to be effective given the specific needs of at-risk students. According to the Florida Department of Education (1986), the six most common approaches and/or strategies used by dropout programs are:

o

alternative curricula approaches;

o

counseling approaches;

o

tutorial approaches;

o

parent involvement approaches;

o

work-related approaches; and,

o

incentive approaches.

In a related study, "Identifying Approaches for Dropout Prevention," Edison-Swift and Novak (1981) identified the six general categories of dropout prevention approaches. These are:

2-24

o

alternative curricula approaches;

o

counseling/advising approaches;

o

tutorial approaches;

o

parent involvement approaches;

o

work-related approaches; and,

o

student-centered approaches.

The categories identified by the Florida Department of Education (1986) and Edison-Swift and Novak (1981) are virtually identical, except for the incentive and student-centered approaches. Each of these identified approaches or strategies focuses on a specific need of at-risk students. These approaches are briefly reviewed in the following section.

Alternative curricula approaches: Alternative curricula approaches are Ilbased upon the belief that some students need different or alternative learning environments in order to succeed in school" (Florida Department of Education, 1986). According to the Florida Department of Education (1986), the most common alternative curricula approaches are:

o

behavior modification programs;

o

environmental programs;

o

fundamental schools;

o

magnet schools;

o

schools without walls;

o

schools of visual and performing arts;

o

street academies; and,

o

theme schools.

Edison-Swift and Novak (1981) state that alternative approaches "attempt to change the academic program to meet the needs of students. II They also state that alternative curricula approaches are "often more comprehensive that other dropout prevention approaches" since these approaches attempt to adapt the total educational environment to meet the needs of at-risk

2-25

students and dropouts. (Alternative curricula approaches are discussed in more detail in the Academic Program section of this chapter.)

Counseling/Guidance/Advisement Approaches: In IIS c hool Dropouts: Survey of Local Programs,1I the GAO (1987), reports that over 90 percent of dropout programs provide counseling services. The Florida Department of Education (1986) reports that counseling programs are based on the premise that
... a healthy self concept is an essential
ingredient to a student's success in school ... such programs include approaches to enhance self awareness, to personalize the school environment, and to provide assistance in the understanding of feelings, and attitudes toward others.
Similarly, advisement approaches focus on encouraging better relationships between administrators, teachers and students.

Edison-Swift and Novak (1981) found that the way in which counseling or advisement approaches are developed and implemented depend on a number of factors. These factors include:

o the specific goals and objectives of the activities offered;

o the type of services/activities offered;

o

who provides the service--public or

private agencies;

o

the special needs of the students served;

o

the number of students served;

o

the frequency of staff-student contacts;

and,

o

the on-going and/or supplemental

activities available to students.

In addition, Edison-Swift and Novak note that counseling and advisement activities can be implemented in a variety of ways:

2-26

o

formal or informally;

o

individual or group oriented;

o academic, personal, developmental, or procedural counseling/advising; and,

o by any individual in a helping position.

The Florida Department of Education (1986) reports that counseling services provided by dropout programs often include:

o

counseling/rap room;

o

former dropouts counseling potential

dropouts;

o

parent counseling;

o

peer counseling;

o

reality therapy;

o

student hotlines; and,

o

teachers as advisors.

Tutorial Approaches: Tutorial approaches are used to provide at-risk students with assistance. According to Edison-Swift and Novak (1981), tutorial approaches can vary given:
o the persons who serve as tutors;
o the structured or unstructured nature of the efforts;
o the emphasis--social growth or academic skills; and,
o the specific group targeted--all students, low-achieving students.
In addition, Edison-Swift and Novak (1981) find that the factors which appear to affect the success of tutoring efforts are:
o the personal relationships between students and tutors;
o program objectives;

2-27

0

the selection, development, and use of

tests;

0

the training of tutors;

0

the selection of tutors;

0

the selection of the students;

0

the subject areas tutored;

0

the frequency of tutoring sessions; and,

0

the accessibility of the tutors.

The Florida Department of Education (1986) finds that the most common tutoring programs involve either:

o

computers as tutors;

o

career mentors;

o

parents as tutors;

o

peer tutors; and,

o

retired or senior citizens as tutors.

Parent Involvement Approaches: Parent involvement approaches emphasize the importance of parental participation in each student's education. Ruzicka and Edison-Swift (1981) report in "Involving Parents In Dropout Prevention," that parental involvement is necessary for a variety of reasons:
o parents of children can be at a loss as how to best help their children;
o not all school problems are precipitated by the school environment;
o parent involvement approaches recognize the importance of the family in the student's education; and,
o working with parents can positively affect student performance, behaviors, and attitudes.

2-28

Ruzicka and Edison-Swift (1981) further state that the level of parental participation can vary greatly. Parent approaches can involve the parents as volunteers or can focus on parent education programs. The most common parent involvement approaches listed by the Florida Department of Education (1986) are:

o

home visits;

o

newsletters;

o

parent education activities;

o

parent-student social activities;

o

parent-teacher contracts;

o

parent volunteers;

o

tours of schools; and

o

welcome wagon activities.

(Parent approaches are discussed in more detail in the Parent and Family Program section of this chapter) .

Work-Related Approaches: Work-related approaches focus on providing students with employment skills, training, and experience. Generally, work-related approaches are either general education/exploratory approaches or vocational approaches. General education approaches attempt to help students who have not made a career choice or are having problems in school. These approaches usually provide general and career education activities. Vocational approaches target students who have made vocational choices and usually provide both general and specific job skills.

In IIIdentifying Approaches for Dropout Prevention,1I Edison-Swift and Novak (1981), identify the following work-related approaches:
o on-the-job training;
o work-related classes;
o career awareness/exploration activities; and,
o vocational employment.

2-29

In addition, Edison-Swift and Novak (1981) state that how these approaches are implemented depends on several factors:

o the age and characteristics of the population being served;

o the identified goals of the activity or program;

o the resources available;

o

school policy; and,

o

state and federal regulations.

According to the Florida Department of Education (1986), the most common work-related approaches are:

o

career awareness/basic skills programs;

o

career awareness labs;

o

career development programs;

o

career fairs;

o

career mentors;

o

diversified cooperative training;

o

executive internships;

o

job fairs;

o

quality career education plans; and,

o

work experience.

Incentive Approaches: Incentive approaches are used to encourage student attendance and improve academic performance. The Florida Department of Education (1986) identifies four categories of incentives:

1.

attendance;

2.

achievement;

3.

positive role models and environmental

incentives; and,

4.

peer support groups.

2-30

It is important to note that the rewards provided by each of these incentive approaches can vary. Moreover, rewards can be individual and personal (greater selfesteem, self-confidence) or extrinsic and more grouporiented (monetary, discount coupons, tickets, ice cream, pizza parties) .

Student Centered Approaches: Student-centered approaches focus on the special needs of the individual student. Ruzicka, Novak, and Benisck (1981) in "Focusing on the Individual" state that these approaches are based on the premise that:

o the individual needs of students should be the primary focus of program efforts;

o

individual differences should be

respected; and,

o

individual goals for cognitive and

affective growth should be one of the

main priorities of policies and programs.

One of the most important aspects of a student-centered approach is the gathering of basic information about the student. Ruzicka, Novak, and Benisck (1981) identify the basic types of assessments that must be made in student-centered programs. These assessments are:

o

formal

-work sampling

-psychometric testing

-critical observation

o

informal -behavior observation

-school records

-questionnaires and surveys

In addition, Ruzicka, Novak, and Benisck identify five techniques and methods that help students stay in school. These are:

o open communication;

o problem solving;

o individual learning styles;

o

classroom strategies for students with

emotional problems; and,

o goal setting and individual planning.

2-31

Program Services
The National Governor's Association (1987) has identified the most common services provided by dropout programs. The NGA groups the broad range of services for at-risk students and dropouts into four general intervention areas:
1. academic imorovement including alternative schools or classes, alternative curricula and instructional techniques, and extracurricular activities;
2. attendance improvement involving direct contact and follow-up with parents, rewards for attendance, and better record-keeping, and computerized attendance systems;
3. personal and social adjustments involving individual or group counseling, family counseling, the use of mentors or buddies, and collaborative relationships with social service agencies which provide services to students; and,
4. career preparation and job training including career counseling and seminars on employability, internships with community service agencies or private employers, modified scheduling to permit after-school employment, and guaranteed employment upon completion of the program or a high school diploma or GED.

In School Dropouts: Survey of Local Programs, the GAO (1987), identifies the services most commonly offered by dropout programs included in their survey of dropout programs. These services include:

o

personal counseling;

o

basic education;

o

career counseling;

o

parental involvement or outreach;

o

assistance in obtaining social services;

o

job search assistance;

2-32

0

job skills training;

0

part-time employment placement;

0

pregnancy/parental counseling;

0

GED preparation;

0

day care; and,

0

English as a second language.

The GAO (1987) reports that two types of services or interventions are reported by a majority (90 percent) of the dropout progra~s: personal counseling and basic education. According to the GAO, "multiple services are the rule, with variation in activities required for differing needs" (GAO, 1987). It appears that most dropout programs provide services for special sub-groups such as pregnancy and parental counseling and GED preparation and assistance. The GAO notes that "not all participants in a [dropout] program need each service."

It is clear from the research literature on program approaches that services vary given the objectives of specific programs, the resources available, and the needs of the students being served. As stated previously, effective responses to the dropout problem are as highly individualized and complex as the problems that confront at-risk students and dropouts. The following section will discuss ~ix program types in greater detail and provide examples of successful programs.

Selected Program Types

This section briefly describes six types of dropout programs and provides descriptions of successful dropout prevention and recovery programs from around the nation. The types of programs presented in this section are:
1. Academic Programs;
2. Pregnancy and Teen Parent Programs;
3. Substance-Abuse Programs;
4. Preschool and Elementary Programs;

2-33

5. Parent and Family Programs; and, 6. Multifaceted and School-Business
Partnerships.
These six categories have been selected because they either:
o describe the types of programs most commonly implemented--academici
o target at-risk students with special needs such as preg~ant students and substance abusers; or,
o represent comprehensive approaches to the dropout problem--preschool, parent/family, and multifaceted programs.
It is important to note that the differences among these programs often are obscured by the comprehensive nature of many of these programs, the needs of the at-risk students targeted, the local resources available, the specific program components and strategies used, the types of services provided, and the level of intervention that characterizes each program.
The general discussion of each of these program types is followed by brief summaries of programs from across the United States. These programs were selected because they have been identified by educators, school administrators, or researchers as successful programs, or they represent new, innovative and/or creative approaches to the dropout problem. An attempt was made to include as many programs descriptions as possible. However, it was not possible to include all programs worthy of mention.
2-34

ACADEMIC PROGRAMS

Academic programs focus on at-risk students who need extra assistance with basic academic skills such as math, English and reading. Generally, these students are identified by educators as being a grade level or more behind their classmates, having one or more failing grades, low test scores, and being overage for their grade by one year or more. Hahn, Danzberger, and Lefkowitz (1987) in Dropouts in America: Enough is Known for Action state that II s tudy after study has documented the low reading, writing, math, science, speaking /listening, and reasoning abilities of at-risk students. II

Alternative programs and schools are based on the premise that II some students need a different environment, different incentives and different instruction in order to succeed in school" (Wyoming Department of Education, 1987). Alternative programs and schools have the flexibility to offer options not available in traditional remedial, business, vocational, bilingual, and special education programs. It appears that many alternative programs and schools are patterned according to the characteristics of effective schools.

Typically, academic programs are school-based and established as a school-within-a-school or as an alternative school with their own separate facilities, staff, and specialized curricula. Morely and Clay (1985) in IIAlternative Schools and Programs, Iowa: "Reaching Out to Help People" identify the following types of alternative programs and schools:

0

schools without walls;

0

learning centers;

0

continuation schools;

0

multicultural schools;

0

free schools;

0

community controlled schools; and

0

district alternative schools.

2-35

In a related article, "Effective High Schools--What are the Common Characteristics," Murphy and Hallinger (1985) identify eight factors that characterize effective schools as a whole. These are:

o

a clear sense of purpose;

o

a core set of standards within a rich

curriculum;

o

high expectations of academic achievement

and educational excellence;

o

a commitment to educate each student as

completely as possible;

o

a special reason for each student to go

to school and multiple opportunities for

student responsibility and involvement;

o a safe and orderly learning environment;

o a sense of community; and,

o

resiliency and a problem-solving

attitude by teachers and administrators.

Eileen Foley (1983) in "Alternative Schools: New Findings" states that exemplary alternative programs and schools are characterized by:

o

a well-defined student population;

o principals who are strong academic leaders;

o

diversified teacher roles which allow

for increased managerial participation;

and,

o

partial course credit, fast paced

cycles, and learning contracts to

enhance the student's opportunities to

succeed academically.

Robbins, Mills, and Clark (1981) in "Alternative Programs: Sometimes They Work, Sometimes They Don't" identify several factors which are crucial to the development of successful alternative programs. These factors are:

2-36

1. the identification of need--the targeting of services to meet specific needs;
2. a power base--concern must be translated into action;
3. an action plan--which documents staff and students needs and program implementation;
4. staff--a director who is qualified and experienced and a dedicated program staff who are thoroughly competent in areas of academic content;
5. a separate program identity apart from the regular school program;
6. a process for developing program staff and student content options which allows the program to adapt and change, and a process which turns ideas into action;
7. recognition of individual needs--the changing needs of students, teachers, and parents must be paramount, the program must respond to changes in these needs;
8. family involvement--ensures communication and strengthens support for the student; the staff must be trained in fostering such involvement;
9. creation of a positive environment--an environment like that of a healthy family must be established, students must feel secure with specific standards and rules, teachers and students must work continuously to develop caring relationships, each student and teacher must be encouraged to grow;
10. an evaluation mechanism--designed to provide healthy criticism, data for comparison, opportunity for review, and the means for measurement of program goals;
11. incorporation into the regular school program--when possible, successful elements of the program must become a part of the regular high school program.
2-37

The key to successful alternative programs and schools appears to be the small size of classes and the overall program or school. The small size of these programs provides the opportunity for a more personal relationship between student and teacher, individualized instruction, variety in curriculum and teaching strategies, and the development of a student culture which allows participants to know one another, work together, foster commitment, and gives the student a sense of belonging.
The curriculum of alternative programs focuses on improving the basic skills of students. Hahn, Danzberger, and Lefkowitz (1987) state that
... research demonstrates that a remediation approach combining traditional paper and pencil materials as well as state-of-the-art computer assisted instruction, can be very effective in improving academic performance as well as generating an overall sense of competency among at-risk students.
In a similar study, Green and Baker suggest that
... the curriculum should be relevant and meaningful for high-risk students, based on real-life experiences and goals. Many [programs] emphasize personal development; many others focus on ... incorporating basic skills remediation or other academic work as appropriate" (Green and Baker, 1987).
According to Green and Baker, the teaching strategies and techniques most widely used with at-risk students and dropouts appear to be experiential teaching, peer counseling and peer tutoring.
Experiential teaching techniques involve the use of real-life problems and solutions in the teaching of academic subjects. These techniques generally make coursework and the overall school experience more relevant to students. Frequently, both coursework and extracurricular activities are combined to focus on career, community, political, social, and outdoor learning situations and experiences.
Peer counseling and tutoring techniques appear to be successful in encouraging active class and school participation by at-risk students. Peer tutoring
2-38

motivates students, fosters leadership and a sense of competency, and encourages positive attitudes toward school goals and student progress. Counseling and tutoring responsibilities also promote social bonding among students and enhance the social development of all students involved. According to the U.S. Department of Education (1986a), the most effective tutoring techniques include the following elements:

o

a highly structured and well-planned

curricula and instructional methods;

o

instruction in basic content and skills

especially in arithmetic; and,

o

a relatively short duration of instruction

(a few weeks or months) .

(Both counseling and tutoring approaches are discussed in more detail in the Program Type section of this chapter.)

Successful alternative programs usually emphasize the extended role of teachers--working with the whole child and responding to the child's entire life. Parent and family involvement and support is a very important aspect of this strategy. Parent participation must be encouraged by teachers, counselors, and administrators. The most effective strategies involve the establishment of a positive learning environment in the home. (Parent involvement is discussed in more detail in the Parent and Family Program section of this chapter)

Researchers (Morely and Clay, 1985) emphasize that the development and implementation of alternative programs and schools requires certain steps. These are:

o assessing the need for dropout prevention;

o

focusing on the needs of students;

o

identifying the approaches for dropout

prevention;

o establishing staff roles and staffing patterns;

o utilizing resources and facilities;

o evaluating efforts;

2-39

o establishing and maintaining support within the school;

o establishing and maintaining support outside of school;

o

involving parents in dropout prevention;

and,

o

facilitating an advisory committee.

In a related article, "So You Want to Start an Alternative School: A How-To-Do-It Manual, Judith Ingram (1982) outlines the steps in the program development process. These include:

o needs assessment;

o

determination of philosophical

foundations;

o

formulation of the program;

o

finding the funds;

o site selection;

o

student recruitment;

o

staff selection;

o policies and procedures;

o

support services;

o

curriculum development;

o staff development; and,

o

student assessment and program evaluation.

The research literature indicates that academic programs are implemented in a variety of ways. It is clear that the successful planning, development, and implementation of local programs ultimately depend on the needs of students, the resources of the community, and the dedication of teachers and administrators.

2-40

Selected Academic Programs:

1. Comprehensive Competencies Program

2. Educational Clinics Incorporated

3.

Exodus, Inc

4. Middle College High School

5. New Horizons

6. Peninsula Academies

PAGE
2-42 2-43 2-44 2-45 2-46 2-47

2-41

Comprehensive Competencies Program

contact:

Remediation and Training Institute Marketing Division 1521 Sixteenth St., N.W. Washington, D C 20036 (202) 667-5319

students served:

academically at-risk students

description: The Comprehensive Competencies Program (CCP) is a competency-based learning management program which presents comprehensive academic and functional skills in individualized self-paced lessons modules. Academic competencies cover basic skills from beginning reading and math through first year college. Lesson modules cover subjects such as mathematics, language skills, writing, literature, social studies, social science, humanities, and physical science. Functional competencies cover basic, intermediate, and advanced levels of life and independent living competency domains such as consumer economics, occupational knowledge, health, government and law, and community resources. The program also provides: o mastery tests for simple diagnosis and prescription; o lesson assignments referencing print, audio-visual, and computer-assisted instruction materials; o activities for supplemental individual exercises, group participation, and experience-based learning; and, o user-friendly computerized systems which provide: 1. an information system for tracking student progress and test scoring; 2. a system for analyzing, aggregating and assessing test results, student characteristics and participation; 3. a lesson assignment system which customizes and edits assignments for each program or participant; and, 4. a program management system (CCP Brochure, 1987; Mann, 1985; TEA 1988) .

2-42

Educational Clinics Incorporated

contact:

Educational Clinics Incorporated Executive Offices 1414 Alaskan Way, Suite 515 Seattle, WA 98101 (206) 622-6980

students served:

eligible students must have been out of school for at least thirty days or must be referred by a public school official

description: The Educational Clinics Inc., (ECI) main objective is to help school dropouts reach their educational goals. An individualized approach is used to remediate student educational deficiencies. Entering students are given diagnostic tests for placement at proper skill levels. Basic skills and knowledge in reading, math, language arts, science, and social studies are emphasized. Employment skills are featured also. These skills include developing positive work attitudes and learning how to find and apply for jobs. Each clinic is located in a business district, and has an advisory council composed of representatives and leaders from local businesses, community and social service agencies and organizations. The students work at their own pace. ECI offers classes, five days a week, four hours a day, on a-year-round schedule. Upon reaching their appropriate grade level, students may return to their home school or take the GED. ECI student tuition is paid by the Washington office of the Superintendent of Public Instruction (Florida Department of Education, 1986; Orr, 1987).

2-43

Exodus, Inc.

contact:

Neil Shorthouse Exodus, Inc. 1011 West Peachtree St. N.E. Atlanta, GA 30309 (404) 873-3979

students served:

dropouts and drop out prone youth from the Atlanta Public Schools, ages 14-19.

description:

Exodus, Inc. is a community-based organization which operates four street academy programs which provide students with accredited alternative education opportunities, on-site counseling services, and on-site access to community service agencies and resources. Each of the sites provides courses accepted for regular high school credit and attempts to meet the educational, legal, housing, social service, health, recreational, cultural, counseling, and economic needs of students. The program focuses on increasing the academic and communication skills of students. Students attend one full period of English, mathematics, science, and social studies instruction. Each of these classes emphasize reading and writing within the subject area. In addition, there is a one hour reading/writing /thinking skills development class, a one half-hour motivational training class, and a one hour class period of reinforcement and application of reading/writing /thinking skills in a community setting through the oral history project. Student receive training in the uses of computers and audio-visual equipment and are enrolled in an athletic program which includes daily rotation of swimming, golf, and tennis lessons. Comprehensive Competencies Program is used for practice and reinforcement. Each student is evaluated when they enter the program and specific instruction and homework plans are developed for each student (Georgia Department of Education Program Memorandum, 1988).

2-44

Hiddle College High School

contact:

Celia Cullen Principal Middle College High School Long Island City, NY 11101

students served:

grades 7-12, a student must have a high rate of truancy, multiple academic failures, or come from a troubled home

description: Middle College High School (MCHS) is an alternative high school for high-risk
students. Student admitted have, either, a high rate of truancy, multiple academic failures, or come from a troubled homes. Admission selections are made collectively by the principal, guidance counselors, and a committee of graduating seniors. The average class has 20 students. This relatively small scale allows teachers and administrators to follow up on students. Four full-time counselors lead eleven group sessions daily with about a dozen students in each group. These sessions provide students with the opportunity to communicate with peers and caring adults and to discuss issues such as drugs, sex, and family problems. The program develops the student's sense of responsibility through self-paced and flexible schedules that permit students to accommodate personal and family needs. Because of its impressive results, the MCHS program is serving as a model for three alternative schools in New York City as well as six sites around the nation (CED, 1987; GAO, 1987; Raby, 1984).

2-45

New Horizons Program

contact:

Wilma Gajdel Program Assistant Alternative High School--North 1801 16th Street Des Moines, Iowa 50314 (515) 244-7015

students served:

Students who are socially, academically, or economically disadvantaged and students who have low academic interest.

description:

The New Horizons Program (NH) is designed to encourage students to stay in school and improve their attendance and school achievement. NH offers youth a variety of experiences and programs--both academic and vocational--which help prepare youth for work. NH is organized around the following innovative concepts: o "hands-on" experiential learning; o individualized/personalized/self
directed learning; o career development activities; o employability skill development; o life survival skill development; o specially selected empathetic and
innovative staff; o parent involvement; and, o broad-based community involvement and
support. The program also offers the following: o staff supportive services; o work experience; o Handyman/Chore Service; o Home Remodeling Project; o Community-Based Education Project; o Dropout Outreach Project; o Neighborhood Improvement Project and
linkages with the Department of Labor Summer Youth Employment Program; and,
o Iowa Conservation Corps/Summer
Conservation Project. In addition, NH has proven effective in providing alternative education services such as special advocacy counseling, work experience coordination, enrichment activities, and career related instruction (New Horizons Program Brochure, 1987).

2-46

peninsula Academies/Partnership Academies

contact:

Charles Dayton, Director Peninsula Academies Stanford Mid-Peninsula Urban Coalition 860 Escondido Road Stanford, CA 94305 (415) 723-3335

students served:

grades 10-12; students with reasonably good skills, as measured by achievement tests with severe motivational problems indicated by poor attendance, poor grades, and lower-than-average academic credits

description: The Peninsula Academies/Partnership Academies (PA/PA) are vocationally oriented school-within-a-school programs. The PA/PA program is designed to motivate potential dropouts and to provide a useful and productive high school experience which includes marketable job skills and training. The program combines a number of features which have proven effective. These include: o a school-within-a-school structure which provides students with a home base and strong support, along with high standards, challenges, and incentives to graduate; o a combination of academic and technical training which targets healthy and growing job fields with good employment prospects such as computers, electronics, baking, health, and hotel/restaurant services; and, o school/business partnerships which allow teamwork between schools and cooperating companies and provides companies with needed employees and students with work experience. Participants take a full complement of academic subjects, and graduate with a high school diploma. However, their academic work is tied to technical preparation, including both hands-on "lab" classes in school and work experience. In addition, eleventh grade students are matched with career-related mentors (GAO, 1987; Justiz and Kammen, 1986, 1987; Naylor, 1987; Peninsula Academies Brochure, 1987; Raby, 1984) .

2-47

PREGNANCY AND TEEN PARENT PROGRAMS
The United States leads all developed nations in rates of teenage pregnancy, abortion, and child-bearing (Rousseve, 1985). There are an estimated one million teenage pregnancies per year in the United States (Select Committee on Children, Youth, and Families, 1984). The growing teen pregnancy problem in the U.S. has severe consequences for the teen parents and for society, in general. The problems associated with teenage pregnancy and parenthood are well-documented.
Data and experience indicate that these young women [have] many serious and unmet needs. The effects of early motherhood tend to impede full development of the adolescent, causing many complex health risks. Most young, teens get no prenatal care in the first trimester; young mothers tend to need more comprehensive support services; the challenge of pregnancy and parenthood often overwhelm the student; families provide minimal support during an adolescent's pregnancy and parenthood; tensions within a family are exaggerated when the adolescent brings an unplanned-for baby into the space and human resources that are usually already taxed; there is little peer group support; child care is difficult to obtain; and little information is available on where and how to seek help from the community (LaRue and Miller, 1988).
Pregnancy programs attempt to prevent pregnancy among adolescents and teenagers, while school-age parent programs attempt to meet the needs of teenage parents. Traditionally, pregnancy and school-age parent programs have targeted female students, paying minimal attention to their male counterparts. Janice Earle (1987) in Female Dropouts: A New Perspective states that teen pregnancy, poverty, low-self esteem, and poor academic performance are all related'to dropping out. She notes that "some existing school practices might encourage women, in particular, to leave school by depressing their overall academic achievement." Thus, Earle suggests that pregnancy prevention programs must address a wide variety of issues.
Earle identifies the components of a model pregnancy program which targets female students. The components of this model are:
2-48

1. instructional strategies incorporating group activities and collaboration that complement cognitive development;
2. remedial instruction (if needed) in spatial reasoning before enrollment in math and science courses;
3. enrollment of female students in math, science, and other non-traditional courses;
4. an institutionalized mentor program which provides female students with female role models in non-traditional occupations;
5. a school environment which is flexible enough to accommodate individual learning and service needs;
6. extracurricular activities that highlight females as key participants;
7. adequate teacher training, to promote teacher-student interactions that are free of racial or sexual bias;
8. counseling and related activities to enhance the female student's self-esteem;
9. parent counseling/education on cultural stereotypes and female potential; and,
10. access and coordination of a range of services targeted to female at-risk students.
Most researchers agree with Earle, and stress that information and services must be available to all students (male and female) if pregnancy prevention efforts are to be effective.
Like the model program presented by Earle, most effective school-based programs attempt to link pregnancy prevention with other school efforts to improve student skills, self-esteem, and career orientation. In "Pregnancy Prevention and Dropouts," Michelle Cahill (1986) identifies three general school-based pregnancy prevention program types. All three of these program types relate pregnancy prevention efforts to different life and career options available to students. The three program types and their main components are listed below:
2-49

1. Classroom-based Programs a. life planning/decision-making skills b. family life/sex education curricula c. media programs
2. Special Programs a. peer counseling b. arts, culture, drama, teen theater c. after-school resource centers, recreation d. mentoring for male responsibility
3. School-wide Programs a. case management (target at-risk students for varying levels of services) b. health clinics/nursing services center c. staff training (teachers, guidance counselors, social workers, coaches) d. parent education/communication programs e. referral system to external social services and family planning agencies f. career emphasis programs

Cahill (1986) states that the most effective schoolbased pregnancy and school-age parent programs are those which are planned and carried out with the participation of local social, health, and youth service agencies. These programs usually are closely linked to public or private pregnancy prevention programs and appear to offer students the best combination of services. According to Cahill, there are a variety of public and private institutions and service agencies which are willing and able to assist schools in the establishment and implementation of pregnancy prevention programs. These include:

o

civic groups;

o

cultural arts groups;

o

family planning agencies;

o

family service agencies;

o

fraternities;

o

neighborhood centers;

o

public health clinics;

2-50

o

social service agencies;

o

universities; and,

o

youth service agencies.

According to the research literature (Children and Teens, 1986; Select Committee on Children, Youth, and Families, 1986) the most effective school-based pregnancy prevention programs appear to be school-based clinics. These clinics are very successful in increasing the use of birth control among sexually active teenagers and in reducing the number of births to teenage parents. The programs offered by school-based clinics attempt to persuade teenagers to postpone intercourse, to seek birth control before their first sexual encounter, and to attend birth control clinics after the initiation of intercourse.

The effectiveness of the clinic approach is due to the comprehensive nature of these programs. Most provide both general medical and contraceptive services, that are confidential and easily accessible, i.e., free or minimal costs and conveniently located (Select Committee on Children, Youth, and Families, 1986). School-based clinics encourage teenagers to be more responsible when they become sexually active. Moreover, researchers (Children and Teens Today, 1986) report that these clinics provide a wide range of information, activities, and services such as:

o

goal-setting;

o

communication with parents;

o

general medical services;

o

reproductive health care;

o

contraceptive services and counseling;

o

pregnancy testing;

o

individual and group counseling; and,

.0

sex education.

Although controversial, these clinics have proven very effective in promoting the open and responsible discussion of sexual behavior among adolescents and teenagers and in informing students of the consequences of irresponsible or unprotected sex such as unwanted

2-51

pregnancies and sexually transmitted diseases. The effectiveness of these clinics is especially significant given the threat posed by the AIDS virus.

Gloria Williamson (1985) in "Awareness is Your Best Weapon Against Sexually Transmitted Diseases," states that "it's past time for schools to get involved in the battle against sexually transmitted diseases." Williamson states that
... far too often, young victims of incest and other sexual abuse are infected and suffer in silence, unaware of the damage these diseases can wreak. And although it might be hard to accept, the fact is that, for some children, consenting sexual activity begins in the elementary grades.

Schall and Harbaugh (1987) report in "Teaching Children about AIDS" that almost half the states have established guidelines for teaching about AIDS. They suggest that district-level committees of teachers, health officials, parents and concerned others be established to deal with the development and implementation of programs at the local level. Schall and Harbaugh stress that "it's a hard topic, a complicated topic to talk about ... but it's necessary."

Programs for school-age parents concentrate on providing services for both the parent and the infant or child. The most effective programs for adolescent and teenage parents are alternative programs or schools. (Alternative programs and schools for teenage parents share many of the characteristics of effective schools discussed in Chapter One.) Typically, these programs feature small classes, separate facilities, flexible schedules, and individualized instruction. Most successful school-age parent programs also provide access to a wide-range of public and private services. These services often include:

o preventive/contraceptive information and services;

o preventive/abstinence education;

o

sex education and family planning;

o

family life education;

o maternal health and medical care;

2-52

o prenatal medical care;

o

infant/child health and medical care;

o educational and vocational assistance and training;

o

life skills development training;

o

adoption services; and,

o child care for adolescent parents.

A major component of effective school-age parent programs is parent and family involvement. As noted previously, parents and families must often provide child care and financial support to school-age parents and their infant or child. The Select Committee on Children, Youth, and Families (1984) finds that
... most adolescent mothers [are) highly dependent on [their] family, especially during the first several years after the birth ... parents most typically provide room, board, and child care.

Effective pregnancy prevention and teen parent programs attempt to provide a wide variety of services for students and their parents and families. These services are critical in providing pregnant and school-age parents with the emotional, physical, and financial support necessary to help them continue and complete their education and in providing a healthy future for their children.

2-53

Selected School-Age Parent Programs:

1.

The Children's Aid Society

/Hunter College Pregnancy

Prevention Program

2.

New Futures School

3.

Urban Middle Schools Adolescent

Pregnancy Prevention Program

PAGE
2-55 2-56 2-57

2-54

The Children's Aid Society/Hunter College Pregnancy Prevention Program

contact:

Michael Carrera The Children's Aid Society 130 E. 101 Street New York, NY 10029

students served:

teenagers between 13 and 17 years old; young parents

.
description: The Hunter College Pregnancy Prevention Program (HCPP) emphasizes personal development as prevention for teenage pregnancy. HCPP is based on the belief that low self-esteem and self-confidence are the primary causes of pregnancy among inner-city teens. The program improves minority teens' self-image by helping them formulate value systems and career goals. The HCPP program is taught over a series of 15 two-hour sessions after school and during the evenings. There are seven program components: o family life and sex education-involves role playing, films, readings, tests, and communication experiences; o career and job readiness--part-time and full-time summer jobs are provided and teens must agree to deposit a portion of each paycheck at a local bank; o self-esteem enrichment through performing arts workshops; o health and medical services--physical examinations are provided at a local hospital, adolescent health specialists conduct health and medical services one day a week; o sports and recreation--designed to foster discipline and self-control, sports are taught as an important part of a healthy life-style; o homework help program--all participants are tested and public school teachers work with them three times each week to strengthen problem areas; and, o guaranteed access to college--students who complete high school (and sometimes their parents as well) are guaranteed admission to Hunter College (CED, 1987).

2-55

New Futures School

contact:

Caroline Gaston Principal/Program Coordinator New Futures School Albuquerque Public Schools 2120 Louisiana Boulevard N.E. Albuquerque, NM 87110

students served:

pregnant teens and adolescent parents

description: New Futures School (NFS) is an alternative school program which offers comprehensive educational, health counseling, vocational, and child-care services for pregnant teens and adolescent parents. The program is supported by a non-profit, community-based organization, New Futures, Inc. The goals of the program are to assist school-aged parents make responsible, informed decisions, complete their education, have healthy babies, and become well-adjusted and self-sufficient. The NFS's in-school services are divided into two departments: the Perinatal Program, which serves the teen who enters the school during her pregnancy and .remains until the end of the semester in which her child is born, and the Young Parent's Center, which is designed to serve schoolage mothers who cannot successfully participate in a regular school program following the birth of their child. The school offers a full range of support services: child care and development classes, individual health counseling, group health instruction, nutrition counseling, personal counseling, referrals and access to social services, three onsite childcare facilities, vocational services including skill training for finding and keeping a job. In addition, NFS operates an outreach program that targets alienated youths in low-income areas. The program sponsors "Family Talks," a training series for parents of preteens that is designed to teach parents how to provide their children with sex education (CED, 1987).

2-56

Orban Middle Schools Adolescent Pregnancy prevention Program

contact:

Michele Cahill Program Director UMSAPPP School Services Division Academy for Educational Development, 608 Fifth Avenue New York, NY 10019

Inc.

students served:

middle school students

description: The Urban Middle School's Adolescent Pregnancy Program (UMSAPPP) is a national demonstration program which targets middle school students. The UMSPPP program links teen pregnancy prevention with other school efforts to improve student skills, selfesteem, career orientation, and the ability to stay in school. This Illife options" approach promotes the capacity and the motivation of young people to postpone pregnancy. Program components include: o classroom-based curricula; o special programs such as peer counseling and afterschool recreational activities; o male responsibility mentoring; o life planning/decision-making skills; o family life/sex education; o staff development/teacher training in sexuality; o health clinic/nursing services center; o service referral guides; o parent education/communication programs; o targeting services to at-risk youth; o arts, culture, drama--(teen theater) with sexual responsibility emphasis; o career emphasis programs; and, o an after school resource center. The UMSAPPP emphasizes the use of a schoolwide intervention through a case management approach which includes the use of health clinics, staff development and training, referrals to social service and family planning agencies, and parent education programs (Academy for Educational Development, 1986, National Committee for Citizens in Education, 1987).

2-57

SUBSTANCE ABUSE PROGRAMS

School-based substance-abuse programs usually focus on either preventing drug abuse through information and education programs or on providing referrals for treatment to students who use and/or abuse alcohol, drugs, and inhalants. The serious effects of drugs and alcohol and the problems associated with serious substance abuse, such as the impairment of memory, alertness, achievement, automobile accidents, and death are well known and well documented. The Select Committee on Narcotics Abuse and Control (1987) in its' 1987 Update on Drugs and Dropouts reports that

o elementary and secondary schools are confronted with a serious drug problem and that the extent of the problem is not evident because absentees and dropouts are usually not included in drug statistics;

o the dropout problem is particularly serious among minority students;

o drugs and dropping out have been associated with a variety of characteristics, behaviors and attitudes, indicating a complex relationship between the two;

o

although there is a definite correlation

between drugs and dropping out, it is not

possible to conclude a causal

relationship between the two;

o there is a reemergence of gangs, particularly in large urban communities, and their involvement in narcotics trafficking is causing serious concern;

o drug abuse by pregnant teenagers who usually dropout is also a growing concern;

o

despite clear evidence, some school

officials and parents deny there is a drug

problem;

o prevention and education are the key to reducing demand for drugs;

2-58

o greater cooperation is needed between state and local officials in responding to the drug problem; and,

o

federal funding and support for local

initiatives is critical.

Although the evidence is overwhelming that substance abuse is an increasingly serious problem in the nation's schools, the development and implementation of schoolbased substance abuse programs remains a very controversial and complex matter.

Alleri Y. Cohen (1985) in "Drug Treatment in School and Alternative School Settings" finds that there are three basic school-based approaches to the substance abuse problem:

1.

the criminalistic approach which simply

categorizes drug or alcohol abuse as

wrong;

2.

the psychiatric approach which considers

the abuser as sick and in need of self-

referral and voluntary treatment; and,

3.

the hard-line educational approach which

considers students to be naive or

ignorant about drugs.

Cohen (1985) states that the use of these approaches varies with the goals and objectives of specific programs, the views of the community, parents, and school
administrators, the severity of the local substance abuse problem, and the needs of individual students. He further states that prevention and/or early intervention programs are targeted toward abstainers and those first experimenting with psychoactive substances. Cohen (1985) stresses that the main objective of these programs

.. . is to increase the probability that abstention, mild experimentation, or very occasional use will not progress to regular or compulsive use, and that any extensive social use of alcohol [or drugs] will be delayed at least until full maturity.

There is a consensus among researchers (Cohen, 1985; Ottenburg, 1985; u.S. Department of Education, 1986b) that the most effective school-based substance abuse programs are preventive comprehensive approaches which

2-59

focus on providing information and education to young children who have not started abusing alcohol, drugs and other substances. In addition, these programs attempt to combine or "blend the concepts and activities of school, serving its educational goals, with the concepts and activities of treatment" (Ottenburg, 1985).

In What Works: Schools Without Drugs, the U.S. Department of Education (1986b) suggests that a model comprehensive drug prevention program should:

o

include all grades;

o

teach about drugs in health education

classes, and reinforce this curriculum

with appropriate materials in other

classes; and,

o

develop staff expertise in drug

prevention through training.

The U.S. Department of Education (1986b) also states that the effort to combat adolescent substance abuse must involve the entire community:

.. . parents, schools, students, law enforcement authorities, religious groups, social service agencies, and the media. They all must transmit a single consistent message-that drug use is wrong, dangerous, and will not be tolerated. This message must be reinforced through strong, consistent law enforcement and disciplinary measures.

The Select Committee on Narcotics Abuse and Control (1986) reports that effective prevention programs provide children, adolescents, and teenagers with:
1. accurate information on which they can base their decision about drugs;
2. the skills to make responsible decisions;
3. a strong self-concept and healthy selfperception so they can be more resistant to the supposed benefits of alcohol and drugs;
4. the ability to resist peer pressure;

2-60

5. community support and reinforcement; and,
6. support and referral systems for people in trouble, or at high risk for developing these problems.

The National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism (1983) in "Prevention Plus: Involving Schools, Parents, and the Community in Alcohol and Drug Education" finds that comprehensive prevention models include the following elements:
1. both alcohol and drug education programs which comprise a comprehensive youth program;
2. both prevention and early intervention programs should be included (schools need early intervention programs for referrals and to provide services);
3. the prevention approaches implemented should already be well documented; and,
4. prevention approaches should be state of the art.

Michael S. Goodstadt (1987) in "School-Based Drug Education: What is Wrong?" states that "each problem discussed concerning drug education is associated with implied or explicit remedial actions." Goodstadt offers the following recommendations:

o program objectives should be clearly specified during program development and evaluation;

o

objectives should be realistic;

o

programs should include an honest

exposition of both the costs and benefits

of drug use and misuse;

o programs should consider the range of reinforcements to which students have been or might be exposed;

o

programs should make explicit the links

between the principles and skills

acquired in the classroom and the reality

of drugs outside the classroom;

2-61

o

programs should possess a sound and

explicitly stated theoretical base for

expected student behavior; and,

o

as much attention should be given to the

implementation and evaluation of

programs, as to the development.

Researchers (Cohen, 1985; Select Committee on Narcotics Abuse and Control, 1986) agree that the most difficult obstacle in the implementation of substance abuse programs is denial of the problem by both parents and students. Substance abuse is a problem that many parents refuse to address, even though the abuse is apparent to them and to teachers, counselors, and administrators. Breaking down this defensiveness and denial system is critical to any effective drug prevention, intervention, and recovery program (Select Committee on Narcotics Abuse and Control, 1986).

Cohen (1985) states that "the family is critically important as a force for early intervention with adolescent substance abuse," and unfortunately, lias with peer systems, families resist resorting to treatment for drug abuse." He cites several reasons for resisting treatment:
o the tendency to deny the existence of the problem;
o the wish that that the problem would just go away;
o most parents want to avoid the stigma;
o some parents simply do not care; and,
o most parents are naive regarding the observable effects of substance abuse among their children (Cohen, 1985).
Since most children and adolescents will not admit they have a substance abuse problem, they will not seek treatment voluntarily. In "Drug Treatment in School and Alternative School Settings," Cohen (1985) states that
... treatment entry for most drug-abusing adolescents often follows some rather dramatic behavioral dysfunction, overdose, delinquency, drug-related offense, truancy, family-related assault, intense family conflict, emotional breakdown, or severe decrement in performance noted by concerned others.

2-62

In "An Overview of Selected Adolescent Substance Abuse
Treatment Programs,'1 Stanley Kusnetz (1985), identifies the four most common events or crisis that precipitate
treatment:

1.

family-related problems

-conflict with parents

-family crisis

-running away

2.

school-related problems

3.

legal problems

-involvement-with the criminal justice

system

4.

emotional or psychiatric problems

-the need for counseling and treatment

Researchers and practitioners caution that there are several important factors which must be considered before individual students are referred to treatment programs or facilities. Alfred S. Friedman (1985) in "Referral and Diagnosis of Adolescent Substance Abusers" states that the decision as to which type of treatment setting is most appropriate for a youngster is contingent upon several factors:

o

the severity of dependency;

o the types of drugs being used and abused;

o

the physical condition of the youth;

o the mental state of the youth;

o

the youth's lifestyle; and,

o

the adequacy of the youth's support

system i.e. home environment, family

relationships, involvement in school,

peer relationships, and employment

situation.

According to the research literature (Kusnetz, 1985; Friedman, 1985) there are a variety substance abuse treatment and intervention settings. These include:

2-63

o

hotlines;

o

the therapeutic community;

o

host treatment services;

o

daycare/day school programs;

o

out-patient (clinic) programs;

o

halfway houses;

o

hospital emergency units;

o

residential (non-hospital) programs;

o

in-patient programs; and,

o

hospital detoxification.

In IIAn Overview of Selected Adolescent Substance Abuse Treatment Programs,1I Stanley Kusnetz (1985) states that effective substance abuse programs share several characteristics. It appears that most programs
1. make extensive use of group counseling;
2. provide individual therapy or counseling;
3. to some extent, require parental or family involvement in the counseling /therapy process and attempt to provide family counseling and therapy; and,
4. attempt to understand and address the underlying multiplicity of problems of substance abusers, problems which extend beyond drug use and which often are rooted in the family.
In addition, Kusnetz (1985) states that
... if a common thread can be found that ties adolescent programs together, it is that they require active participation on the part of all involved. The youngster can not do it alone. The family can not do it alone. Similarly, the treatment program cannot make the difference alone.

2-64

Once a student has received treatment, they are often placed back in the same family, school, and social environment. Researchers stress that these students are in need of programs and services that will help them to adjust to reentry into their homes, schools, and community, and to continue their education. According to the Florida Department of Education (1986), a responsive substance abuse educational program will provide returning students with a variety of alternative
services:

o

school-based courses;

o

resource programs (school or agency

based) ;

o

self-contained programs;

o

residential treatment programs;

o

counseling;

o

academic programs;

o

health/medical services;

o

life management programs; and

o

family/community involvement.

Researchers (Gaus and Henderson, 1985) have identified several skills which help students cope once they have received treatment for their substance abuse problem. An effective aftercare program will provide students with opportunities that enable them to:

o adapt to change;

o manage leisure time;

o manage stress;

o

communicate with a wide variety of

people;

o delay gratification;

o

resolve conflicts nonviolently;

o make informed decisions;

o develop meaningful relationships with other people;

2-65

o

appreciate the rich cultural heritage

around them; and,

o use their earning power wisely.

It is clear from the research literature that the correlation between drugs and dropouts has serious implications for the nation's schools. The Select Committee on Narcotics Abuse and Control (1987) states that current program efforts "are insufficient with respect to content and because of their reliance on voluntarism." The Committee states that more funding, training, and attention must be directed toward drug education by the federal; state, and local governments if the relationship between drugs and dropping out is to be severed.

2-66

Selected Substance Abuse Programs:

1.

Cambridge and Somerville Program

for Alcoholism Rehabilitation

2.

Palmer Drug Abuse Program

3.

School Intervention Program

PAGE
2-68 2-69 2-70

2-67

Cambridge and Somerville Program for Alcoholism Rehabilitation

contract:

Ruth B. Davis, Director CASPAR Alcohol Education Program 226 Highland Avenue Somerville, MA 02143 (617) 623-2080

students served:

all students

description: The main goal of the Cambridge and Somerville Program for Alcoholism Rehabilitation (CASPAR) is to alter children's attitude and behavior toward alcohol. The program is based on the premise that alcohol use and abuse are learned behaviors, and that attitudes toward drinking are prime factors in the development of alcoholism. The program's Decision about Drinking curriculum has units for elementary grades 3-6, junior high grades 7-9, and senior high grades 10-12. Each unit has sequential modules for each grade level which repeats similar concepts in progressively greater depth. Alcohol use and decision making are covered in the first sessions. Alcoholism is covered only during the last few sessions, when children who are experiencing family problems will be more ready to accept this information. The CASPAR program curriculum emphasizes high student involvement through participatory activities such as debates, role playing, drawings, and small group discussions. Activities focus on real life issues and situations, and convey repeated and consistent messages about responsible decision making in relation to alcohol use. Trained teachers using the CASPAR model attempt to identify children who exhibit behaviors which signal distress over alcohol-related concerns. They also discuss these problems with the students and refer them to appropriate community agencies when necessary (Florida Department of Education, 1986; NlAAA, 1983).

2-68

palmer Drug Abuse Program (PDAP)

contact:

PDAP National Office 3300 North A Street Building 8, Suite 204 Midland, TX 79705 (915) 687-4311

students served:

12-16 year oldsi adolescent substance abusers

description: The Palmer Drug Abuse Program (PDAP) is a free, long-term, self-help counseling program with day-care capability. The program is voluntary, built upon client participation, and is structured around the 12 phases or steps of Alcoholics Anonymous. The main goals of the program are to motivate and encourage teenagers and to help them rebuild and replace lost confidence and self-esteem. The only requirement for entry into PDAP is the desire to live a chemical-free life. Upon entry, a counselor evaluates the client to determine if he or she is appropriate for the program, has needs that the program can not handle, and is motivated to change. The length and level of client participation is determined by the client's special needs and desires. The client is encouraged to participate in a series of weekly meetings and group counseling sessions. The program also provides client's with voluntary, individual counseling sessions. In addition, PDAP maintains voluntary parent groups which meet at the same time as the client sessions. Parents usually do not participate directly with their children, although under certain circumstances a group counseling session will be held with parents and child. Also, parents can avail themselves of individual counseling sessions. The PDAP program is continuous and ongoing, and since the program is voluntary, participants can stop treatment any time. Most clients stay involved in the program for at least one year (Kusnetz, 1985i U.S. Department of Education, 1986b).

2-69

School Intervention Plan

contact:

South Carolina Commission on Alcohol and Drug Abuse 3700 Forest Drive Columbia, SC 29201 (803) 734-9520

students served:

students in grades 7-12

description: The School Intervention Plan (ScIP) is a prevention and intervention program designed for students who are at-risk of developing behavioral problems including inappropriate use of alcohol and other drugs. Once school officials identify students who might benefit from ScIP, the students are assessed by an intervention specialist. Services are offered through the county alcohol and drug abuse program. These services include a 20-hour structured group experience, individual or family counseling or parent education group. Referrals may also be made to outside agencies or services. ScIP services are continually evaluated, updated, and modified through selfexamination and quality assurance procedures. The South Carolina Commission on Alcohol and Drug Abuse (SCCADA) which sponsors the program also evaluates the program. Program participation appears to significantly reduce the number of student suspensions, days absent, days tardy and disciplinary visits to the schools office (NIAAA, 1983; South Carolina Department of Education, 1987).

2-70

PRESCHOOL AND EARLY CHILDHOOD PROGRAMS

Preschool and early childhood programs focus on improving the academic performance of at-risk children. These programs are based on the premise that poor academic performance in school contributes to the problems of school failure, dropout, pregnancy, delinquency, substance abuse, and unemployment. The center for Research on Elementary and Middle Schools (1987) states that improving the poor academic performance of at-risk children can greatly alleviate some aspects of the serious social problems facing the
nation.

The Committee for Economic Development (1987) in Children in Need: Investment Strategies for the Educationally Disadvantaged states that
... children who are born into poverty or overly stressful family circumstances often suffer from a wide variety of physical and emotional problems that can delay normal social and intellectual development or impair their ability to function effectively in the typical public school setting ... without early intervention, such children will have difficulty taking advantage of the learning opportunities available in elementary and secondary school.

In "Evidence That Good Childhood Programs Work,I' Lawrence J. Schweinhart and David P. Weikart (1985) identify the positive effects of preschool and early childhood education according to the major outcomes for participants at each period of their lives. These effects include:

o

improved intellectual performance during

early childhood;

o

better scholastic placement and improved

scholastic achievement during the

elementary school years;

o

a lower rate of delinquency during

adolescence; and,

o

higher rates of both graduation from

high school and employment at age 19.

2-71

The U.S. Department of Education (1987) in What Works: Schools That Work--Educating the Disadvantaged states that early childhood programs are different from elementary programs since "preschoolers have needs that are different from [students] in the elementary grades. In addition, the U.S. Department of Education (1987) states that preschoolers require greater attention to their broader social development and "more play activities than are found in a regular elementary class."

According to the research literature (CED, 1987; U.S. Department of Education, 1987) parental education and involvement are essential components of early childhood programs. The U.S. Department of Education (1987) suggests that school-sponsored family education programs should:

o guide young parents in ways they can nurture their children's learning at home;

o

foster self-confidence by offering

instruction that does not talk down to

parents and involves parents as full

partners in their children's learning and

development; and,

o help to establish a strong bond between parents, children, and schools that will carryover into formal schooling.

In a related article, Schweinhart and his colleagues (1985) find that quality preschool programs are characterized by:

o

parent involvement;

o

programmatic leadership by supervisors

and directors;

o

competent and genuinely enthusiastic

teachers;

o

an articulated curriculum of proven

effectiveness;

o

a sound inservice training program; and,

o

program evaluations based on participant

feedback.

2-72

According to Schweinhart (1985) effective programs need to teach children two things: "how to be good learners and how to work with adults who are not members of their families." He states that these are the real basic skills to be imparted by early childhood education and Schweinhart further cautions that
... if children do not become learners, open to their experiences, and if they do not learn to work with adults other than family members, they will never have more than limited access to reading, writing, and arithmetic.
Schweinhart and his colleagues (1985) conclude that "good early childhood programs can benefit children, their families, and all citizens." However, he warns educators and parents that
... there is no intrinsic value in a young child leaving home for a few hours a day to join another adult and a group of children. Unless the content of a program is carefully defined, a preschool is just another place for a child to be ... quality is essential in early childhood programs if they are to have longterm benefits.
The Committee for Economic Development (1987) states that the key to successful early prevention programs is the establishment of a strong link between parent education and child development. According to the CED (1987), parent education emphasizes the importance of a home curriculum, higher educational aspirations for both children and parents, family health care, and nutritional guidance. The CED states that comprehensive preschool programs frequently include:
o quality child-care arrangements for poor working parents that stress social development and school readiness;
o prenatal and postnatal care for pregnant teens and other high-risk mothers and follow-up health care and developmental screening for their infants;
o early and sustained intervention into the lives of at-risk children; and,
2-73

o

programs and policies that are tailored

to meet the needs of the whole child

within the context of school, family,

and community (CED, 1987).

Researchers and educators have found that "the benefits of preschool dissipate if they are not reinforced by later school experiences" (U.S. Department of Education, 1987). Thus, is appears that preschool programs help poor children, but these programs can only be regarded as the first step.

The Center for Research on Elementary and Middle Schools (1987) states that "to maintain the improved performance and to continue to increase learning, elementary schools must provide instructional programs that are effective for at-risk students." According to CREMS,

... this can be done in two ways--through effective pullout programs ... that concentrate on providing compensatory education services outside the classroom to at-risk students only, or through classroom instructional programs that are effective for all students.

CREMS (1987) finds that the most effective programs are in-class elementary programs. The common characteristics of these continuous progress programs are:

o

a well-defined hierarchy of skills that

allows the testing of students at each

level;

o

careful recording of student progress

through the curriculum, with the data

used to make grouping, remediation, and

other decisions; and,

o

instruction delivered by teachers to

groups of students at the same level.

It is clear from the research literature that effective dropout prevention efforts must start as early as possible. Successful preschool programs attempt to provide services for the child, their parents, and the entire family, in order to break the link between family poverty, the scholastic failure of children, and poverty among adults. Furthermore, it is apparent that these programs must offer at-risk students and their families

2-74

continuous and comprehensive services from preschool through high school graduation and beyond if they are to overcome the severe physical, emotional and economic problems confronting many of these individuals and families.
2-75

Selected Preschool and Early Prevention Programs:

PAGE

1. Beethoven Project 2. Early Prevention of School Failure 3. Lee County Preschool Reading Program 4. Ysleta Pre-Kinder Center Program

2-77 2-78 2-79 2-80

2-76

Beethoven Project

contact:

The Ounce of Prevention Fund 188 W. Randolph Suite 2200 Chicago, IL 60601

students served:

expectant mothers, infants and toddlers

description: The Beethoven Project (BP) provides prenatal care to expectant mothers and comprehensive care for their children over a five-year period. The main goal of the program is to give these children a better start in life and a better chance for success when they enter Beethoven Elementary School. The BP project teaches young mothers basic parenting skills and emphasizes their own and their children's need for basic education. Developmental programs for infants and toddlers are available to all children born in the Beethoven Elementary School enrollment area. Head Start programs will be available to all children when they reach three years of age. There is a high level of commitment by the project's director and staff, the local high school principal, and the community advisory counsel. The BP program has demonstrated success in its ability to mobilize human resources and it works by using community members for whom intensive training has been provided as home visitors. These trained home visitors inf~rm expectant mothers of available health care, family counseling and other social services. It is hoped that this community-based approach will improve health, reduce delinquency, and curb the growing problem of teenage pregnancy in the Beethoven area (CED, 1 987) .

2-77

Early Prevention of School Failure

contact:

Luceille Werner Director Early Intervention for School Success 114 North Second Peotone, IL 60468 (312) 258-3478

students served:

children aged 4-7 years

description: Early Prevention of School Failure (EPSF) is a program designed to prevent school failure by identifying the developmental styles of preschool children. The program uses a professional team to implement the main components of the program. These include: o screening to identify high need children; o identifying the educational strengths and needs of each child; o educational planning to provide the experiences, curriculum, and effective teaching strategies that will ensure a successful learning environment for all students; and, o evaluation of student performance through yearly and longitudinal studies. Other services provided by the EISS staff and certified trainers are: o awareness presentations and/or materials; o visitations and in-service training workshops; o follow-up in-service on classroom implementation of suggested developmental curriculum; o effective teaching strategy workshops; o meetings and conferences which provide updates and suggestions for developing more effective programs; and o leadership seminars which emphasize advanced skills and consultative practices (Werner, 1986).

2-78

Lee county Preschool Reading Program

contact:

Lee County Child Care Inc. Fort Myers, Florida

students served:

disadvantaged preschool children

description:

The Lee County Preschool Reading Program (LCPRP) has two main goals. The first is to involve disadvantaged children in activities related to books. Books are read to the children several times a week at day-care centers. Puppet shows, arts and crafts, creative dramatics, and music are used by the teachers to make the stories or concepts more meaningful, exciting, and enjoyable. Moreover, these activities attempt: o to promote in preschoolers an interest
in good children's literature; o to tap into the creativity of each child; o to widen horizons through information and
ideas; o to increase confidence and self-esteem
through vicarious experiences in books; o to promote reading readiness and to
motivate children to learn to read; o to help teachers provide moments of
sharing and opportunities for children to discuss their own feeling and ideas; o to help children understand story structure--the beginning, the middle and the end--as well as sequencing, contrasts and similarities; o to help children learn to draw conclusions; and, o to question and to decide why something happens when it does. The second main goal of the LCPRP is a 1,000 book circulating library for local day care centers. This library would provide day care teachers with a wide variety of books which can be borrowed. Teachers would be responsible for checking out books to children in their classes for home reading. The parents of these children would be encouraged to read to their children the books that are taken home (MacCarry, 1987).

2-79

Ysleta Pre-Kinder Center Program

contact:

Ysleta Pre-Kinder Center 7909 Ranchland Drive El Paso, TX 79915

students served:

four-year olds who are either non-English speaking or from a low-income family

description:

The Ysleta Pre-Kindergarten Center Program (YPCP) is unique in that the school district set aside an entire school for prekindergarten classes. This created a "learning laboratory" for teachers and instructional aides. The school accommodates a total of 700 children, with 300 more in a satellite center, and it has a adult-student ratio of one to 11. The YPCP program emphasizes five essential areas of development: o awareness of language as a means of
communication; o the use of the five senses to observe
the environment; o development of motor skills, including
physical coordination, balance, and fine motor skills; o expression of creativity through art, music, and drama; and, o social-emotional development by building confidence and self esteem. The program also makes extensive use of field trips, special programs in health, safety, and entertainment, and computers for learning. An extensive parenteducation program provides access to a wide variety of resources and an ongoing support group. Parenting classes are conducted in both English and Spanish. Parents are encouraged to volunteer in the classroom and in other aspects of the program. The library provides books for children to take home to their parents so that the parents can read to them. Free classes in English conversation and citizenship information are available to all parents (CED, 1987).

2-80

PARENT/FAMILY PROGRAMS
parent and family programs focus on increasing parental involvement in their children's lives and on educating parents about the needs of children and adolescents. Most parent education and involvement programs are based on the premise that teachers and schools must work with the whole child and respond to the wide variety of factors which affect children's educational performance. There is a consensus among researchers and educators that "the most effective strategy for learning ... is where an individual teacher and the individual parent are working together [in] the best interest of the child" (Detroit Public Schools, 1986).
Dorothy Rich (1985) in The Forgotten Factor in School Success: The Family finds that parent involvement:
o raises the academic achievement of students;
o improves attitudes and the performance of children in school;
o helps parents understand the work of the schools;
o enables parents and children to communicate more and show they care about one another; and,
o builds school-community relationships that are on-going and problem-preventing.
Researchers (CED, 1987; Rich, 1985) have found that parental involvement and education is especially important for children from poor or disadvantaged backgrounds. The Committee for Economic Development (1987) finds that
... many disadvantaged children do not receive reinforcement in their home lives for the positive traits that will lead to future employability. This negative home curriculum is estimated to contribute to about half of the problems students exhibit in school ... good programs require the active participation of parents. Among other goals, they should teach parents how to provide a home environment that encourages learning. Where the home cannot
2-81

provide such simple necessities as a quite place to study, proper nutrition, and warmth and cleanliness, other avenues need to be explored.

John W. Myers (1985) in "Involving Parents in Middle Level Education," states that the key element in the development and implementation of any parent involvement program is clear communication between the school and the horne. Myers (1985) identifies various approaches which can be used to improve communications between
schools and student's homes. These are:

o building and maintaining a strong parentteacher organization;

o

implementing a school newsletter that is

mailed to student's homes at least

quarterly;

o

involving parents in orientation sessions;

o using personal notes and telephone calls to keep parents informed;

o mailing special materials to student's homes;

o

conducting special events during the

school year;

o

conducting parent surveys;

o

instituting a welcome wagon;

o encouraging the use of telephone chains; and,

o publishing a calendar of events for the school year.

There are a variety ways in which parents can become involved with their child's education. Ruzicka and Edison-Swift (1981) in "Involving Parents in Dropout Prevention" state that, generally, parent involvement can be divided into two distinct types--parents as partners/resources and parent education. According to the research literature (Rich, 1985; Ruzicka and Edison-Swift, 1981) parents as partners can contribute a great deal to schools by serving as volunteers, a supportive constituency, and as policymakers. Ruzicka and Edison-Swift (1981) identify a number of ways to

2-82

involve parents as partners/resources. listed below:
o parent-teacher conferences;

These are

o program evaluations;

o weekly communications;

o open houses;

o raising funds;

o parent surveys;

o parental permission and consent;

o home visits;

o PTO/PTA groups;

o parent advisory groups; and,

o parent volunteers.

Parent education is based on the premise that parents are their child's first and most important teacher. Parent education serves two purposes--educating the parent and providing a positive home learning environment for students. In "Parent Involvement: A Survey of Teacher Practices" Becker and Epstein (1982) describe five categories of teaching techniques that involve parents in learning activities at home with their children. These include:
1. techniques that involve reading and books;
2. techniques that encourage discussions between parent and child;
3. techniques that specify certain informal activities at home to stimulate learning;
4. contracts between teachers and parents that specify a particular role for parents in connection with their children's school lessons or activities; and,

2-83

5. techniques that develop parents' tutoring, helping, teaching, or evaluation skills.

In addition, Becker and Epstein (1982) report that several techniques appear to be very effective increasing parental involvement with schools and in improving the home learning environment. These are:

o

reading with children;

o

signing papers and folders;

o

home visits; and,

o

summer learning at home.

A report by the U.S. Department of Education (1986a), What Works: Research About Teaching and Learning, states that parents can create a curriculum of the home that will teach their children what matters and help them succeed in school. According to the U.S. Department of Education (1986), a positive home curriculum which will help children learn to read, reason, and understand things better involves parents who:

o

read, talk, and listen to their

children;

o tell stories, play games, and share hobbies;

o discuss news, TV programs, and special events;

o provide books, supplies, and a special place for studying;

o

observe routines for meals, bedtime, and

homework;

o monitor the amount of time spent watching TV and doing after-school jobs;

o discuss school events;

o help children meet deadlines; and,

o talk with their children about school problems and successes.

2-84

Ruzicka and Edison-Swift (1981) identify a number of Suggested parent education activities. These are:
o formal classes;
o informal seminars-weekly or monthly;
o brown bag lunches;
o group counseling;
o adult education classes;
o workshops;
o informal discussion groups;
o films and presentations on special topics;
o field trips;
o school inservice training;
o professional conferences;
o parent teacher organizations;
o visiting parent drop-in centers;
o written materials and handouts;
o TV discussion groups; and,
o study groups.
Researchers and educators (U.S. Department of Education, 1987; Rich, 1985) acknowledge that the amount of time parents can devote to these activities is limitedby the responsibilities of work, family and the general need for rest and relaxation. However, they stress that teachers and administrators must encourage parent involvement since it is crucial to children's success in school.
Ruzicka and Edison-Swift (1981) identify a seven step strategy for developing and implementing a parent involvement program (PIP). The steps in this strategy are:
2-85

1. assessing needs;
2. developing a philosophical base;
3. determining purpose;
4. identifying communication and interaction patterns;
5. developing an organizational structure;
6. identifying parent involvement outcomes; and,
7. evaluating the effectiveness of parent involvement activities.
Ruzicka and Edison-Swift (1981) note that each parent involvement program will vary given the needs and resources of individual schools and communities.
Myers (1985) also identifies several steps in the establishment a parent involvement program. According to Myers (1985), these steps are:
1. a needs assessment;
2. selection of a program coordinator;
3. matching needs with available resources;
4. educating teachers and other school volunteers as to the value of school volunteers;
5. the establishment of administrative routines for program operation;
6. the recruitment, orientation, and training of volunteers;
7. the coordination, monitoring, evaluation, and revisement of the program;
8. recognition for parent volunteers, staff, and faculty;
9. maintaining a high profile for the program within the school and community; and,
10. periodic formal program evaluation.
2-86

In addition, Ruzicka and Edison-Swift (1981) identify several other factors which they consider important in the development and implementation of successful parent
involvement programs. These are:

o

involving parents in the program

planning process;

o

scheduling meetings at convenient times

for parents;

o

sending out reminders of meetings;

o establishing a flexible agenda ;

o

using a variety of learning approaches;

o allowing time for discussion and giving everyone a chance to speak;

o allowing time for socializing;

o

following up meetings with telephone

calls;

o

arranging child care; and,

o

starting and ending meetings on time.

It appears that effective parent and family involvement programs attempt to extend the traditional boundaries of education to include the parents and families of students. In addition, many of these programs offer referrals and access to services provided by public and private social service agencies. Frequently, closer involvement between the school and the student's home reveals very serious and harmful family conditions and problems. The most common of these are:

o

alcoholism;

o

emotional maltreatment;

o

mental illness (depression, suicide);

o

neglect;

o

physical abuse;

o

sexual abuse; and,

o

substance abuse.

2-87

The presence of any of these problems and conditions can dramatically affect the academic performance of children and adolescents. Educators, school administrators, and program staff must be prepared to offer assistance when these situations are uncovered. The nation's schools are in a unique position to provide prevention and intervention programs to students and their families. Many schools have been successful in overcoming the problems which impede the academic success of many children and which eventually cause many students to drop out of school before graduation.
2-88

selected parent/Family Programs:

1.

The Corner Process

2.

Family Support Center

3.

Model School Adjustment Program

4.

Parent Training Program

5.

Success in School Through

Horne Intervention

PAGE
2-90 2-91 . 2-92 2-93
2-94

2-89

The Comer Process

contact:

James P. Comer Yale Child Study Center
Yale University 230 Frontage Street New Haven, CT 06510

students served:

students, parents, teachers, counselors, and principals

description: The Comer Process (CP) is a school-based management approach that attempts to change the attitudes and working relationship of principals, teachers, counselors, health-care professionals, and, parents. The program participants are organized into a school management and governance team and a mental health team. Each of these teams meets regularly to deal with general and specific school issues and student problems. Although the principal retains his/her authority, decisions are made by counselors and team members. Team members are rotated yearly. The management process helps to foster a sense of school ownership among administrators, faculty, and parents.
One of the main functions of the school management and governance team is to design and implement a social activities calendar for the entire school year, with parents playing a primary role. In addition, parents are encouraged to volunteer as teacher aides. Parents who do not have the time to volunteer during the school day are kept informed of activities through parent newsletters, involvement in a strengthened parent-teacher organization, and evening social activities. Some parents have been motivated to return to school and obtain their high school or college degree (CED, 1987).

2-90

Family support Center

contact:

Yvonne L. Fraley Executive Director 201 South 69th Street Upper Darby, PA 19082 (215) 352-7610

students served:

parents and their preschool children identified as at IIhigh" risk of abuse

description: The Family Support Center (FSC) has developed a multi-purpose, multi-
disciplinary approach which attempts to
change parent's patterns of child-rearing, and remedy children's developmental delays through home visits, counseling, and the Family School program. The program identifies families at high risk of abuse through certain personality factors and traits which have been identified as common among abusive and neglectful parents.
These factors and traits include: o an actual, verified incidence of abuse or a strong suspicion of abuse by a
professional or program staff person; o parents report a regular use of physical
punishment as the most frequent means of discipline or express fear of losing control and harming a child; and, o a pattern of family violence is evident. The FSC program has three phases. Phase
One: Counseling Services involves the initial counseling of the family in their
home where a counselor helps the family set
goals. Phase Two: The Family School uses a structured, parent-oriented curriculum to improve parents' self-image; to teach parents how to discipline their children without hurting them; and how to teach and play with their children at home. The program also provides nutrition education, and the support of other parents with similar problems to reduce the isolation of parents. Phase Three: Counseling and Peer Support Services includes follow-up counseling and referrals through a mental health or family counseling agency, if needed (Armstrong and Fraley, 1985; Fraley, 1984; FSC Program Brochure, n.d.).

2-91

Model School Adjustment Program

contact:

Frank Campana, Principal Driftwood Middle School 2751 Northwest 70th Terrace Hollywood, FL 33024 (305) 963-8080

students served:

students in grades 6-8 and their parents

description: The Model School Adjustment Program (MSAP) serves students who are at high risk of dropping out of school. Typically these students are performing below their academic potential and exhibit behavior or attendance problems. Both students and their parents are provided with a variety of tutoring and counseling services to improve self-concept, grades, behavior, and attendance. Trained peer tutors help the students with academics, study techniques, and basic skills, and present a positive peer example. Students receive peer tutoring four times a week. Tutoring and counseling are provided by trained students who receive credit for their help. The student's parents or guardian must attend parent education classes conducted by a family counselor. In these classes, parents learn how to help their children achieve through encouragement and the development of coping skills. Individual, group and family counseling are available, as well as a behavior management program which helps to improve behavior and attendance through a reward system (Education USA, 1988; Florida Department of Education, 1986).

2-92

parent Training Program

contact:

Parent Training Program
Memphis City Schools Memphis, Tennessee

students served:

kindergarten through fifth grade students

description: The Parent Training Program (PTP) is based on the premise that school-aged children need structure at home and help with their
school work. Unfortunately, many parents lack the self-confidence and the academic skills necessary to help their children
succeed in school. The PTP involves parents in an extensive training program which sponsors weekly parent workshops and sessions at schools and other locations. The workshops are announced and publicized through local
radio announcements and through mailed
notices sent to student's homes. Each workshop session focuses on a specific
topic: discipline, time management, planning and monitoring, home study,
building self-esteem, communication skills, drugs/alcohol abuse, and nutrition. The PTP has been very successful. Parents regularly participate and report a renewed sense of control over their children. Many parents have also expressed a great sense of personal satisfaction in being directly
involved with the education of their children (U.S. Department of Education,
1987) .

2-93

Success in School Through Home Intervention

contact:

Phyllis A. Beneke, Principal Wheeling Park High School RD 4, Box 1976 Wheeling, WV 26003 (304) 243-0400

students served:

students in grades 10-12 and their parents

description: Success in School through Home Intervention (SISTHI) is a program which helps students succeed in school by meeting their social needs and by working with those parents who will not come to the school for assistance, especially those who need help in dealing with their children. The four main program objectives are: 1. keeping students enrolled in school; 2. increasing parent participation; 3. improving student's attitude toward self, peers, and home; and, 4. improving student's desire to complete school assignments. In addition, cooperation with community agencies, school staff, and school administration are emphasized. The SISTHI program provides the following services: o individual counseling; o group counseling; o teacher conferences; o home visitations; o parent counseling; and, o care calls. The program also has established a Dropout Reentry Program to help returning dropouts succeed in school and to prevent these students from dropping out again. A Reentry Workshop and a study skills class are mandatory for all reentry students. These sessions are designed to teach students the necessary skills for success in school such as study skills, testing skills, and a classroom participation skills (Boissy, 1987).

2-94

MULTIFACETED PROGRAMS
Multifaceted programs are a comprehensive approach to the dropout problem. These programs are based on the premise that the factors responsible for students dropping out of school are varied and complex and no one approach or service effectively meets the needs of all at-risk students (South Carolina Department of Education, 1987). Multifaceted programs are designed to meet the needs of at-risk students and dropouts through a variety of educational and noneducational approaches, and a wide range of community services. As a result, most of these programs form partnerships with the business community, colleges and universities, and public and private agencies to effectively coordinate and deliver services needed by at-risk students and their families.
According to the Committee for Economic Development (1987) multifaceted programs provide a framework which extends the traditional boundaries of public education by providing the opportunity for cooperation between different groups within the community. As a result of this cooperation, existing dropout policies and programs can be identified, strengthened, and coordinated, and new promising programs can be developed.
Multifaceted programs are either school-based, in a regular or alternative school setting, or communitybased programs. Most multifaceted programs appear to be community-based. According to the Florida Department of Education (1986) community-based programs usually are associated with public or private non-profit agencies. The services identified in the Florida report are:
o leadership clubs which provide social support and motivate students to stay in school through positive group activities and projects;
o community center programs such as counseling, recreational activities, education programs, and after school programs;
o resource programs which include supplemental counseling and educational programs; and,
2-95

o mentorship programs which provide counseling, tutorial assistance, and guest lecturers.

The Florida Department of Education (1986) finds that many community-based programs also provide the following types of benefits, activities, and services:

o

caring and positive role models;

o

supplemental academic instruction,

tutoring, and homework assistance;

o

personal or career counseling and goal

setting activities;

o

school achievement incentives provided

by community agencies, clubs, or

employers;

o

employability skills training either on

the job or in the community;

o

recreational, wilderness, and survival

skills programs;

o

summer employment programs; and,

o

cultural and environmental awareness

activities and trips.

The General Accounting Office (1987) reports that dropout programs usually provide multiple services. However, the intensity of services, the emphasis on each, and the variation in activities required for different needs, varies among programs. The range of services identified by the GAO (1987) are:

0

personal counseling;

0

basic education;

0

career counseling;

0

parental outreach;

0

assistance in obtaining social services;

0

job search assistance;

0

job skills training;

2-96

o part-time employment placement;
o pregnancy/parental counseling;
o GED preparation;
o day care; and,
o English as a second language instruction.
Many of the services provided by multifaceted programs are work-related. In Learning to Work: Improving Youth Employability, Duggan and Mazza (1986) state that
... experience shows that learning-to-work activities raise employment levels and earnings of youth and have the greatest impact on the disadvantaged. The most effective programs are comprehensive, include all aspects of employability, and consist of a planned sequence of activities in which youth achieve small successes step by step.
Moreover, they state that employability encompasses a wide range of skills needed for obtaining and retaining jobs such as positive attitudes, motivation, appropriate work behavior, and interpersonal skills. According to Duggan and Mazza (1986), youth program practitioners generally agree that employability has four main components:
o basic skills;
o pre-employment competencies;
o work maturity; and,
o occupational skills.
The Florida Department of Education (1986) recommends that
... each [dropout] program include activities that prepare students for choosing a career and for participating in the world of work. Such activities may include specific courses as well as activities conducted by counselors and occupational specialists.
2-97

The most common types of work-related services and activities identified by the U.S. General Accounting Office (1987) are:

o

career development programs;

o

executive internships;

o

quality career education plans;

o

work experience;

o

diversified cooperative training;

o

career mentors;

o

career awareness labs;

o

career fairs;

o

job fairs; and,

o

career awareness/basic skills programs.

Many job training programs are established through the Job Training Partnership Act (JTPA). Kolberg (1987) reports in "Employment, the Private Sector, and At-Risk Youth" that JTPA programs provide the framework for public-private partnerships in the field of job training, facilitate coalition building at the local level, and provide the opportunity for successfully dealing with the unemployment issue. JTPA programs are established at the local level through private industry councils (PICs). The PICs follow federal guidelines, establish local job training policy, and oversee the operation of local job training programs. Kolberg (1987) finds that the main characteristics of JTPA job training programs are:
o a sense of local ownership and meaningful participation in program decision making;
o a uniform institutional structure shared by the public and private sectors for joint decision making;
o protection of local flexibility to design programs and to budget resources most effectively;

2-98

o

state authority for setting overall

policy, coordinating other public systems

and resources, and ensuring fiscal

integrity;

o

federally set performance standards to

justify investment and measure

accomplishment; and,

o broad participation of all the pertinent institutions and individuals with expertise and interest in job training.

Many multifaceted and comprehensive dropout programs involve school-business partnerships. Researchers and educators (Burke, 1986; Justiz and Kameem, 1986; Moran, 1983) agree that school-business partnerships have flourished for several reasons. These are:
1. the President's Task Force and the White House Office of Private Sector Initiatives which has encouraged volunteerism and partnerships in education;
2. the recognition by the private sector that it needs educated workers, and therefore, has a vested interest in education, and needs to take a more active role in solving community problems; and,
3. the realization that public support is
needed, if the quality of education in
the U.S. is to improve.

Justiz and Kameen (1986) in "School-Business Partnerships: Working To Defuse the Dropout Time Bomb" find that all partnership programs begin with the same basic premises--thae partnerships are essential for developing an adequate work force and that the key to success with at-risk students and dropouts is a caring environment.

In "School Partnerships: Trojan Horse or Manna From Heaven," Michael A. Burke (1986) states that
... successful school-business partnerships all have one ingredient in common: an advisory council. These councils, composed of educators and business leaders, develop and

2-99

monitor proposed partnerships and make project recommendations for school board consideration.
Burke (1986) identifies the factors that characterize successful advisory councils. These are:
1. the district has active and visible support from teachers, unions, school board members, and administrators;
2. a full-time or part-time coordinator chairs the council; and,
3. from the very beginning the emphasis is on human contributions as opposed to financial aid or material resources.

In "Business Involvement and Public School Improvement, Part 1," Dale Mann (1987) reports that partnerships between the schools and the business community are characterized by the following four factors:

o

a coordinating structure;

o

multiple purposes;

o

multiple players; and,

o

stability.

McCormick (1984) in "These Tried-And-True Alliances Have Paid Off For Public Schools" states that adopt-a-school programs are the best known partnerships and that partnerships range from general projects that benefit all schools within a district to one-on-one projects between businesses and specific schools. McCormick (1984) also identifies other potential partners for schools. These include:

o art groups;

o civic groups;

o colleges and universities;

o

foundations;

o professional organizations; and,

o other organizations and institutions.

2-100

In "Effective School Business Partnerships," Don Adams (1985) finds that the business community contributes to partnerships in the following ways:
o employees work as school volunteers;
o loaned executive programs for special projects;
o donating new and used equipment;
o providing in-kind contributions of products and services; and,
o financial assistance.
In addition, Adams (1985) states that partnerships must offer a definitive payback to the corporate or business sponsor. Adams also identifies several benefits to businesses involved in partnerships with schools. These are:
o a sense of personal satisfaction;
o community recognition;
o working with schools as the source of future employees or customers; and,
o the loan of students and teachers.
Adams (1985) further states that tangible benefits to businesses can be enumerated in written agreements or contracts between the school and their partner. Agreements or contracts add formal structure to the partnership and ensure that both parties know their roles and responsibilities.
Gerald L. Hester (1986) in his analysis of schoolbusiness partnerships in Spokane identifies several characteristics of successful partnership projects. These are:
o geographical proximity;
o no financial obligation required from either partner;
o partners of approximately the same size;
2-101

o

a strong partnership advisory council

which provides equal representation,

stability, program planning and

development; and,

o

strong community support for schools

and education.

Santee C. Ruffin Jr. (1983) reports in "School-Business Partnerships: Why Not?" that the most essential component of effective public/private partnerships is a caring staff which exhibits enthusiasm and feels a sense of commitment to the project. In a subsequent article, Ruffin (1984) identifies and lists the steps to building a successful partnership. These are:
1. educators know exactly what the private sector expects from a partnership;
2. school personnel identify firms that are capable of providing the needed expertise;
3. meetings are scheduled between representatives of the firms and faculty, parents, and students;
4. a program timeline is established;
5. a project coordinator is selected and their role defined; and,
6. school and business partners agree on a method of evaluating program activities.
Ruffin cautions that partnerships will not succeed unless program administrators and staff develop an sense of ownership and make the extra effort to recognize individual volunteers and consider the needs of all students.

Moran (1983) states that "the process utilized for private sector involvement with education is critical." Moran identifies and lists the steps necessary for developing a comprehensive school/community partnership. These are:

o

establish a local industry education

council;

2-102

o develop a management plan;

o create an administrative position for public/private partnerships;

o

identify problems and potential

resources;

o develop or establish access to an extensive data base;

o build a network;

o

conduct an annual private sector

initiative campaign;

o

reward excellence; and,

o

avoid turfism.

Several researchers and educators (Adams, 1985, Mann, 1987) report that the partnership movement has entered a critical stage. They state that project-oriented programs must give way to deeper commitments on the part of educators and business people if partnerships are to be effective in keeping at-risk students in school and encouraging dropouts to continue their educations. The American School Board Journal (1988) states that although business involvement is making education a community-wide effort, "local school boards and systems retain the ultimate responsibility for policy-making in education and for changes and improvements in the schools."

2-103

Selected Multifaceted Programs:

PAGE

1. ALL STAR Program

2-105

2. Atlanta Partnership of Business & Education Inc

2-106

3 Boston Compact

2-107

4 . Communities in School

. 2-108

5. The Door--A Center For Alternatives

2-109

6. Project COFFEE

2-110

7. 70001 Training and Employment Institute ..... 2-111

8. Summer Training and Education Program

2-112

9. Tenneco Partnerships in Education

2-113

2-104

ALL STAR Program

contact:

James D. Kazen President and Chief Executive Officer
6800 Park Ten Blvd.
Suite 171 W San Antonio, TX 78213 (512) 735-9191

students served:

junior and senior high school students

description: All STAR is an acronym for Activity Leadership . Laboratories--Students Teaming Around Responsibility. The ALL STAR program is a positive peer leadership program which is based on the belief that young people can be mature and responsible in their behavior and actions. Participants are encouraged to develop their own positive standards of behavior in activities and academics which will benefit themselves and the local school community. The program uses the school team approach to problem solving and emphasizes the development of positive role models which can deter young people from socially and personally destructive behavior. ALL STAR comprehensive training involves: o in-service programs for school teams including administrators, teachers, parents, and other support personnel which enable the program to remain selfsustaining within the school districts; o orientation of parents of participating students before and after the ALL STAR retreat; and o technical assistance and on-site support for students to implement action plans developed during training. In addition, the ALL STAR team approach offers students the opportunity: o to develop skills as team members and use these skills to pursue shared or group goals; o to commit to a written statement of conduct with peers; and o to develop personal discipline and maturity (ALL STAR Program Brochure, 1987) .

2-105

Atlanta Partnership of Business & Education, Inc.

contact:

Boyd Odom, Executive Director Atlanta Partnership of Business & Education, Inc. University Plaza Urban Life Suite 736-739 Atlanta, GA 30303

students served:

students in the Atlanta Public School System

description: Tne Atlanta Partnership of Business & Education, Inc. (APBE) is a nonprofit corporation which was designed to further the educational opportunities of Atlanta students through broadly-based, citywide, school-business partnerships. The APBE operates five partnership programs: o Adopt-a-School, which pairs individual schools and businesses. o Affirmative Action/Adopt-a-Student, which pairs business volunteers with students in the lowest quartile of their high school class with a role model on an one-to-one basis. The program includes seminars and workshops which assist students in developing and improving their job awareness, preparation, and aspirations, as well as life-coping skills.
o Distinguished Scholars--Humanities, which helps link university faculty with teachers in the Atlanta area.
o Institutionalization, which is an effort to raise funds for an endowed chair at Georgia State University dedicated to school-business partnerships.
o Volunteers/Tutorial, which links volunteer tutors from religious institutions and businesses with schools that seek tutorial services.
In addition, the APBE provides internships for students, helps plan school curricula, and gives managerial assistance to schools (CED, 1987; Institute for Educational Leadership, 1986).

2-106

Boston Compact

contact:

Edward Dooley Executive Director The Boston Compact 26 Court Street Boston, MA 02108

students served:

students enrolled in Boston Public Schools

description:

The Boston business community, the public school system, local universities and colleges, cultural organizations, and trade unions have created a school-to-work program which focuses a wide-range of local resources on Boston's teenagers. The program organizes community and school resources around student employment, achievement, and college enrollment. As part of the program: o the Boston school system guarantees
basic reading and math competencies for all graduates; o local businesses agree to provide jobs for Boston students during the summer and after high school graduation; o local colleges and universities agree to increase the rate of Boston graduates entering post-secondary institutions; and, o the trade unions agree to increase the number of apprenticeships for Boston Public School graduates. Also, a Boston Dropout Prevention and Reentry Plan has been developed and funded. This plan recommends changes in four areas: o school structural issues--school rules, flexible class schedules, and financial incentives and sanctions; o basic education--the creation of learning clusters, transition classes, tutoring programs, screening of students, parent outreach, and career programs; o the creation and expansion of alternative and community-based programs; and o the placement of social and human services in the local community (CED, 1987; Hargroves, 1987).

2-107

Cities in Schools Communities in Schools

contact:

Bill Milliken, President Cities in Schools, Inc. 1023 15th Street, N.W. Washington, DC 20005 (202) 861-0230

students served:

all students

description: Cities in Schools or Communities in Schools (CIS) is an in-school dropout program which brings existing social services into schools. CIS activities are designed: o to encourage personal and social development; o to increase school attendance; o to improve learning; and, o to help students acquire skills which will allow them to obtain employment. CIS support staff and volunteers have offices in each participating school and are available on a daily basis to help students and their families. Each CIS staff member is assigned at-risk students to counsel on an individual basis. The CIS program offers regular academic courses, tutoring assistance, field trips, job training, summer employment opportunities, and individual, group and family counseling. Discipline problems are discussed with parents who are encouraged to work out solutions with the help of the staff. In addition, the families are also provided with counseling and assistance, if needed. Referrals are provided to a broad range of services such as medical, legal, food, housing, and day care assistance. The national office of CIS provides training and technical assistance in the establishment of local CIS school/business partnerships. Typically, these partnerships involve local governments, school officials, business representatives and community organizations which provide needed services (CEO, 1987; GAO, 1987; Justiz and Kameen, 1987).

2-108

The Door--A Center For Alternatives

contact:

The Door-A Center For Alternatives International Center for Integrative Studies 618 Avenue of the Americas New York, NY 10011

students served:

disadvantaged youth, ages 12-20

description:

The Door--A Center for Alternatives (DACA) is a comprehensive health, educational, and cultural service center which provides a range of free social services for at-risk youth. Activities are designed to address the physical, emotional, intellectual, and
interpersonal problems of disadvantaged youth. Services include: o educational and prevocational
preparation which includes remedial education, career counseling, and prevocational training; o creative and physical arts such as visual, performing, and plastic arts programs and martial arts and competitive sports; o a health center which provides primary medical care, health promotion, sexual health and awareness, prenatal care and education, nutrition and food services; o mental health and social services including prevention, intervention/ treatment programs and substance abuse treatment; and, o social and legal services such as crisis intervention, emergency support, and representation in legal proceedings. Program activities take place in a large renovated department store which was designed as a counterpoint to traditional educational and service facilities. Teens may be referred to the program by friends, teachers, principals, and/or the courts. Program services are free to those who wish to participate (CED, 1987; Shapiro, 1985).

2-109

Cooperative Federation for Educational Experiences

contact:

John R. Phillips Project Director Project COFFEE Oxford High School Annex Main Street Oxford, MA 01540 (617) 987-1626

students served:

alienated and disaffected secondary students

description:

The Cooperative Federation for Education Experiences (Project COFFEE) is a highly successful school/business partnership which provides a comprehensive instructional, occupational training and counseling program. The program integrates four components: o an academic component which provides
relevant occupational and life-coping basic skills instruction based on an individualized education plan; o an occupational component that provides hands-on educational experience in a high technology work environment which reinforces basic skills; o a counseling component that provides occupational and emotional support using state, regional, and local social service agencies; and, o a physical education component that offers a program of recreational activities adapted to enable students to develop a sense of self-accomplishment and group cooperation. Each occupational program features job entry skills, job placement skills, shadowing experiences, and a related workstudy program. Specialized occupational programs include: o electronic assembly o data processing o building and grounds maintenance o horticulture/agriculture o distributive education. (GAO, 1987; National Diffusion Network, 1982) .

2-110

70001 Training and Employment Institute

contact:

70001 Training and Employment Institute West Wing, Suite 300 600 Maryland Avenue, S.W. Washington, DC 20024 (202) 484-0103

students served:

dropouts and other economically disadvantaged individuals; ages 16-21

description: The 70001 Training and Employment Institute program is a short-term intervention program which aims to successfully place disconnected youth in the work force by providing educational and motivational programs, out-of-school pre-employment services, and jobs for highly disadvantaged high school dropouts. Local programs are directly operated by 70001 or by communitybased organizations and schools as affiliates of 70001. Participants are academically evaluated upon entering the program, and individualized educational plans are structured to their needs. The average participant reads at only the 6th grade level. The 70001 program offers o the Comprehensive Competencies Program which is a competency based remediation program; o pre-employment, work maturity, and responsibility training; and, o motivational, leadership and personal development activities. In addition, participants are encouraged to complete a GED program and to prepare for college entry exams (SAT and ACT) and college-level courses. Job development specialists screen participants for prospective employers and attempt to place participants in jobs with private firms. The 70001 program has been effective in increasing the short-term employment and wages of participants and in encouraging participants to obtain their GED (Florida Department of Education, 1986; GAO, 1986; Hahn, . 1987) .

2-111

Summer Training and Education Program (STEP)

contact:

Summer Training and Education Program Public/Private Ventures 399 Market Street Philadelphia, PA 19106 (215) 592-9099

students served:

14- and 15-year old students from lowincome families who are performing below grade level

description: The Summer Training and Education Program (STEP) is a national demonstration project which provides poor and under-performing youth with remediation, life skills and work experience during two consecutive programs sessions. During the six to eight week summer program, participants earn a full-time minimum wage salary for participating in the three STEP core activities. These activities include: o remediation--group and individually paced instruction in basic reading and math skills. Teaching modules relate basic skills to job and real-life situations, and emphasize computerassisted instruction and sustained reading activities; o life skills and opportunities (LSO)-instruction on responsible social and sexual attitudes and behaviors such as personal decision-making; and, o work experience--part-time work provided by the federal Summer Youth Employment and Training Program (SYETP). During the school year, STEP participants are provided with ongoing support including group activities, mentors/counselors who schedule regular meetings, make referrals to needed services, monitor school attendance, and encourage students to remain in school and participate in the second STEP summer session (Sipe, Grossman, and Williams, 1987; National Committee for Citizens in Education, 1987; CED, 1987).

2-112

--tn
I
CD
-3
-CD
:::S:::s
G')o
CDC0 -C' :D-7
ii' "'0 (; a CD 3

CHAPTER THREE
STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM IN GEORGIA
The Georgia Department of Education estimates that approximately 25,000 to 30,000 students drop out of Georgia schools each year. Moreover, it is estimated that 1,517,000 adults in the State of Georgia have not graduated from high school. There are a number of serious problems associated with the large number of Georgia dropouts. Werner Rogers, Georgia Superintendent of Education, states that
... right now in Georgia we estimate that there are more than 700,000 adults with less than an eighth-grade education and who, cannot read and write well enough to perform the common tasks of everyday life (Rogers, 1987).
In addition, one out of five youths in Georgia is unemployed. Approximately, 50 to 75 percent of the unemployed in Georgia lack the basic skills to get a job. "The illiteracy rate in five Georgia counties is about 40 percent or above. The average tested grade level for Georgia's prison population is 5.5 years for men and 5.4 for women" (Summerlin, 1987).
According to the National Education Association (NEA) and the United States Department of Education (DOE), Georgia ranks fifth in the number of high school dropouts among the 15 states that comprise the Southern Regional Education Board. The U.S. Department of Education's report on high school freshman who did not graduate with their class indicates that Georgia ranked 45th in the nation in 1987. The Georgia Department of Education has determined that the statewide school graduation rate is 63 percent. The 1988 statistics from the Georgia Department of Education of graduation rates for each school system indicate that 95,708 students were enrolled in the ninth grade in 1983-84, compared to 60,018 students who were graduated in 1987. (See appendices G and H for more information.) Approximately 35,690 students did not graduate with their class. Thus, it appears that increasing awareness about the dropout problem and implementing effective interagency programs are the most critical needs currently facing the State of Georgia.
There are several other factors and trends which dramatize the need for effective solutions to the Georgia dropout problem. These are:
3-1

o the proportion of the economically disadvantaged population in Georgia is much higher than that for the nation, despite Georgia's substantial growth in employment and income during recent year,s;
o out of a total of 187 local school systems in Georgia there are 69 in which 50 percent or more of the students receive free or reduced school lunches. There appears to be a relationship between high non-completion rates and the numbers of students receiving free or reduced lunch in 25 percent of local school systems;
o in 1980, 23 percent of the Georgia population age 16 and over was eligible to participate in JTPA-funded programs;
o the diversity between rural and urban areas accounts for different types of problems and the need for a wide range of activit~es targeted for at-risk students across the state; and,
o the need for increased coordination and collaboration among agencies and groups to set a unified direction for future activities.
STATE RESPONSE TO THE DROPOUT PROBLEM
The State of Georgia has established momentum toward educational reform that began with the Quality Basic Education Act (QBE) in 1985. The firm commitment of the legislature and the Georgia Department of Education to addressing the needs of at-risk students is evidenced by the growth and continuation of dropout programs and increased levels of funding for these programs.
The State of Georgia has taken a comprehensive and coordinated approach to the dropout problem. The Governor, the legislature, the Georgia Department of Education and various other state agencies have established task force groups to address the needs of at-risk students.
3-2

In 1986, the House of Representatives established a School Completion Task Force to hear testimony from various agencies involved with the at-risk population and to collect data about successful programs. The recommendations of this group initiated a variety of activities that include:
a. the establishment of a clearinghouse to collect and disseminate information about dropout prevention and other programs for at-risk students;
b. increased emphasis on school climate management ~nd provisions for technical assistance to local systems;
c. initiatives of activity to designate a uniform definition for school dropout and a data collection method for collecting longevity statistics for this population;
d. increased support for counselors in middle and elementary schools; and,
e. emphasis on interagency collaboration.

In 1987, the Governor established a Commission on Children and Youth that represents all the major state agencies. Activities are coordinated with the task
force of the Georgia Department of Education (DOE). In addition, the Governor's office and the Georgia DOE have coordinated their efforts with other agencies including
the Georgia Department of Community Affairs and the Georgia Department of Labor. This effort includes:

1. The Action Program to Prevent and Control Juvenile Delinquency, which is designed to:

a. help control juvenile delinquency;

b. improve the state's juvenile justice

system;

.

c. deinstitutionalize juvenile offenders; and,

d. provide for the total separation of juvenile and adult offenders.

3-3

2. The Governor's Task Force on Drug and Substance Abuse; and,
3. Jobs for Georgia's Graduates, a program that targets at-risk secondary students.
The continued support from the Governor, the Georgia legislature, the Georgia Department of Education and other state agencies demonstrates a commitment to the continuation of efforts to address problems of atrisk students. Georgia agencies are now working together to plan and implement activities and are breaking down barriers and concerns over "turf" that have existed in the past. The School/Community Collaboration for Dropout Prevention, a conference cosponsored by the Georgia Department of Education, Georgia State University, APPLE Corps, and a volunteer business group was held in March, 1988. Emphasis on the community team is a new approach for Georgia, and this effort is proving to be a catalyst for state-wide collaboration. Follow-up activities related to the team process occur during the year, and provide a network for planned regional conferences.
Ten regional interagency forums for students at risk of school failure are planned for 1988-89 as a result of a grant from the Council of Chief State School Officers (CCSSO). Georgia is one of eleven states selected to receive funds from CCSSO to promote intradepartmental and interagency collaboration and to enlist support for legislation designed to ensure school success for all students.
3-4

MODEL DROPOUT PROGRAMS: GEORGIA

PAGE

Coordinated vocational Academic

Education (CVAE)

3-6

Dropout Prevention/Reduction Using

School-Based Action Plans

3-8

Early Intervention Program

3-12

MACAO SUPER Program

3-14

Monte Sana Program

3-17 e..

Optional Program with Training (OPT)

3-18

parenting Program

3-20

PASS--Partnership and Student Success

3-22

SPIRIT

3-24

Student Mentoring

3-26

. Systematic Intervention in Language Development (SILO)

3-29

Teens In Community Service (TICS)

3-31

Information for this section reflects survey responses received from Georgia program administrators, school districts, and sponsoring entities. Most of the programs in this section were visited by project staff.

3-5

PROJECT
TARGET POPULATION

Coordinated Vocational Academic Education (CVAE)
Houston County Schools
Students who have failed the ninth or tenth grade or who are behind a grade level are automatically considered for the program. The CVAE coordinator from the junior high and junior and senior high counselors may also recommend students to the program. Enrollment in the program is limited, therefore student records are examined closely so that those students with the greatest need may be admitted to the program.

PROJECT GOALS

The primary goal of the CVAE program is to keep at-risk students in school by allowing them to divide their school day between academic and vocational classes, and off campus employment. The program provides flexible scheduling to allow for morning or afternoon employment.

DESCRIPTION

The CVAE program is comprised of a minimum of four class periods. One period is a CVAE class and the other classes are comprised of a combination of academic, vocational, and cooperative work experience. If a student has been placed in a job he reports to that job upon completion of four class periods. Normally students will work at their place of employment between 15 and 25 hours per week.
The maximum size of the program is limited to between 60 and 80 students. These students are distributed across three or four CVAE classes during the four period day. The program currently has 35 students working on site. Those students who have not currently been placed in a job may elect to take additional vocational classes.
The CVAE coordinator administers a series of vocational interest/aptitude questionnaires to students as they enter the program. The results of these questionnaires are used to help match students to appropriate employment opportunities. The coordinator is responsible for placing students in jobs and has a good working relationship with local businesses. The CVAE program has placed many students in positions at Warner Robins AFB which operates a Stay-In-School program offering employment to economically disadvantaged students. Although

3-6

PROJECT OtrrCOMZS
SOURCE OF
I'UNDING CONTACT

the coordinator identifies most job opportunities, students occasionally locate jobs on their own. The program coordinator supervises the students by working closely with their employers. A co-curricular VOCA Club allows students to relate to one another and compete in employment-related areas.
The CVAE curriculum consists mainly of employment related activities. Instruction is provided in the areas of citizenship, completing resumes and job applications, job interviews, personal finance, tax returns and other pertinent areas. The CVAE classes also extensively utilize outside speakers and resources to present programs to their students. The program coordinator acts as the instructor for the CVAE courses and is assisted by a para~professional. The coordinator provides general counseling to the students in the program and additional counseling is provided by the grade counselors.
The CVAE program has been in operation since 1972. Data indicates that the program improves the graduation rate for students. The program has consistently allowed (or motivated) many students with special circumstances to remain in school. Comparisons of grade-point-averages (GPA) of CVAE students and dropouts have shown a consistently higher GPA in English and math for the CVAE students. At-risk students in the CVAE program were less likely to drop out as compared with a like group of non-CVAE at-risk students. Surveys indicate that local employers have been pleased with the quality of employees the program has provided. The program has been successful in teaching individual responsibility and promoting a positive self concept.
The CVAE program has been supported primarily by a combination of state, federal, and local funding. Some JTPA funds are available for eligible students to participate in tryout employment. The total cost of the program is approximately $45,000 per school.
Dr. Charles M. Hill Director of Vocational Education Pearl Stephens Center Reid Street Warner Robins, GA 31088 (912) 929-7880
3-7

PROJECT
TARGET POPULATION PROJECT
GOALS
DESCRIPTION

Dropout Prevention/Reduction Using School-Based Action Plans, District-wide
Murray County Public Schools
All K-12 students with emphasis on at-risk youth
I
Prevent and reduce dropouts
Murray County Public Schools have instituted a systemwide effort at preventing and reducing dropouts. The development of the current comprehensive dropout prevention effort for the system began in early 1985. This developmental process was a cooperative effort between the school system and the Chamber of Commerce. The business community rallied behind the effort, contributing ideas and assistance through a Chamber Stay-in-School Task Force composed of 60 local business personnel. Pledges were received from 90 percent of local industry to promote the idea of students staying in school and discouraging full-time employment for persons without a high school diploma that were under the age of 18 years. A Chamber Liaison Committee works closely with the system coordinator to provide interface between the school system and industry.
School Action Plan Committees were formed for elementary, middle, and high schools in the district. Each committee developed its' own component of the overall system action plan. A needs assessment was done in the way of a survey of students to determine the extent of potential dropouts in the system. Former, nongraduating students were contacted and encouraged to return to school. Potential dropouts were counseled about the need to stay in school and obtain a high school diploma. A total of 11 dropout prevention/reduction programs were developed by the action committees for implementation at the various school-levels. Actual implementation of the approved program began in August 1986.

3-8

Elementary Level Components:
Partners At Learning (PAL Project) Identified potential dropouts in grades 4-6 are paired with a school staff member. All school staff including janitorial and secretarial staff are paired with a student. The staff member routinely checks on their PAL, watching for problems, advising, encouraging attendance and good grades, and serving as a resource if the student encounters problems they can not handle.
P.A.S.S. (Parents Assisting Students Successfully) P.A.S.S. provides parents of third grade students with the opportunity to learn how to help their children learn their basic skills so they can pass the Criterion Referenced Test (CRT). Students must pass this test in order to be promoted to the next grade. Back to Basics is structured to ensure that high risk students are not rerouted through the same programs, but will receive appropriate remedial instruction where needed, special help with academic and other problems, parental contact and communication. Goals of the program include improving interaction among parent, child, teacher, and school administration while helping children master the basic skills. These efforts aid in improving academic capabilities and thereby reduce the dropout rate. The program consists of four two-hour sessions which include child care while parents are in the sessions.
Middle School Components
Teams for Teens Team teachers will create student support groups to work with identified potential dropouts in their teams. These support groups will use the services of volunteers, former dropouts, peers, and parents to assist potential dropouts through their middle school years. Evaluation of the effort will include comparison of Teams for Teens students with a control group of their peers.
Vocational Interest Program (VIP) Middle school students' interests and abilities are identified prior to entering the high school. Interest and Aptitude Tests are administered to assist the students, parents, and schools in properly examining the needs of students and enrolling them in a high school program best suited to their needs and capabilities.
3-9

High School Components
Experimental Program for Orientation (EXPO) This program is designed to provide identified potential dropouts (finishing 8th graders) the extra support needed to adjust to the move from middle school to high school. An EXPO advisor (a 12th-grade student) is assigned to each such student to serve as mentors, helping students with any problems occurring during the school year. Students meet at least once a week to discuss school issues, homework, problems, and to just talk. A fall workshop is used to teach study skills, assertiveness, and time management.
Teens In Counseling Service This activity involves use of a peer counseling service composed of students working at the Teen Resource Center. These students will be drawn from each high school in the area and will serve as .advocates at their individual high schools. They are available to talk with their peers on a wide variety of teen-age problems including child abuse, pregnancy, other health concerns, and family problems.
System-Wide Programs
Save Our Students (SOS)/ADDITIONS ADDITIONS is a volunteer program which came into existence following discussions with representatives of parent/teacher organizations who formed the dropout prevention parent group, SOS. In an effort to relieve teachers of menial tasks in the classroom, provide individual assistance and remediation to more students, and make available the talents and resources of the community, this nationally acclaimed volunteer program from Orange County, Florida, was introduced in the Murray County Schools.
Business/Industry and Education Partnerships This program encourages private sector involvement in the educational process through adoption or partnership with an entire school, a grade, a department or class section. The program focuses on enriching the learning experience and providing experiences that are mutually beneficial to all parties involved. Each "Partner" is limited only by the energy and imagination of those involved.
3-10

PROJECT OUTCOMES
SOURCE OF FUNDING CONTACT

This system-wide effort has reduced the dropout rate from nearly 50 percent to less than 40 percent. The dropout rate for 1985 was 39.1 percent, 36.3 percent in 1986, and 35.2 percent in 1987.
The absentee rate for students in the PAL program was reduced from an average of 15.55 days to 9.78 days per year. In addition, their GPA increased from 1.47 to 1.73.
The Homework Hotline received 1,334 calls averaging 2-3 minutes. Nearly 43 percent of the calls required assistance with mathematics. Over two-thirds of the calls were from elementary students.
Local businesses are cooperating in the dropout prevention efforts by discouraging persons under 18 years of age from taking jobs until they have their high school diploma.
This systemwide program is funded through a combination of sources including local, state and federal funds as well as local businesses.
Mrs. Kate Pannell Dropout Prevention Coordinator Murray County Schools P.O. Box 40 Chatsworth, GA 30705 (404) 695-4531

3-11

PROJECT
TARGET POPOLA'l'ION PROJECT
GOALS
DESCRIPTION

Early Intervention Program
Houston County Public Schools
K-1, all subject areas
The primary goals of the Early Intervention Program are the improvement of perceptual, cognitive, and language skills, reading readiness, positive self-concepts, and the development of a positive attitude toward school by students.
The Houston County Early Intervention Program (EIP) is a nationally validated project that was developed in Dade County, Florida, in 1970. Houston County adopted ECPC as a pilot program in two first-grade classes in 1982. Satisfaction with its success as a failureprevention program has lead to its expansion to all schools with significant concentrations of high-risk learners. In March 1987, Houston County was certified as a Georgia training center for educational improvement.
The Houston County Early Intervention Program focuses on high-risk learners as certified by a standardized achievement test. It provides an individualized diagnostic/prescriptive reading readiness curriculum and focuses on the development of perceptual, cognitive and language skills. To achieve the goal of failure prevention, the program is directed toward the learner and the learning environment. The major components of the program model are screening selection, diagnosis, classroom organization/ management, prescriptive teaching and attitude development.
This program is being adopted by some school systems to meet the needs of kindergarten students who failed the state readiness assessment. The program is currently being expanded to meet the needs of the five-year-old kindergarten student.

3-12

PROJECT OUTCOMES
SOURCE OF FUNDING CONTACT

Seven classes of at-risk first grade students provided the evaluation data for ECPC in Houston County during the 1987-1988 school year. A summary of these analysis is as follows:

SCHOOL n ONE 11 TWO 15 THREE 17 FOUR 8 FIVE 18 SIX 18 SEVEN 14

87 CAT Standard Score

M

SD

416.45 28.15

343.67 139.78

361.35 28.15

392.12 32.45

430.50 93.62

401.46 99.33

380.00 62.44

88 CAT Standard Score

M

SD

425.27 57.72

389.87 132.99

491.00 83.30

444.25 68.09

390.13 64.67

336.94 120.46

379.00 63.74

DIFFERENCE

M

Sig.

8.82 .62

-46.20 .02

-129.65 .00

-52.12 .08

27.71 .23

52.15 .19

1. 00 .96

TOTAL 98 387.69 90.44 404.59 102.78 -25.34 .02

The standard score analyses did show an overall significant mean change from 387.69 in 1987 to 404.59 in 1988. Data from the 1987-88 evaluation of the ECPC project from the Spring of 1987 to the Spring 1988 show that reading standard score increases were both statistically and practically significant. These increases underscore the positive impact of the program.

The program is funded by a grant from the State Department of Education.
Marcia Talbert Houston Training Center for Educational Improvement 305 Watson Boulevard Warner Robins, GA 31093 (912) 929-7800

3-13

PROJECT TARGET POPULATION
PROJECT GOALS

MACAD SUPER PROGRAM (Metropolitan Council on Alcohol and Drugs Substance Use Prevention and Education Resource Program)
Cobb County School System
Students involved with drugs and alcohol offenses and their parents. High-risk students in need of help. High-risk students include:
o children of chemically dependent persons; o truants and potential dropouts; o sexually active students; o economically disadvantaged youth; o students from dysfunctional families; o victims of physical, sexual, or
psychological abuse; o students who have committed violent or
delinquent acts; o students experiencing mental health
problems; o students who have attempted suicide; o students who have experienced long-term
physical pain; o runaways; o students with eating disorders; o special education students; and, o students who have been administratively
placed or retained.
The objectives of the MACAO SUPER program are:
o to identify at-risk students who are experiencing emotional distress or involved with chemicals;
o to intervene with the student and/or family who is referred;
o to assess the extent of the problem; o to provide appropriate out-of-school
referrals or in-school services for the student with problems and to refer the family to services ranging from education to free assessments provided by professionals; o to provide case management and follow-up services for each student; and, o to help educators do their jobs more efficiently.

3-14

DESCRIPTION

The MACAD SUPER Program is a prfmary prevention and education program and an intervention alternative for students facing suspension for drug use or a drug-related problem.
The Cobb County School Alcohol and Drug Use Policy states that student violators shall be reported to the appropriate law enforcement agency. .Students are subject to the penalties prescribed by the policy:
(a) first offense: suspension from school for a period of ten (10) school days.
option: The parent/guardian and the student may opt for attendance at all sessions of the Metropolitan Atlanta Council on Alcohol and Drugs (MACAD) Substance Use Prevention and Education Resource (SUPER) Program. The suspension will be reduced to four (4) days and the remaining six (6) days of suspension will be served by the student should the parent/guardian and/or student fail to complete the MACAO SUPER Program.
(b) second offense: long-term suspension from school for the remainder of the reporting period. This long-term suspension shall not be less than twenty days.
(c) third offense: the minimum is expulsion from school for a period of one school year, including the grading period in which the offense occurs.
If the MACAO SUPER Program option is selected by the parent and student, the principal or his/her designee will notify the MACAD coordinator immediately to schedule the student for the next session. The student must begin and complete their sessions as scheduled.
The MACAD coordinator will notify the principal or his/her designee in writing of the entry, departure dates, and status of the student. Failure to complete the MACAO SUPER Program will result in the student being immediately assigned the six remaining days of the suspension.
The MACAD SUPER Program includes four two-hour sessions over a two week period. These sessions provide information about the legal and medical consequences of substance abuse,
3-15

PROJECT OUTCOMES
SOURCE OF FUNDING CONTACT

and decision-making, critical thinking, effective listening, and communication skills. During these sessions student drug assessments, evaluations, and anonymous student and parent surveys are conducted.
The intervention center has a private counseling area, record-keeping, and training and assessment facilities. The program offers counseling and referral services and uses private psychologists and facilities for analysis.
The program is staffed by counselors with special interest in chemical dependency. Counselors examine the student's historic and generational background for chemical dependency. Videotapes, handouts, and materials supplied by the QUEST program are used by the counselors. The counselors also develop support groups for students.
The MACAO SUPER Program tests students when they enter and leave the program. The program receives feedback from referrals, school administrators, and community agencies. The program collects information on interventions, the demographic and academic descriptions of students served, and student attainment of program objectives. The program also conducts follow-up studies of program participants.
The MACAO SUPER Program is funded by the United Way and through a federal grant from the Drug Free Schools Program.
Tom Mathis P.O. Box 1088 Marietta, GA 30061 (404) 426-3433

3-16

PROJECT TARGET POPULATION PROJECT GOAL DESCRIPTION
PROJECT OUTCOMES
SOURCE OF FUNDING CONTACT

Monte Sano School-The Innovative Demonstration School of Excellence (K - 5)
The entire school's student population
The project is designed to increase the overall academic achievement levels of the student population and to increase student self esteem.
The Innovative Demonstration School of Excellence is a total model school, which is based on the effective schools research. The moael includes the development of a pr~cess that reflects the implementation of the six basic teaching functions: daily review, presentation, guided practice, feedback, independent practice and periodic reviews. To assist the school in realizing its goals, proven effective instructional programs were introduced in the reading and mathematics areas of the curriculum that augment the already existing curriculum. The comprehensive model provides an effective instructional program that addresses the diverse needs of all students and positively enhances student achievement and the school climate.
The project incorporates a through systematic evaluation component using a series of test scores and. control groups. School attendance rates are up over 30 percent and the school has involved over 70 percent of the parents in school related activities.
The program is funded by a $80,000 grant from the State Department of Education and $10,000 of local funds.
Ms. Bequi Coar Program Coordinator Monte Sana School 3116 Lake Forest Drive, Bldg. 311 Augusta, GA 30909

3-17

PROJECT
TARGET POPULATION
PROJECT GOALS
DESCRIPTION

Optional Program with Training (OPT) Grades 9 -12
Glynn County Schools
The program is designed for students who have not been successful in the traditional classroom setting. To be eligible for the program a student must be two years or more behind his/her class or have failed the ninth grade. A student must be at least 16 years old to enroll in the program.
The primary objective of OPT js to prepare students to pass the GED exam and graduate with their class. In addition, students complete two years of vocational training which will allow them to graduate with a marketable skill.
OPT is a two year program divided into academic and vocational areas. The academic program is housed at Glynn Academy and the vocational program at Brunswick High School. Participants spend three hours in the academic and three hours in the vocational program during each school day. Transportation is provided between the two campuses.
Students apply for the program and are initially screened by a guidance counselor. Conferences are held with selected students, their parents and the program coordinator. Both students and parents must sign a contract outlining the goals and regulations of the program. It is made clear that the ultimate goal of the program is aGED diploma rather than a regular high school diploma. The program is limited to a maximum of 72 students. These students are divided evenly with 36 in the academic program while the other 36 are in the vocational program.
The academic component of the program is designed to develop functional competencies in the areas of language arts, social studies, mathematics, science, and life skills. The 36 students attending the academic portion of the schedule are separated into three groups of twelve students each. These groups attend one hour classes in the areas of language arts, mathematics and life skills on a rotating basis. At the end of this three hour rotation the students proceed to the vocational phase of the program.

3-18

PROJECT OUTCOMES
SOURCE OF FUNDING
CONTACT

The academic portion of the program makes extensive use of audio-visual materials and selfpaced computer based instruction. Students advance at their own pace following individualized study programs. The Remedial Services Institute's GED series is used and supplemented by Kentucky GED classes on videocassettes. Each section of the academic program is staffed by a certified instructor who has had training in dealing with at-risk students.
Students are given a great deal of responsibility in the day to day operation of the program. Students are responsible for ordering materials, organizing and maintaining files and other aspects of the program's daily operation. These responsibilities are part of the life skills component of the academic program.
At the end of the two year OPT program job placement is available. The Private Industry Council has agreed to fund 15 slots in the program for students who meet the council's employment criteria. Currently all of the slots have not been filled.
The response of program participants and administrators has been very positive. Academic performance of the students has improved and there is a great deal of interest being expressed by students not currently in the program. The most important outcome of the program is that fifteen students who had decided to drop out remained in the program all year.
The OPT program has been funded by matching $10,000 grants from the Georgia Department of Education (Vocational Education) and the Glynn County School Board. The initial purchase price of the Remedial Services Institute's GED series was $50,000, with an annual contract fee of $1,000. It is estimated that the total start-up cost for the first year of the program was from $90-$95,000. The program qualifies for Chapter 1 funding which will pay half of the salaries of the language arts and mathematics instructors.
Mr. L.E. McDowell Vocational Director Glynn County Schools Instructional Services 2400 Reynolds St. Brunswick, GA 31521 (912) 264-6220
3-19

PROJECT TARGET POPULATION PROJECT GOALS DESCRIPTION
PROJECT OUTCOMES

Parenting Programs
Brooks County Schools
An In-School Parenting Program is available to all students at Brooks County High School. An After-School Parenting Program is available only to parents or to pregnant females.
The Brooks County parenting programs teach knowledge, skills and attitudes needed for successful parenting.
The Brooks County School District has offered parenting programs for the past six years. Both the In-School Program, which is titled simply "Parenting", and the After-School Program, titled "Teenage Outreach: Values and Choices" are centered around a computer laboratory. Personal computers and filmstrips are used extensively by students in these highly individualized parenting programs. Both instruction and testing are computer assisted and cover a variety of topics including:
o personal development; o interpersonal relationships; o human sexuality; o pregnancy and birth; o nutrition; and, o preparation for employment.
Brooks County High School is unique in that it operates a day-care center on the school campus that serves the entire community. The day-care center is fully self-supporting. Profits generated are used to improve and expand the facility. The day-care center serves as a learning lab for students in the parenting programs. Parenting program students who themselves have children attending the day-care center are allowed to have their children ride with them on the school bus each day, thus minimizing transportation problems for program participants.
Both In-School and After-School Parenting Programs are in a stage of continuing development. Therefore, no data on program effectiveness is currently available. However, enrollments in both the parenting programs and the day-care center are consistently high each year. The 60 hour inschool program has served 21 females (6 in their

3-20

SOURCE OF rUNDING
CONTACT

first pregnancy and 12 single parents) and one male, single parent. Ages of students served has ranged from 13 to 15 years.
As noted previously, the day-care center is selfsupporting. Its operating budget is approximately $60,000 annually. Local funds support the parenting programs supplemented with annual single parenting program grants from the Georgia Department of Education.
Ms. Mary Stevens Home Economics Teacher Brooks County High School 704 N. Talloaks Road Quitman, GA 31643 (912) 263-8923

3-21

PROJECT TARGET POPULATION PROJECT GOAL DESCRIPTION
PROJECT OUTCOMES

PASS-Partnership and Student Success
Thirty third grade students, identified as needing instruction beyond what is generally accomplished in the regular classroom setting (through scores on the ITBS, administered at the end of the second grade), and whose parents have historically been uninvolved in the educational process, will be the target population.
To dramatically improve achievement in mathematics for at-risk third grade students through the involvement of parents in the instructional process, and through an innovative approach to utilizing materials already identified as effective.
The project is organized into two components and is based on the assumption that academic achievement is highly correlated with a positive self-concept. The first component will be to assist parents to use parenting skills to help their children improve their academic achievement in mathematics. Learning how to effectively aid in academic tasks, at home, will be the other component. The school and its resources (both material and personnel) will be involved, but the home and parent must accept a portion of the responsibility. By affording the use of manipulative materials organized into learning packets, as well as computers and related software (all of which will be used in the home), and personnel trained to work effectively with heretofore "uninvolved" parents, the school can provide the training needed to help parents more effectively aid their children in academic tasks at home. This project, then, will seek both to create and foster interaction between school and parent (a partnership), and to integrate the cognitive mathematics understandings with basic life skills. The parents are contacted by two outreach workers who make a very active effort to establish a relationship with the parents.
The project incorp~rates a systematic evaluation plan designed by faculty members at Georgia State University using a variety of test scores and control groups. The first year's evaluation contrasted scores of the experimental group with those of a control group on the Georgia Criterion Referenced Test (CRT) and the Iowa Test of Basic Skills.

3-22

SOURCE OF
J'UNDING
CONTACT

(ITBS). There was a somewhat higher performance by the experimental group on the CRT performance portion of the test (proportion of students passing) and on the ITBS total score. These differences are illustrated in the table below. Student attendance,
completion of homework, self-esteem, and selfconcept were about the same for both groups of
students.

Students

N

Experimental 38

Control

28

CRT TOTAL
7.58
7.07

CRT PASS
.87
.71

ITBS ITBS TOTAL PASS
48.7 48.97
47.7 44.96

The project is funded by a $44,461.80 grant for innovative programs from the Georgia Department of Education with a $22,704 local match.
Ms. Gwenn Roundtree Principal Thompson Elementary School Thompson, GA

3-23

PROJECT
TARGET POPULATION
PROJECT GOALS
DESCRIPTION

SPIRIT (Support Peers Implementing Resourceful Instructional Techniques) Peer Tutoring, Study Center
Emanuel County Schools
Students are identified who have performed poorly on the Basic Skills Test (BST) or who are having problems with basic course work. The largest group of participants are tenth grade students. Students may also ask to participate in the program without having been identified by the school administration. Participation in the project is voluntarily, however, students are strongly encouraged to participate.
The primary goal of the program is to remediate basic skills so that students will be able to pass the Basic Skills Test. The SPIRIT Study Center is available to any student who needs a quiet place to study or who desires assistance with preparing for the BST or with regular course work.
The program has been in operation for one year and was originally designed solely for the remediation of basic skills. The two high schools in the district implemented the program in different ways. The larger of the two schools directed the program at remediation of basic skills necessary to pass the BST. The smaller high school applied the program broadly to the schools general curriculum.
The tutoring program operates after school two days a week for one hour each session. Tutoring sessions are conducted in the areas of language arts and mathematics by a certified instructor with the aid of peer tutors. Additional sessions may be conducted immediately preceding the administration of the BST. Math and language arts sessions are conducted in separate classrooms. The tutoring sessions concentrate on those objectives which a student did not master on the BST.
The maximum size of the tutoring sessions is limited to 12 to 15 students so that students may receive individual attention. The math sessions utilize the PACE math modules to prepare students for the objectives of the BST. The curriculum for the language arts sessions is prepared by the language arts instructor. Attendance at the sessions is voluntary and

3-24

PROJECT OUTCOMES
SOURCE OF FUNDING
CONTACT

generally students have attended the majority of the sessions after entering the program.
Students working as peer volunteers participate in an orientation program. There are no strictly defined requirements for participation in the program. Teachers monitor the peer tutor's academic performance to ensure that participation in the program does not adversely affect the peer tutor's grades. A bank of tutors is maintained and scheduling is done on a flexible basis.
The Study Center is an outgrowth of the after school tutoring program. The center is housed in the media lab and is open before school and three days after school. Students may also use the Study Center during regular school hours. The Study Center is staffed by peer tutors and volunteer teachers. Assistance is available both for students preparing for the BST and students with questions regarding regular classwork.
The Study Center is equipped with computers and additional resource materials. Students use the computers for SAT preparation, to work on specific academic areas, and for word processing. Future plans call for adding more computer stations and academic software to the Study Center.
The peer tutoring program is strongly supported by students, teachers and parents. During the first year of the program over 50 percent of the students attending the tutoring sessions have passed the portions of the BST on which they were deficient. The Study Center has been heavily utilized by students particularly prior to BST testing and final exams.
The first year of the program has been supported by a $3,500 grant from the Georgia Department of Education, matched by the school district. The major costs of the program have been teacher's salaries for the after school tutoring program, and the PACE math modules.
Mrs. Jamie Lawrence Vocational Supervisor Emanuel County Schools P.O. Box 130 Swainsboro, GA 30401 (912) 237-6674
3-25

PROJECT
TARGET POPULATION PROJECT GOALS
DESCRIPTION

Student Mentoring Oglethorpe County High School Lexington, GA 30602
Oglethorpe County Schools
.
Students identified as at-risk based on their previous retentions, number of course failures, absentee rates, and teacher knowledge of student attitudes.
To motivate at-risk students to continue in school, to graduate, and achieve gainful employment. The goals are threefold: to reduce the dropout rate significantly in the next two years, ensure that those who do drop out during that two year period eithe+ secure employment or renew their educational efforts, and continue improving programs for at-risk students beyond the funding period.
The program is divided into two parts. The focus of the first part is to give personal attention to students; the focus of the second part is to develop curriculum and alternative education programs.
Personal Attention:
o Identification of all at-risk students according to age, previous retentions, number of course failures, absentee rates, and teacher knowledge of student attitudes (to be completed prior to school opening, 1987 and again prior to opening of 1988) .
o Care plan whereby teachers adopt two to three at-risk students, meet with them weekly, review their progress, find out what problems they are experiencing, and provide referrals for tutoring, counseling, job placement, child care, and transportation (to begin fall, 1987, and continue throughout the project) .
o Development by the Student Council of a booklet of community resources to respond to high risk students' academic, social, personal, and employment concerns. Additional resources will include filmstrips, tapes, and videotapes of interviews with former students who struggled in high school but who have

3-26

succeeded following completion of high school (to begin fall, 1987, and continue throughout the project) .
o Information sharing sessions to be held by job training coordinators and directors of vocational training institutes and adult education programs (to begin after January, 1988, and continue throughout the project) .
o Daily tutorial sessions by teachers and academically successful students for at-risk students in particular courses ( to begin October of 1987 and continue throughout the project) .
o A half-time counselor/teacher to work closely with no more than twenty incoming ninth graders and ten tenth graders who are predicted to dropout (based on'previous analysis) to counsel them, coordinate programs with their regular teachers, tutor, and arrange special learning activities (to begin summer of 1987) .
Curriculum and Alternative Educatibn Programs:
o Alternative curriculum development for teachers of at-risk students in their regular courses. Each high school course conforms to state mandated minimum curriculum objectives. Most of those objectives are taught through textbooks and materials that assume an "at level" reading competence of students. As a result, the at-risk students are often not able to keep up with the material. Materials and activities that are of high interest but less dependent on reading level will be obtained or developed.
o Reading instruction will be focused on helping students comprehend the reading material used in required courses instead of teaching remedial skills in isolation.
o A half-time at-risk, counselor/teacher will have a partial pullout program for no more than twenty incoming ninth graders and ten tenth graders. This program will be developed in conjunction with the regular program classroom teachers.
3-27

PROJECT OUTCOMES
SOURCE Oli' li'UNDING
CONTACT

o Staff development for the entire faculty targeting strategies for working with atrisk students.
The dropout rate at Ogelthorpe County High School has decreased dramatically since the project was initiated. The rate has decreased from 43 percent of a cohort in 1986 to 33 percent in 1987. By March of 1988 the dropout rate had only reached 17 percent.
The total budget for the two year program of $144,000 came from local appropriations, services from the University of Georgia and a $70,000 grant from the Metropolitan Life Foundation.
Mr. Aubrey Finch Principal Ogelthorpe County High School Hwy 78 Lexington, GA 30602

3-28

PROJECT TARGET POPULATION PROJECT GOALS
DESCRIPTION

Systematic Intervention in Language Development (S ILD)
Butts County Schools
The program is designed for pre-Kindergarten and Kindergarten students who score 1.5 standard deviations below average on the TEL Development Inventory. Students are tested during spring pre-registration for Kindergarten.
The primary goal of SILD is to improve the language and cognitive skills of Kindergarten students, particularly those from poor socioeconomic backgrounds. The long range objective of the program is to eliminate gaps in a child's educational development at an early stage before they experience academic failure. The program also attempts to increase the awareness of parents regarding their role in the educational development of their child.
Students are identified and admitted to the program based on their scores on the TEL Development Inventory. These students are given special instruction in a regular Kindergarten classroom setting. The students in the program are spread across eleven regular Kindergarten classrooms.
In addition to the regular Kindergarten teachers, the program employs a speech therapist and early childhood education teacher to work with the students. These teachers each spend forty-five minutes each day with groups of approximately ten students in their regular classroom. The speech therapist uses the Lets Talk for Children series and the early childhood education teacher uses the Peabody Language Experience Kit-Level II. Both of the teachers are assisted by a paraprofessional. The augmented model was chosen so that the maximum number of students could be reached by the program.
As a part of the SILD program parent conferences are held during pre-registration and horne visits are made for each student participating in the program. During the parent conferences and horne visits staff members are able to discuss the details of the SILD program with parents and to instruct them as to how they can enhance their children's educational experience. The horne visits allow staff members to assess the

3-29

PROJECT OUTCOMES
SOURCE OF FUNDING
CONTACT

resources available in the home and to determine if there are any special circumstances in the home environment that may affect a student's performance in the program.
Students who score particularly low on the TEL Development Inventory are eligible to enroll in a pre-Kindergarten summer session. This program is designed primarily for students who have had no pre-school experience. A major component of the program is the involvement of parents in the classroom experience. Parents are able to observe and participate in educational activities the program provides for their children. Parents are instructed in methods they may use to enhance and extend these activities to the home environment.
The program has been in existence for one year and no formal evaluation has been conducted. The performance of students who have participated in the program will be compared to the performance of those students who were in the regular Kindergarten program. One outcome of the program has been a 50 percent decrease in the number of students in remedial programs. In addition, the performance of program participants will be compared to that of similar students in another county. The program has been well received by students, staff and particularly parents.
The program is funded with an $84,000 grant from the Georgia Department of Education. Grant moneys have been utilized for salaries, materials and staff development for all teachers in the program. Approximately $17,000 in local funds has been used for staff salaries. The pre-Kindergarten summer program is funded locally.
Ms. Norma Greenwood SILD Project Director Butts County Schools P.O. Box 3819 Jackson, GA 30233 (404) 775-2605

3-30

PROJECT TARGET POPULATION
PROJECT
GOALS
DESCRIPTION

Teens In Community Service (TICS) - Peer Counseling Program Dropout Prevention Project: Grades 7-12
Appling County Schools
The dropout prevention program is designed for at-risk students in grades 7-10. These students are identified in grades 6-9 through the use of a checklist of characteristics identifying potential dropouts. The checklist is completed by the student's teachers in grades 6-9. The TICS peer counseling program serves students in grades 7-12. The peer counselors serve as an information resource for their fellow students.
The main emphasis of the Dropout Prevention Project is on the early identification, in grades 6-9, of students who may be classified as potential dropouts. After being identified as at-risk, these students are provided with a comprehensive program, including individual and group counseling, and computer academic and counseling software, geared to helping them remain in school.
The program begins with the identification of at-risk students in grades 6-9 prior to their promotion to grades 7-10. This is accomplished through the use of a checklist detailing the characteristics, both academic and emotional, of potential dropouts. A student is classified as at-risk if a single teacher identifies five problem categories or if several different teachers identify problem categories.
Many teachers, counselors and administrators have participated in five days of staff development workshops dealing with the characteristics and identification of potential dropouts. The workshops also presented instructional methods and leadership styles to be used with at-risk students. It is the intention of the Dropout Prevention Project that all teachers will participate in this type of workshop dedicated to the topic of potential dropouts and dropout prevention.
Upon identification of the students being at risk, a list of these students is compiled and provided to the principals of the appropriate schools. The registration process of these students is closely monitored by to insure that they are placed in the appropriate courses.

3-31

These students also participate in a group counseling program in addition to individual counseling. The group counseling sessions are composed of five to seven sessions and group size is limited to six to eight students. The primary topics covered by the group sessions are:
o administration and interpretation of the Piers-Harris Self Concept Inventory;
o discussion of individual strengths and weaknesses, self-esteem and self-motivation;
o interpersonal communication and relationships; and,
o study and test taking skills.
Individual counseling is provided on an as-needed basis following the group sessions. Students who have participated in the group sessions have shown a greater willingness and tendency to seek individual counseling.
Teens in Community Services (TICS) is a peer counseling program serving students in grades 712. Peer counselors are given training in the areas of drug and alcohol abuse, human sexuality, death and dying, nutrition and first aid, and mental and emotional health. Peer counselors serve" as an information resource for their classmates.
A special liaison counselor is provided for students in grades 8-9. The counselor spends the first semester at the high school with the ninth grade class and the second semester at the junior high. Individual registration is provided for eighth grade students. As a part of this process individual appointments are made with the parents of each student to review that student's academic record. The liaison counselor serves to ease the transition between junior and senior high school and assures that students enroll in the classes for which they are academically best suited. The individual registration also initiates one on one contact between the student and counselor which can be carried over to the first semester of the ninth grade.
3-32

PROJECT OUTCOMES
SOURCE OF FUNDING CONTACT

Al~hough the program is in its first year it has been successful in identifying at-risk students at an early stage and providing them with a more comprehensive program of counseling. Following development of a list of characteristics of potential dropouts, 257 students in grades 6-9 were identified. These students attended group counseling sessions which were followed by individual sessions. Student response has been very favorable to the group counseling sessions and the TICS program. The counseling sessions and related staff training program have created a more educationally conducive attitude among both teachers and students.
Other activities included participation of 250 students in a "Just Say No" march against drugs, participation of 32 community representatives in a Career Activity Day, and assignment of over 60 new students or students with personal problems to "corne under the wings" of TICS.
Funding for the project has corne from the Georgia Department of Education ($10,OOO) and the Appling County Board of Education ($10,OOO). Professional development funds were utilized to conduct the five day workshop on dropout prevention. The hiring of additional counselors has been funded by the county.
Mrs. Dale C. Clark Director of Guidance and Testing Appling County Schools Route 7, Box 36 Baxley, GA 31513 (912) 367-8604

3-33

CHAPTER FOUR
IN-SCHOOL SUSPENSION PROGRAMS
According to a growing number of educators and researchers, positive alternatives to traditional outof-school suspensions are no longer an option but a necessity_(Leatt, 1985). The increased use of alternatives to out-of-school suspension indicates significant changes in the attitudes of American educators concerning the goals and objectives of school discipline policies and programs. This change in attitude reflects growing concern ~mong parents, educators, and the public in general, concerning the negative consequences of out-of-school suspension on students, the schools, and the community as a whole.
The negative effects of out-of-school suspension programs and the increased use of in-school alternatives to suspension raise a number of critical questions about the overall purpose of school disciplinary practices, the reasons why schools discipline and suspend students, the effectiveness of school disciplinary actions, and the development and implementation of successful suspension alternatives.
This first part of this chapter discusses some of the critical issues involving out-of-school suspensions and their impact on the development of in-school alternatives to suspension. The second section describes the essential elements of in-school suspension programs. The third section lists the steps in the establishment of successful programs and the fourth section provides descriptions of successful in-school suspension programs. The last two sections of the chapter focus on the State of Georgia. These sections describe the current status of in-school suspension programs in the state and provide descriptions of Georgia model programs.
SUSPENSION
A review of the research literature on suspension reveals that out-of-school suspensions are one of the most common and the most controversial disciplinary techniques used by schools to respond to student misbehavior. Concern about the negative consequences of out-of-school suspension has grown as the interrelationsh1ps among student misbehavior, inadequate
4-1

or inappropriate disciplinary measures, and student dropout rates have become more clear (Leatt, 1985). Researchers and educators (Chobot and Garibaldi, 1982; Collins, 1985; Leatt, 1985; Mizell, 1979; Williams,
1979) cite a number of factors which have contributed to this increased concern and to significant changes in the attitudes of American educators toward school suspension policies and programs:

o the finding that the system of out-ofschool suspensions was inherently racist and extremely sexist given the high
percentage of male, minority students suspended; .

o the acknowledgment that the loss of instructional time is unacceptable for all students and is particularly detrimental for low-income students and those students experiencing academic difficulties;

o an increased awareness that suspending students from school for attendance offenses is an irrational and ineffective disciplinary response which is in fundamental conflict with sound educational philosophy;

o

the ~ealization that suspension is an

ineffective and unbelievely self-

defeating response to non-violent,

disruptive student behavior;

o the acknowledgment by school administrators that short-term out-ofschool suspensions are often used as an
expeditous and simplistic response to complex problems;

o the realization by school officials that the suspension of students reduces the level of state financial aid to schools since suspended students are not counted in the average daily attendance total;

o the finding that suspension of students requires procedural due process, oral or written notice of the charges against students and a hearing which provides the students with the opportunity to present their side of the incident;

4-2

o the finding that suspension conveys a strong message of personal and institutional rejection and frustration which isolates students from peers and the instructional environment, creates personal feelings of failure and rejection, exacerbates students' problems, and encourages students to drop out of school;
o decreasing parental support of school disciplinary methods and increasing criticism by parents and community groups that suspensions are ineffective, and that schools are not using the wide range of techniques and services available to them to identify and remedy the problems responsible for disciplinary offenses;
o pressure from law enforcement officials and juvenile court judges to keep unsupervised suspended students in school in order to decrease daytime juvenile delinquency and crime;
o the acknowledgment that suspended students are frequently stereotyped and labeled troublemakers and/or problem students by school staff;
o evidence that suspension is so inappropriately used and misused that it negatively impacts students' sense of justice and fairness; and,
o the finding that suspensions indirectly lead to increased social welfare costs resulting from unemployment and educational deficiencies.
In "In-School Alternatives to Suspension: Why Bother?" Junious Williams (1979) states that the most severe disciplinary action a school can impose on a student, is school removal, the decision to temporarily or permanently deny a student access to their normal schedule of instructional activities. According to Williams, there are three types of removals: short-term suspensions, long-term suspensions, and expulsions. Ideally, the length of the suspension should reflect the severity of the infraction or misbehavior.
4-3

Short-term out-of-school suspensions are the most common form of suspension used by schools. Generally, students are suspended from school for a period of one to ten days for misbehaviors which necessitate the
removal of the student to avoid further disruptions of the classroom and/or to protect the physical safety of students and school staff. It appears that in-school suspensions programs are used primarily as alternatives to short-term out-of-school suspensions.

Long-term suspensions are usually imposed on those students who, either, exhibit moderately serious misbehaviors, have repeated behavioral infractions, or for whom short-term suspensions have proven ineffective. Generally, long-term suspensions are for fixed periods of time exceeding ten school days.

The expulsion of a student is the most severe disciplinary action available to school administrators. An expelled student is not allowed to attend any school operated by the local school system. Expulsion is reserved for those students who commit felonies or serious offenses resulting in bodily injury to an
individual.

An examination of the research literature (Mizell, 1979; Williams, 1979; Wu, Pink, Crain, and Moles, 1982) reveals that proponents of suspension believe that it serves a number of very important purposes for the school. These include:

o providing an expedient method to protect individuals and school property and to
minimize the disruption to those students interested in learning;

o

a cooling-off period for the student and

some relief for school staff who may be

frustrated by previous attempts to deal

with the student's behavior through less

severe sanctions;

o helping students develop self-control and learn the mode of conduct that is
necessary in a free society;

o serving as a punishment and forcing students to comply with established
behavioral roles at school; and,

4-4

o requiring parental contact since the suspension of a student provokes a crisis which requires the-parents to appear at school, this is especially important in those situations where the parents have not cooperated with the school in the past.
critics of out-of-school suspension argue that it is ineffective in meeting these stated purposes and that "the strongest evidence demonstrating the need for curtailing the use of suspensions and developing in. school alternatives is found in the analysis of the reasons why students are suspendedi , (Williams, 1979).
Williams states that student misbehaviors leading to suspension can be divided into four general categories:
o attendance violations;
o discretionary offenses;
o fighting; and,
o legal violations (state or federal) .
He found that attendance and discretionary violations account for half of all suspensions. He states that this
... serves to reinforce the contention that suspensions are not utilized to separate students guilty of serious misconduct, but for the most part are used as a response to relatively minor misbehavior on the part of the student (Williams, 1979).
Williams concludes that suspension is frequently used by educators because:
1. it is a very convenient device for managing discipline;
2. student discipline practices have become standardized and/or systemized;
3. there is a lack of alternatives; and,
4. out-of-school suspensions are believed to be effective.
4-5

Chobot and Garibaldi (1982), in "In-School Alternatives to Suspension: A Description of Ten School District Programs," list the reasons for student suspensions, most frequently cited by educators. In order of frequency these are:
o attendance problems;
o smoking;
o nonviolent acts disruptive to the educational process;
o violations ot school .rules;
o assaults, fighting, or threat of injury;
o use of drugs or alcohol; and,
o vandalism, theft, or destruction of property.
Like Williams, Chobot and Garibaldi state that a majority of suspensions are for offenses that are neither dangerous to persons or property. Thus, it appears that suspension is being misused and inappropriately applied by educators and school administrators since the reasons why students are suspended appear to be minor compared to the harshness and negative consequences of out~of-school suspension.
M. Hayes Mizell (1979) in "Designing and Implementing Effective In-School Alternatives to Suspension, II states that school administrators must recognize the fact that suspension is an expedient response to student misbehavior which does not address the reasons for student misbehavior. According to Mizell, student misbehavior, in whole or in part can be attributed to:
o the way teachers manage their classrooms and/or relate to their students
o the hasty jUdgment of school personnel whose reactions are based on incomplete information, cultural/racial stereotypes, and/or personal values; and
o a range of school, peer, home, and community factors.
Moreover, Mizell states that the use of out-of-school suspension programs means that educators
4-6

... are unable or unwilling to successfully initiate and execute the kinds of preventive instructional, organizational, and management strategies which will minimized the manifestations of inappropriate behavior by students (Mizell, 1979).
Wu, Pink; Crain, and Moles, in "Student Suspension: A Critical Reappraisal" state that student suspension involves more than student misbehavior. They state that student suspensions are not simply a matter of student misbehavior, but also -a consequence of the way different schools operate, and how they treat their students. According to Wu, Pink, Crain, and Moles (1983), the following six school factors are far more powerful in explaining the school suspension rate than student attitudes and behavior. They report that students chances of being suspended increase if:
1. teachers are seen by students as relatively uninterested in them;
2. teachers believe that students are incapable of solving problems;
3. disciplinary matters are handled largely by administrative rules;
4. the school is not able to provide consistent and fair governance;
5. there is a relatively high degree of academic bias among school personnel; and,
6. there is a relatively high degree of racial bias present at the school.
There is a consensus among most researchers and educators that
... given the potential consequences and costs of suspension for the student, the school, and society, [out--of-school] suspension for minor misbehaviors is extremely expensive. When all the factors related to the purpose, impact, and consequences of suspension are considered, it is clear that there is no realistic choice except to find ways to avoid [out-of-school] suspension and to reduce its negative impacts and consequences (Williams, 1979).
4-7

Researchers and educators caution that the development and implementation of
... in-school alternatives can be a valuable step toward better meeting student's needs, but they must not be allowed to deter or replace more fundamental educational efforts which will prevent the kinds of behavior to which in-school alternatives are a response ... just because a disciplinary practice carries the label of an in-school alternative to suspension, it cannot be assumed that the needs of children are being better served or that it represents a qualitative improvement over previous disciplinary practices (Mizell, 1979).
Moreover, researchers and educators stress that the in-school alternatives to suspension must be carefully planned and monitored by skilled educators to avoid the many negative consequences of suspension and to keep inschool suspension programs from becoming as casually utilized and mismanaged as out-of-school suspension (Mizell, 1979; Williams, 1979).
ELEMENTS OF SUCCESSFUL IN-SCHOOL SUSPENSION PROGRAMS
A review of the literature reveals that a variety of programs and activities have been implemented by schools as alternatives to out-of-school suspension. The goals and objectives of many of these programs reflect the recognition of the negative consequences of out-ofschool suspensions and a significant change in the attitudes of American educators concerning school suspension policies and programs. Educators and school administrators have realized that student misbehavior is often caused by underlying school, home, peer or community problems and, as a result, effective school disciplinary actions must focus on rehabilitative aspects rather than the punitive actions.
Several studies have identified the program elements or components necessary for the successful development and implementation of in-school suspension programs. In "In-School Suspension: An Alternative to Unsupervised Out-of-School Suspension," Mario DiSciullo (1984) states that the goals and objectives of most in-school suspension programs are:
4-8

1. to isolate the disruptive student from the non-disruptive;
2. to instruct the disruptive student; and,
3. to counsel the disruptive student.

Desmond Leatt (1987), in "In-School Suspension Programs for At-Risk Students," states that successful in-school suspension programs

... enable students to have as little interruption to their regular school program as possible while affording school personnel the opportunity of helping students develop adequate skills to survive and progress at
school.

Leatt also states that in-school suspension programs must:

o

provide academic assistance;

o

develop the student's sense of

responsibility;

o

provide flexible assignments;

o

provide clear expectations; and,

o

focus on the at-risk student.

In a related study, "In-School Alternatives to Suspension: A Description of Ten School District Programs," Chobot and Garibaldi, found that
... in-school alternatives to suspension are in-house programs to which a student may be assigned for a short period of time in lieu of out-of-school suspension. They are designed to counteract many of the negative effects of suspension. Instructional time may continue without interruption, and special academic help can be provided as needed (Chobot and Garbaldi, 1982).
Chobot and Garbaldi note that the amount and quality of the counseling that students receive varies. They found that "counseling services for students experiencing personal, academic, or behavioral difficulties can result in behavioral change, an improved self-image, and greater self-discipline."

4-9

M. Hayes Mizell (1979) in "Designing and Implementing Effective In-School Alternatives To Suspension," states that in-school suspension alternatives is a generic term that refers to "a framework within which problems are solved" and which "describe many different kinds of efforts that deal with student disciplinary offenses that would have formerly resulted in out-of-school suspension." He states that in-school suspension alternatives should be developed for the following specific purposes:
1. helping the student;
2. identifying and remedying the underlying problem;
3. helping the student develop selfdiscipline;
4. gaining knowledge about the factors contributing to discipline-related problems, and initiating preventive measures to reduce those problems;
5. eliminating the use of out-of-school disciplinary suspension for all offenses except those which clearly threaten the security of the school community; and,
6. providing a framework within which school personnel can work to achieve the first five goals, while enabling the majority of students in the school to continue to participate, without interruption, in the school's instructional process.
More importantly, Mizell advises that
... school officials who.are developing inschool alternatives to suspension should make sure their efforts are based on a solid philosophical foundation. If [school officials] believe that the primary purpose of the alternative is to punish students, to control students, or to modify the behavior of the student, then it is unlikely that the long-term results of the alternative will differ much from the results of other disciplinary practices conceived within a similar philosophical framework (Mizell, 1979) .
4-10

Mizell states that a solid philosophical foundation is necessary since the establishment of these programs often requires that school officials commit to alternatives that permit the program staff to make an objective analysis of what the problem really is. Moreover, school administrators must give the staff the power and support to recommend and establish effective school policies and programs.

Antoine M. Garibaldi (1979) in "In-School Alternatives to Suspension," finds that in-school programs have many points in common. Garibaldi reports that these programs
usually:

o are housed in a separate room;

o

are supervised by a caring teacher and/or

counselor;

o

are assigned students for a specific time

period; and,

o

require that students continually improve

their academic progress and behavior

during and after the student returns to

the regular classroom.

More recently, educators have focused on the rehabilitative aspect of school disciplinary actions. There is a consensus among most educators and researchers that purely punitive in-school suspension programs that do not involve some sort of therapeutic component are deficient and ineffective (Leatt, 1985). Desmond Leatt cautions that in-school suspension programs that do not offer students alternatives which help then overcome behavioral and educational problems are merely "programs which serve as administrative dumping grounds." Like Leatt, Mizell states that
... in school alternatives to suspension which result only in students sitting in a room are irresponsible management techniques which, over the long term are not likely to help either the student or the school (Mizell, 1979) .

In a related article, Francene Patterson (1985) makes the point that students are suspended from school for a variety of reasons. Patterson states that school administrators must address the causes of student behavior problems and formulate programs -which

4-11

specifically address student needs. According to Patterson,' the reasons most students are suspended involve "the outward manifestations of unacceptable behavior which can be traced to a single underlying cause--the student's inability to function in group situations." Most researchers agree with Patterson that
... no single alternative can realistically add~ess the variety of student needs and problems and the wide range of misbehavior that lead to suspensions ... what appears to be needed is not a single, foolproof approach, but a combination of strategies and approaches which realistically address the wide array of problems leading to the high level of suspension in the nation's pUblic schools (Williams, 1979).
Paula M. Short and George W. Noblit (1985), in "Missing the Mark in In-School Suspension: An Evaluation and Proposal," found that most effective in-school suspension programs are part of a total school discipline program. They state that "it is the responsibility of school administrators to establish effective school discipline and consequently, effective in-school suspension programs." According to Short and Noblit, effective in-school suspension programs not only punish or correct student behavior, they attempt to . "diagnose a student's problems, determine appropriate placement, and refer or provide treatment after placement." Short and Noblit (1985) report that therapeutic in-school suspension programs are based on behavioral management systems and/or behavior modification principals. Therapeutic programs provide students with services and activities which
o improve self-image;
o enhance communication skills;
o allow participation in decision-making;
o emphasize the completion of classwork as a "success experience";
o develop the skills needed in the school environment; and,
o provide counseling.
4-12

Short and Noblit stress that the counseling provided students must be varied to fit the need of students if the program is to be successful.
The research literatu~e on school suspension indicates that "success of these programs depends on the abilities and commitment of the people working with disruptive youth II (Collins, 1985). M. Hayes Mizell, concludes that in the American education system
... the quality of any given program is largely dependent upon the commitment of those who plan the program and upon the leadership and energy which they bring to its implementation (Mizell, 1979).
STEPS IN ESTABLISHING A IN-SCHOOL SUSPENSION PROGRAMS
A review of the research literature (Garibaldi, 1970; Mizell, 1979; Williams, 1979) reveals several types of in-school suspension alternatives which can be implemented by schools. These alternatives include:
o time-out rooms;
o an ombudsperson;
o hall monitors; o pupil problem teams;
o counseling and guidance programs;
o after school counseling clinics;
o peer counseling programs;
o behavioral control programs;
o school survival courses;
o alternative punishments;
o work-study programs;
o Saturday school;
o evening school;
o in-school suspension (detention) centers;
4-13

o in-school study centers;
o separate alternative schools; and,
o a combination of various program .approaches.
The research indicates that the establishment of an inschool suspension program requires a strong commitment by school staff and administrators. According to M. Hayes Mizell (1979), the commitment to design and implement an effective in-school alternative to suspension "implies a recognition of the negative consequences of the frequent use of out-of school suspension."

Junious Williams (1979) states in "In-School Alternatives To Suspension: Why Bother?" states that before schools can begin to develop in-school suspension programs they must:

o stop blaming students for misbehavior;

o cease to use the lack of finances as an excuse for inaction;

o give discipline more than a verbal priority--must commit resources;

o teach discipline like any other subject;

o provide teachers and administrators with comprehensive skills needed to design discipline systems and to manage discipline problems;

o

~nvolve students, parents, school

staff, and the community in the planning

and decision-making; and,

o be prepared to provide a wide range of comprehensive in-school suspension alternatives.

According to M. Hayes Mizell (1979), it is essential that the planning of in-school suspension program is a deliberate and thoughtful process. This means that teachers, administrators, students, and parents should be involved in the designing of program alternatives and that all the participants should be well-informed about various models and alternatives. Mizell states that

4-14

... the design of an in-school suspension alternative should reflect both an ambition to deal more substantively and successfully with student misbehavior and a sense of realism based on an intimate knowledge of student needs, and on the informal structures and relationships in the schools (Mizell, 1979).
Mizell (1979) lists several major components which must be considered during the implementation of a program. These are:
o that the criteria and procedures for referral must be appropriate and clearly stated;
o that the length of student assignments must be sufficient to identify the problem, and that a process must be initiated to effectively deal with these problems;
o that the in-school facilities should be removed from the normal activity of the school and provide instructional materials and study aids specifically geared to the academic level of the students;
o the careful selection of staff and the assignment of specific responsibilities;
o the involvement of the parents of students in discussions and analyses of student behavior;
o that students must receive academic instruction comparable or superior to that they would receive in their regular classrooms;
o the program must include individual or group counseling;
o that the staff must have access to the school system's support services;
4-15

o that once a student leaves the program, it is important to have a follow-up process to determine how the student is performing in regular classes and to determine the effectiveness of the program;
o that the program may require additional funding; and,
o that the program must be carefully monitored and evaluated at regular intervals to ensure its effectiveness.
According to Mizell, the most important elements of an in-school suspension program appear to be the quality of the staff and the of counseling provided. Mizell (1979) states that
... there is no more crucial aspect of developing a in-school alternative to suspension than selecting the staff who will work with the students assigned to the program ... Furthermore, it is critical that the regular school personnel understand the philosophy behind the program, why it has been created, and how it will work.
Mizell (1979) also lists the criteria for the selection of staff. In his opinion, the program staff should:
o want to work with the program;
o want to work with students who have problems;
o have demonstrated their ability to work successfully with youngsters with problems;
o relate well to students from a variety of class and cultural backgrounds;
o be interested in identifying and solving underlying problems causing student misbehavior; and,
o be patient, caring, and committed to students.
4-16

The other crucial factor in the establishment of an inschool suspension program is the quality and the level of counseling provided the students in the program. Mizell (1979) states:
... unless there is some opportunity to work with the student within the context of a counseling model, it is unlikely that the underlying problems causing the student behavior will be identified or that the student will be successfully involved in its solution.
Accordingly, the purpose of counseling in the in-school alternative program is
1. to involve the student in identifying and assuming some responsibility for solving the problems responsible for the student's misbehavior;
2. to assist the student in confronting the reasons for their own misbehavior and the misbehavior of others;
3. to assist the student in analyzing the relationship between their behavior and their short- and long-term self interests; and,
4. to assist the student in accepting responsibility for and in learning how to manage their behavior and to cope more responsibly with the behavior of others.
Researchers agree that the only other factor essential to the successful development and implementation of an in-school suspension program is the periodic monitoring and evaluation of the program. The purpose of program evaluation is to determine if the program is meeting its stated goals and objectives. The program must be monitored constantly to assure that it is operating effectively. According to Mizell (1979), program evaluations:
o help reduce out-of-school disciplinary suspensions;
o allow the gathering of data on student referrals and assignments;
o measure changes in student academic, social, and attendance levels;
4-17

o monitor the development of student selfdiscipline;
o increase the level of parent involvement; o determine which students the programs
serves; and, o determine the needs of students which
must be met. A review of research literature on in-school suspension reveals that in-school suspension programs are effective if they are carefully planned, developed, and implemented. Successful in-school suspension programs attempt to identify the underlying reasons for student misbehavior and to offer the student and their family assistance and support. It is clear that schools must make every effort to prevent student behavior problems and to find solutions to student problems instead of simply punishing students after the fact.
4-18

HPDEL IN-SCHOOL SUSPENSION PROGRAMS
Alternative Learning Center In-School Suspension and Saturday School positive Alternatives to Student Suspension Student Referral Centers

PAGE
4-20 4-21 4-22 4-23

4-19

Alternative Learning Center

contact:

Principal James Madison Memorial High School Madison, Wisconsin

students served:

Students referred by assistant principal

description:

The Alternative Learning Center (ALC) is
an in-school suspension program which was established to provide a disciplinary alternative to out-of-school suspension.
The program provides students with
uninterrupted educational opportunities while they are being disciplined.
Students are assigned to the ALC by the
assistant principal. The assistant principal discusses ALC rules and behavioral expectations with the student. The student signs an ALC assignment form acknowledging his or her understanding
of ALC guidelines and behavioral
expectations. ALC restrictions include: o school arrival and departure times;
o students must seek permission of the
ALC instructor to leave the classroom for any reason; o ALC student's lunch schedule is restricted; o students are excluded from all cocurricular activities and assemblies; and,
o students who do not attend the ALC when assigned or leave the area without permission are automatically suspended from school.
A standard memo is sent to all of the student's teachers notifying them of the student's assignment to the ALC. The ALC instructor routes lesson assignment sheets to all the student's teachers requesting class assignments. Upon completion of the ALC assignment and required classwork, the student returns to their normal school routine. The ALC instructor forwards an evaluation of the student's performance to the assistant principal for review (Van Den Heuvel,
1986) .

4-20

~n-School Suspension and Saturday School Program

contact:

Principal Liberty Senior High School Liberty, Missouri

students served:

Students who violate school rules.

description:

The Liberty In-School Suspension program was created to make in-school suspension into a self-help, rehabilitative process. The administrative staff has developed self-help packets for students placed in the in-school suspension program. The packets are carefully created to be
readable and concise, yet practical, informative, and pertinent. Sections of the packets are designed to provide
parents and counselors information about students' behavior. The self-help packets emphasize value clarification, judgment, and decision-making regarding the specific rule(s) violated by the students. In
addition, students are supplied packets which emphasize study skills related to
various academic courses. Most packets
dealing with specific rules violations are
two to three pages in length and contain multiple choice questions and some essay questions. The more severe the infraction, the more lengthy and involved the additional packet(s) become. Other materials may accompany the packets such as books, magazines, filmstrips, and tapes. At the end of their assignment, students meet with their counselor. In addition, a Saturday program was
implemented to deal with all violations of the school's attendance policy. Students with attendance problems such as chronic tardiness, excessive absenteeism, and unexcused absences are required to spend all of Saturday working on classwork, self-help packets, various study skill and audio-visual material. Students assigned to Saturday School are also scheduled for an appointment with their counselor on the Monday following their Saturday School assignment (Stessman, 1984, 1985).

4-21

positive Alternatives to Student Suspension

contact:

John Kackley or Ralph E. Dailey
Pupil Personnel Services Euclid Center 1015 10th Avenue North St. Petersburg, FL 33705 (813) 823-6696

students served:

Students with serious behavior problems facing suspension from school.

description:

Positive Alternatives to Student Suspensions (PASS) has been developed as a comprehensive, alternative approach to out-of-school suspension. PASS has two main intervention strategies, preventive /developmental and crisis/remedial. Preventive/developmental program activities include:

o staff development--workshops and seminars for faculty and staff;
o humanistic activities in the classroom--one hour a week devoted to positive social awareness activities;
o basic encounter--a student interaction program which emphasizes personal growth and effective communication;
and,
o parent training groups--a six session
program which helps parents improve
their relationships with with their children.

Crisis/remedial activities include:

o a time out room--an environment where students can discuss problems before coping difficulties result in undesirable behavior;
o a school survival course--a twelve week program helps students learn to create positive learning experiences and positive feed-back; and,
o home survival course--students learn a variety of techniques to facilitate relationships at home (Florida Department of Education, 1986).

4-22

atudent Referral Centers

contact:

Marilyn Finer-Collins 3830 Richmond Avenue Houston, Texas 77027 (713) 623-5151

students served:

Suspended students in grades six-12,
who act out in class and are disruptive or students whose attendance needs improvement.

description:

The main purpose of Student Referral Centers (SRCs) is to provide an alternative to out-of-school suspension.
The SRC promotes improved student behavior, enhances student achievement,
increases daily attendance, and encourages the development of a more positive attitude toward school. Discipline is inherent in the structure of the SRC and in the student's separation from their friends and school. . The staff of the SRC attempts to identify, evaluate, and treat student behaviors and
learning difficulties through the use of an alternative suspension class, individual and/or group counseling, and
referrals to other agencies. An individualized study class allows students to continue assigned academic work. Individual counseling is provided all students and the services of various community agencies are utilized for specific student or family problems.
Each SRC is located within a middle school
setting accessible to students and their
families. The facilities are separate from the main building of the school and
include a classroom and a counseling office. The recommended staff for a SRC is a counselor and a teacher. Community Youth Service workers assist students with special needs by helping them find community resources and visiting student's families. Proper inservice training for all administrative personnel is mandatory (Garibaldi, 1979; Texas Education Agency, 1987).

4-23

STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM IN GEORGIA
The in-school suspension movement is one of the most recent steps in the on-going process of resolving disciplinary problems in public schools. An examination of the history of this type of program reveals that inschool suspension programs have evolved because of three major factors:
1. pressure from the courts to assure the legal rights of students;
2. growing concern over problems caused by unsupervised students who are out of school because they have been suspended or expelled; and
3. problems resulting from students being deprived of an education as a form of punishment.
The Legal Rights of Students
The General Student Population: In January 1975, the
u.s. Supreme Court handed down a decision in Goss v.
Lopez that affirmed the rights of students to due process in disciplinary actions. The decision stated that any student suspended from public high school is entitled to a hearing, oral or written notice of the hearing, "an explanation of the evidence" if he denies the charges, and "an opportunity to explain his ~ide." The decision in the case of Wood v. Strickland handed down a month later, held that board of education members would not be immune from liability if they acted maliciously or with disregard for student's constitutional rights. Subsequently, HEW's Office for Civil Rights issued a directive ordering school districts to keep detailed records on all student disciplinary actions. As a result of these decisions, a great deal of attention has been focused on the issues of school suspension and school expulsion. This development along with the emphasis on student rights caused school systems to examine disciplinary rules and to offer students the protection of reasonableness, consistency of application, and equal protection.
Special Education Students: One of the most difficult problems facing educators is the enforcement of disciplinary rules in the cases of handicapped and special education students. Two legal issues tend to
4-24

surface whenever a special education student is disciplined, particularly when the punishment is severe, i.e. suspension or expulsion.
The first issue is whether the punishment is a "change in educational placement" requiring a new individualized educational plan (IEP) and/or affects the other procedural safeguards mandated by Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act and the Education for All Handicapped Children Act, P.L. 94-142.
The second issue involved is whether the student is being punished for misconduct that is a manifestation of his or her handicap. Most states, in administering P.L. 94-142, have taken the position that special education students cannot be punished for misconduct related to their handicap.
In 1981 the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit decided 5-1 v. Turlington. This case involved seven mentally retarded students in Florida who were expelled from school and who had filed a suit in U.S. District Court requiring that state and local officials provide them with the educational services and procedural rights required by Section 504 and P.L. 94-142. The Court of Appeals ruled that an expulsion was a change in educational placement. However, the court did not rule that a special student could never be expelled. The court stated:
we therefore find that expulsion is still a proper disciplinary tool under P.L. 94-142 and Section 504 when proper procedures are utilized and under proper circumstances. We cannot, however, authorize the complete cessation of educational services during an expulsion.
The court did address the issue of how a school district can determine whether a special education student is being punished for the manifestation of his or her handicap. In their decision, the court held that an expulsion must be accompanied by a determination as to whether the handicapped student's misconduct bears a relationship to the handicap.
Based on Turlington and other administrative and judicial decisions, it is possible to summarize several general principals that seem to apply to the suspension and/or
4-25

expulsion of handicapped students. First, it appears that special education students can be suspended for a short period of time in emergency situations. A comment in the regulations for the Turlington case states that a school district may use "its normal procedures for dealing with children who are endangering themselves or others."
Secondly, . at least one federal court in the case of Stanley v. School Administrative Unit No. 40 (January, 1980) has held that special education students can be suspended for nonemergency reasons for up to ten school days without triggering the elaborate "change in educational placement" procedural safeguards mandated by P.L. 94-142 and Section 504. However, some determination should be made regarding whether the student is being suspended for misbehavior related to his or her handicap. To accomplish this, special education personnel should be involved in the suspension procedures.
Since most courts have held that an expulsion is a change is educational placement, the expulsion should be imposed only after affording the student and parent all the procedural safeguards. It should also be determined that the expulsion is the result of misbehavior not related to the student's handicap. A pupil placement team (not solely school administrators or school board members) should make this determination since the Office of Civil Rights has issued a policy interpretation that school board members cannot serve as hearing officers in proceedings conducted to resolve disputes between parents of handicapped students and officials of their school system (43 Federal Register 36036, 14 August 1978). Also, the district should provide some form of home-based educational service to these students.
In-School Suspension and QBE
According to Quality Basic Education Act (QBE) Section 20-2-155(b), the Georgia State Board of Education is authorized to create an in-school suspension program. Since a vast majority of the students who disrupt public school classrooms are also experiencing problems in mastering classroom assignments and are below expectation in their academic achievement, it is the policy of the State of Georgia to reassign disruptive students to isolated individually oriented in-school suspension programs rather than suspend or expel such students from school.
4-26

r
The primary purposes of the in-school suspension program are to isolate the offending students from the regularly assigned classroom and activities of the school, to continue progress relative to classroom assignments, and to provide individually oriented instruction in essential skills and knowledge areas for which low achievement levels are contributing to the student's adjustment problems. The in-school suspension programs may be housed in the regularly assigned school, special schools specifically organized for such programs, or alternative schools, provided the suspended students are isolated from typical school activities until they demonstrate sufficient adjustment to warr~nt return to their previously assigned classes.
The State Board of Education shall adopt regulations, standards and eligibility criteria necessary to guide the effective operation of state supported in-school suspension programs. For the first year of implementation of this program state-wide, the State Board of Education shall request an amount for grants to local school systems based upon documentation of the number of eligible students estimated to be served; provided, however, that funds appropriated for this program in the initial year of operation shall be allocated only on the basis of the documented actual number of students being served during the initial year. FOr the second year of operation and thereafter, the amount of funds appropriated and allocated for this program shall be based on the actual count of students served during the preceding year.
Summary of Results From In-School Suspension Survey
Response:
The survey was conducted by the Georgia Department of Education from February 1, 1986 to March 30, 1986. Out of 1,785 schools in the State of Georgia, 907 responded, or almost 50 percent. The following paragraphs briefly summarize the ISS survey results.
Elementary Schools
535 schools out of 1,289 - 42 percent responded 75 schools out of 535 - 14 percent have ISS
4-27

Middle Schools 77 schools out of 152 responded - 51 percent have ISS

High Schools 126 schools out of 220 responded - 55 percent have ISS

Combined Secondary Schools 203 schools out of 372 responded - 55 percent have ISS

Alternative Schools:
The total number of schools reporting some type of system-wide alternative school was 57.

Plans for ISS Program:
Approximately 14 schools that do not have ISS programs now, are planning to implement ISS next year.

Should There Be Two ISS Programs (One Short- and One Long-Term Suspension?)

Total Responses

189

Yes, need two programs

110

No, no need for two programs 79

Needs Assessment:
In order of importance, schools report the following as most needed at the local level:
1. staff (directors, teachers, aides) 2. space 3. training for staff 3. counseling services 4. evaluation of program 5. on-site facility 6. remedial help for students 7. better method of transportation to off-site
ISS programs.

4-28

Schools report the following as most needed at the state level, in order of importance:
1. funding 2. guidelines and standards 3. training for staff 4. curriculum development and other
resources 5. technical assistance, monitoring and
evaluation 6. support for the ISS programs 7. communication among schools with ISS
programs through newsletters, meetings, directories, etc.

Analysis of Needs Assessment:

The main problem areas identified at the local level are lack of staff and space for ISS programs and lack of training for staff. An analysis of school responses reveals that they are coping with these critical needs in a variety of ways.

Staff - Different staff members are used to supervise and teach in the ISS program. Many are part-time only. In most cases, ISS staff include the following:

o the principal

o the assistant principal

o aides

o regular teachers alternating in ISS

o

librarians

o counselors

o secretaries

o

ISS teachers

o P.E. teachers

Space - Most ISS programs are housed in a designated room in the school. However, about half the schools report that there is no space in their schools to house the program. Listed below are a variety of ways schools utilize what space they have:
o areas in hallways o part of the principals or secretary's office o areas in regular classrooms o areas in gym o areas in the library o isolation booths

4-29

Training - Since many schools are not funded for qualified, full-time staff for ISS programs, there is a need for training directors and teachers. Training in classroom management techniques and methods for working with students who pose discipline problems are needed along with ways to deal with academic problems such as individualized and small group instruction.
At the state level, 75 percent of the schools responding to the survey report that funding is the greatest need. Many cannot operate good ISS programs because of the lack of funds for staff, space, materials, and other resources. Schools also report that they need the state to provide guidelines and standards for ISS programs and to assist with staff training.
Alternative Schools:
There are approximately 57 schools reporting that they use alternative schools for ISS programs. These alternative schools usually serve all the schools in the school system. Many of the alternative school programs cannot accommodate elementary students. As a result, elementary students may be housed in separate buildings or on a regular school campus.
At least two systems, Atlanta and Cobb report having alternative schools, not used for ISS programs. The alternative schools in these systems are schools of choice for students and serve as alternatives to the regular academic programs in the school system. The Atlanta City system is planning an on-site ISS program for the 1986-87 school year. Some systems such as Cobb and Gwinnett report that they have both alternative schools in separate buildings and on-site ISS programs.
4-30

HQDEL IN-SCHOOL SUSPENSION PROGRAMS: GEORGIA

PAGE

Hamilton Alternative School Program

. 4-32

In-School Suspension Center ...................... 4-34

In-School Suspension Program

4-36

. ISS Center (In-School Suspension)
Rockdale Alternative School Program

4-38 :. 4-40

Information for this section reflects survey responses received from Georgia program administrators, school districts, and sponsoring entities. Each of the
programs in this section was visited by program staff.

4-31

PROJECT

Hamilton Alternative School DeKalb County

TARGET

Suspended students in the County's schools.

POPULATION

PROJECT GOAL

To provide a second educational opportunity to students with disciplinary problems.

DESCRIPTION

The Hamilton alternative school is part of the County's overall discipline program. The County has a written discipline code which is explained to students at the beginning of the school year. The code contains specific offenses and their punishment and due process guarantees for
students. For serious offenses principals
can offer students the option of attending
the Hamilton alternative school. In order
to attend the school the students must agree to abide by the rules and procedures of that institution. This alternative is available to all students facing suspension in DeKalb County.

The school uses the normal curriculum but has a very committed teaching staff who
have small classes and who have volunteered to work in this environment. The staff is
recruited by the principal who is very
committed to the success o'f the program.
The morale of the staff appears to be very high which is demonstrated by an extremely good attendance record. The school offers counseling by a very experienced counseling staff and a great deal of individual attention from the teaching staff. The school counselor teaches the students a class in decision making during the school
year which is designed to increase the student's self-esteem and motivation.
Students are assigned to the school for a minimum period of the remainder of the academic quarter they are assigned. Overall the atmosphere of the staff is very supportive and positive. Many of the teachers have developed innovative materials and techniques to use with these students.

4-32

PROJECT OUTCOMES
SOURCE OF FUNDING CONTACT

The program has not implemented any systematic evaluation effort utilizing longitudinal follow- up or control groups. An examination of student's records and conversations with a number of students reveals a significant number of impressive success stories and attitude changes. The key elements associated with the successes is the voluntary nature of the assignment and the dedication and positive attitude of the staff.
The school is locally funded.
Dr. William Hightower Principal Hamilton Alternative School Scottsdale, GA

4-33

EROJECT

In-School Suspension Center Dougherty County

TARGET EOEULATION

This program is for middle school and high school students (grades 6-12) who have been suspended from their regular school.

EROJECT GOALS

The In-School Suspension Center gives students the opportunity to keep pace with their class work while suspended from their regular school. Additionally the Center's goals are:

o To improve students' mental image; o To develop and enrich students' self-
esteem; and, o To help students learn how to make
responsible decisions through a better understanding of others and a clearer interpretation of themselves.

DESCRIETION

The Center began in 1971 and now is housed in a separate school that also offers other special programs for the district. It serves Dougherty County's four high schools and eight middle schools. The average
daily attendance is about 85 students who are placed in one of three groups:

o sixth and seventh graders o eighth and ninth graders o tenth, eleventh and twelfth graders.

Presently, one teacher and three certified para-professionals serve the students under the supervision of the Center's principal. Next year, the Center expects to have three regular teacher positions. The teachers and para-professionals are selected to ensure that all subject areas are covered by the teaching team.

Students spend from one to ten consecutive days at the Center. They must ride a bus to the Center from their school each morning and return to that school by bus each afternoon. Personal transportation is not allowed. Students are not given breaks between classes, and lunches are brought in

4-34

PROJECT OUTCOMES
SOURCE OF FUNDING CONTACT

to them. Both measures are aimed at making up for time lost in being transported to and from their regular schools.
A strict set of rules is enforced for all students. Center personnel also bring in resource persons to talk to the students. The police department is a resource that is used frequently.
A regular schedule of academic work takes place daily. The academic work is centered around what is now called, "Life" or "Survival Skills." This includes completing application forms, writing rent receipts, reading want ads, balancing check stubs, and many everyday requirements. Copies of forms have been provided by a large number of businesses in the area.
The Center does not maintain dropout statistics on the students it has served (approximately 4,000 per year). It has begun tracking recidivism and found that about 30 percent of the sixth and ninth graders and 15 percent of the students in the other middle and high school grades return to the Center to serve another term of in-school suspension. These statistics indicate that after their first year in middle school or high school, student misbehavior is reduced, after one or more in-school suspensions.
The Center is funded locally by the school district. In addition to teacher salaries, approximately $85,000 in additional funds are used for supplies and administrative salaries.
Mr. John Strong Principal Suspension Center 435 Mercer St. Albany, GA 31701 (912) 431-1286

4-35

PROJECT

ISS Center (In-School Suspension) Seminole County

TARGET POPULATION

The program is primarily geared to
students in grades 8-12 who have engaged in disruptive behavior. Some students in
grades 4-7 are also admitted to the ISS Center and transported from the middle school.

PROJECT GOALS

The main objective of the ISS Center is to keep students in school and academically productive. Assignment to the ISS Center has replaced the suspension of students,
except for serious rules violations, and
reduced the number of days a student is out of school for disciplinary reasons.

DESCRIPTION

The ISS Center is located on the high school campus and consists of two adjoining classrooms. A separate bathroom facility is provided to ISS students to prevent them from associating with other students. ISS students receive lunch in the cafeteria after the regular student body has returned to class. ISS students are intentionally kept separated from other students as a reminder that they have been placed in the Center for disciplinary violations.

The Center is staffed by a full-time certified instructor whose only teaching responsibility is in the Center. The Vocational Education Supervisor is responsible for the admittance of girls to the Center and the Assistant Principal is responsible for the admittance of all boys. The principal of the middle school refers students in grades 4-7 to the
appropriate Center supervisor. Students are referred to the Center primarily by teachers and other school staff.

Upon admission to the Center students are given a list of rules and regulations outlining their responsibilities while in in-school suspension. This list of rules must be signed by their parents and returned to the Center's instructor. This procedure often leads to telephone or personal conferences with the parents of students who have been assigned to the Center. These conferences are handled by the appropriate Center supervisor.

4-38

PROJECT OUTCOMES
SOURCE OF FUNDING
CONTACT

Overall, parents have been very supportive of the in-school suspension program.
Students are assigned to the program for a minimum of three days and a maximum of ten days. Additional days may be added if a student does not adhere to the rules of the Center. Students may not return to their regular class schedule until their time in the Center has been completed. The average daily enrollment in the center is from three to five students. The maximum enrollment is limited to ten students. If the enrollment reaches ten, students are placed on a waiting list until a space becomes available.
Students are responsible for obtaining their regular classroom assignments from their teachers and reporting to the ISS Center each morning. The Center is a selfstudy situation and students are responsible for completing their work and keeping up with their classroom assignments. The Center's teacher assists students whenever they request it, but gives no formal lessons.
The ISS program has been very effective in reducing the number of suspensions and keeping at-risk students in school and focusing on academics. Suspensions still occur occasionally, but are reserved for the most severe disciplinary violations. Students do not want to attend the InSchool Suspension Center which has helped reduce the incidences of disruptive behavior for some students.
The ISS Center has been in operation for five years and has been locally funded by the school district. The basic cost of the program is the salary of one full-time certified instructor who serves as the Center's teacher. Existing facilities are used for the program and no special curriculum materials are necessary.
Mrs. Wilma Jones Vocational Education Supervisor Seminole County High School P.O. Box 248 Donalsonville, Ga. 31745 (912) 524-5135

4-39

PROJECT

Rockdale Alternative School Rockdale County

TARGET POPULATION

Students in the Rockdale County Middle and High Schools that violate the County's di&cipline code.

PROJECT GOALS

The alternative school has six major goals:

o To provide an alternative to the existing form of suspension in the
middle schools and high schools; o To provide a structured learning
environment which emphasizes academic
and behavioral success; o To improve student behavior through the
modeling of appropriate behavior by members of the alternative school staff and by isolating the students from their peers at the home school; o To increase attendance in the middle schools and high schools; o To make the alternative school an integral part of the instructional program of the middle schools and high
schools; and, o To encourage behavior among all
students in the middle schools and high schools that will preclude their being assigned to the alternative school.

DESCRIPTION

This alternative school has been in operation for nine years in Rockdale
County. Students are sent to the school by the principals for infractions of the
County discipline code. Generally only
serious discipline problems result in
assignment to the alternative school. Anytime a student is referred to an assistant principal for possible disciplinary infractions, a local school hearing is conducted. If the student is found guilty he may be assigned to the alternative school for a specified period of time. After assignment to the alternative school the teachers are informed who then assign work for the student to complete during his stay. Assignments and necessary materials are sent to the alternative school with student. Students attending the alternative school must travel to school on a district bus which leaves from the

4-40

PROJECT OUTCOMES
SOURCE OF FUNDING CONTACT

home school. Students are assigned for a period of one to fifteen days.
The school is highly structured with very strict monitoring. Each student is placed in an individual cubicle for the entire school day with a specified number of breaks for use of the restroom. During the student's assignment they must be working on academic lessons prescribed by their regular teachers. Two teachers are available for assistance and for counseling. If the students complete their academic assignments they are given Dther materials to work with for the remainder of the day. They are not allowed to rest or simply sit in their cubicle. Any violations of the rules of the school results in additional days being added to the students original period of assignment to the school. Students are required to keep a diary of their activities during each day spent at the school. At the beginning of their assignment they read and sign a contract agreeing to the rules and procedures of the alternatives school. The teachers and the principal at the school work closely with local juvenile authorities.
The rate of return visits to the school is relatively low which indicates that the program is effective. As can be seen from the figures below, third and forth-time repeaters are rare. Out of the 620 students assigned to the school, 67 percent were there for their 1st assignment, 23 percent for their 2nd assignment, 7 percent were 3rd timers, and only 3 percent were paying a 4th visit. This reduction in return assignment to the school mirrors a reduction in discipline problems and other incidents that would formerly have been suspendable offenses. The 9th grade had the largest number of attendees (28 percent) and the 12th grade the smallest number (6 percent) .
The school is supported by local funds.
Mr. Sam McGee, Principal Rockdale Alternative School Conyers, Georgia

4-41

CHAPTER FIVE SCHOOL CLIMATE PROGRAMS

School climate is considered one of the most important factors in the creation of an effective school. According to most of the current research literature on school excellence and change, a positive school climate is the "very foundation for a sound educational program" (American Association of School Administrators, 1988). There is a consensus among effective schools researchers that every school should provide a positive school climate--a secure and stimulating environment in which to work and learn, which promotes healthy human
relationships, and enhances the quality of life for all

The American Association of School Administrators (1988) states that school climate is a term used to describe the
combination of beliefs, values, and attitudes shared by students, teachers, administrators, par~nts, bus drivers, office personnel, custodians, cafeteria workers, and others who play an important role in the life of the school.
More importantly, positive school climate describes how people feel about their school--proud, connected, and committed. In a positive or effective school program, students, school administrators, and staff actively support, help, and care for one other.

Vincent Licata (1987) in "Creating a Positive School Climate at the Junior High Level," defines effective
school climate as "a positive attitude on the part of the entire school staff and student body which is exhibited through overt behavior that creates a warm and
orderly learning environment." In "Assessing School Climate in Prevention Program Planning, Development, and Evaluation," Gary Gottfredson (1984) states that school Climate specifically describes

o

how safe a school is;

o

whether morale is high or low;

o

whether students. and teachers find the

school a pleasant place to learn and

work; and,

5-1

o

whether there is tension between

administrators and teachers.

ELEMENTS OF SUCCESSFUL PROGRAMS
Schools with effective school climate programs share a number of characteristics and factors. This section briefly reviews the essential elements of successful school climate programs most often identified in the research literature by researchers and practitioners. There appears to be a consensus among researchers and educators on the general factors necessary for the successful implementation of school climate programs. However, different researchers and educators emphasize different elements and characteristics due to differences in the specific projects and activities they have reviewed and evaluated, the type of program information available, the level of program resources available, and the specific environment in which different programs exist.

Dan Hogan and Karen Roth (1984) in "Positive Organizational Climate: The Key to Quality Circles," stress that organizational climate appears to be "the pivotal point in bringing about the necessary changes to create excellence in schools." Hogan and Roth, have identified the factors that are consistently found in innovative and positive organizations. They state that an open, facilitating, and nurturing school environment can be developed with:

o

leadership;

o

staff support;

o

the willingness to take risks; and,

o

long-term commitment.

Vincent Licata (1987) in "Creating a Positive School Climate at the Junior High Level" states that the development of a positive school climate is dependent on:

1.

strong administrative leadership;

2.

a cooperative, caring, and committed

teaching staff;

3.

an educational philosophy that stresses

the importance of all students; and,

5-2

4. innovative programs that recognize the self-worth of every student.
Licata stresses that school administrators need to establish school climate programs as part of their overall school discipline plan. By doing so, the administration provides leadership and indicates that it is willing to take the necessary risks to improve school climate. Moreover, the establishment of a school-wide discipline plan creates a climate expectation level, sets a standard for behavior, and enables the administration to focus on improving school climate.
In "How to Diagnose School Climate: pinpointing Problems and Planning Change," Gary Gottfredson and John Hollifield (1988) state that the key factors in producing a positive and orderly environment are lithe clarity and fairness of school rules and the cooperation between teachers and principals planning for school improvement. II According to Gottfredson and Hollifield the leadership provided by the school principal is one of the important factors in the development of school climate programs. They state that principals should understand that the management of schools and I educational programs requires the concerted action of many people and administrative leadership. Gottfredson and Hollifield (1988), emphasize that it is the responsibility of the principal/leader to take the initiative, to critically scrutinize their own school's climate, to focus improvement efforts where they are most needed, to assess the programs designed to address school problems, and to suggest and implement needed revisions in program context and format.
Willard Hopkins and Kay Crain (1985) in "S chool Climate The Key to an Effective School," state that lithe key to success seems to be a commitment [by the] administration, staff and students to work together toward an effective school." Hopkins and Crain emphasize that positive changes in school climate are made by including students in decision-making processes that directly affect them. These areas include:
o academics;
o discipline;
o student leadership roles;
o extra-curricular participation;
5-3

o

food service changes;

o community service; and,

o public recognition for student achievement.

According to the American Association of School Administrators (1988), there are ten factors which have been identified by

... a half-century of research plus hundreds of informal sessions and interviews with teachers,students, parents, and school administrators--that seem to make a real difference in a school's climate.

Furthermore, the AASA (1988) finds that schools with winning school climates have the following ten factors in common:

1.

a supportive, stimulating environment;

2.

student-centered programs;

3.

positive expectations;

4.

a feedback system;

5.

rewards;

6.

a sense of family;

7.

closeness to parents and community;

8.

communication;

9.

achievement; and,

10. trust.

THE PROCESS OF IMPROVING SCHOOL CLIMATE

The main objective of the school climate improvement process is the development of alternative school activities and interventions which will create a positive learning environment in the school. A review of the literature on school climate reveals that effective school climate programs are most successful when they are implemented as the result of a comprehensive, systematic, organizational climate

5-4

improvement plan (Hogan and Roth, 1987). Researchers and educators consider the development and management of school climate a continuous and on-going process which occurs in stages over an extended period of time. A process which must be continually reassessed and refined to determine if the objectives and plans initially established and implemented are still appropriate and are still being achieved (Gottfredson and Hollifield,
1988) .

Gary Gottfredson (1984) states in "Assessing School Climate in Prevention Program Planning, Development, and Evaluation" that the rational approach to planning school climate improvement programs involves the following seven steps:

1.

the diagnosis or assessment of an

individual school's climate;

2.

the formulation of school and program

goals and objectives;

3.

research on potential program

alternatives;

4.

identification of obstacles and

resources;

5.

the development of a formal plan for

school improvement

6.

the establishment of quality control

standards; and,

7.

program evaluation.

Moreover, Gottfredson (1984) states that the effective implementation of school climate programs requires the availability and expenditure of funds, the leadership of school personnel, careful planning, and the faithful and thorough implementation of sound program interventions.

The American Association of School Administrators (1988) states that the school improvement process is seldom orderly and often unpredictable. However, according to the AASA (1988) there are some very basic steps for improving climate as a school-wide project. These steps are:

Step 1:

informing and involving school administrators, staff, parents and the students;

5-5

Step 2: Step 3: Step 4: Step 5: Step' 6: Step 7: Step 8:

assessing school climate; setting climate improvement goals; developing an action plan; implementing the action plan; monitoring progress; analyzing feedback; and, evaluating progress.

The AASA also states that there are several important elements that are crucial to the success of the school climate improvement process. First, there must be agreement or a consensus among the participants regarding the school climate factors to be targeted and the selection and/or development of the climate assessment instrument. Participants must decide what will be assessed, who will provide the information, and when the assessment will be made. Secondly, anonymity and confidentiality must be guaranteed those individuals providing information. In addition, recommendations and plans should be well-documented in written form.

According to the AASA (1988), proper implementation is crucial. To properly implement the program, there must be general agreement that the plan developed will work, there must be sufficient commitment on the part of administrators and staff, and the necessary time and resources must be available. Furthermore, once the plan is implemented a great deal of hard work and attention to maintain the momentum is required.

Dan Hogan and Karen Roth (1984) discuss a model for school climate which is "based on defining and describing the process that seems to be working in places which are moving toward a more positive organizational environment." According to Hogan and Roth (1984), the establishment of a successful school climate program requires
o the gathering of informal data;
o the determination of the strength of the support system;
o commitment to the implementation of a

5-6

comprehensive systematic organizational climate improvement project;
o the establishment a management committee;
o the collection of data;
o the synthesizing of the informal and formal data;
o the sharing of information derived from the data;
o the prioritization of short- and longrange projects;
o the establishment of an action committee;
o the development of action plans by the action committee;
o the approval of the action plans by the management committee;
o the implementation of the plans by the management and action committees;
o the frequent reassessment of the program's progress; and,
o the continuation of the school climate improvement process.
Hogan and Roth (1984) emphasize that organizational climate improvement is an ongoing process that no school ever really completes--it is something that always requires work. The authors stress that their school climate improvement model continues to repeat itself with modifications as changing student needs determine them. Hogan and Roth state that being responsive to the current needs of the students is at the core of school climate improvement models.
EFFECTIVE SCHOOL CLIMATE TECHNIQUES
As stated previously, the main objective of the school climate improvement process is the development of alternative school activities and interventions that create a positive learning environment in the school. A review of the literature (AASA, 1988, Hogan and Roth, 1988) on school climate improvement reveals that many activities and programs have been implemented which
5-7

directly influence the climate of schools. These alternative interventions and programs attempt to change school elements which either are practical in nature, involve a physical/technical problem, or affect the organizational structure of the school. The following list includes activities and program alternatives that have been implemented with some success:

o faculty senate

o student forum

o parent's advisory committee

o peer counseling

o weekend retreats for students

o weekend retreats for staff

o additional teacher/parent conferences

o a school public relations program

o teacher recognition day

o

informal staff meetings--entire school

staff

o a school mission that emphasizes that every student will receive at least one success experience during the year.

o a clear and consistently enforced discipline policy

o a lunch with the principal program

o a teacher advisor group program

o a student incentive program

o special theme weeks

o student of the month program

o camping program

o a physical education olympics

o

staff training in Teacher Expectation

Student Achievement (TESA)

o

special activity days

5-8

o phone calls to parents of new students at the end of their first week to make sure they are making a good adjustment

o school climate class projects

o high student participation in local, state, and national academic contests, intramural, interscholastic athletics, and academic clubs

o

a building team

o notes and phone calls to parents for student accomplishments, good grades, and improved behavior

o

regular student recognition assemblies

o positive signs and posters placed throughout the school

o student work exhibited in the main office

o teachers volunteering their time before and after school to assist students

o birthday club

o gym playnights for specific classes

o regular meetings between the administration and the student council

o candid photographs of student in "action" and exhibited in success showcase

o special counseling groups including counseling for drugs, divorce, poor selfconcept, and new students.

5-9

MODEL SCHOOL CLIMATE PROGRAMS

PAGE

Kate Sullivan Elementary School ................ 5-11

School Climate Improvement Process

5-12

5-10

late sullivan Elementary School

contact:

Nancy Duden, Principal Kate Sullivan Elementary School
Tallahassee, Florida

students served:

all students

description:

The principal and staff of Sullivan Elementary school have tailored their instructional strategies and altered the teaching program to stimulate students and address their individual needs. A major component of the program is the School Improvement Team (SIT). The SIT functions as the major planning and decision-making body at Sullivan Elementary. The team is composed of teachers from each the
instructional areas, as well as school support staff--the lunchroom manager, the building supervisor, the school bookkeeper--and a parent. One of the first actions of the Sullivan SIT was to abolish the use of open space classrooms and move students into self-contained classrooms. Other aspects of the Sullivan Elementary School program include: o the writing of individual behavior
plans for students;
o establishing flexible groupings of students within each classroom, with an option to group students between grade levels as needed;
o emphasis on analytic skills; o holding "Academic Olympiads;" o the nooner program for parents; and o the SOS Care program. The Sullivan School has an excellent reputation and the principal and staff are constantly evaluating programs and revising strategies to make sure that each child is learning. Approximately, 75 percent of the student read at or above grade level, and 83 percent are at or above grade level in mathematics (U.S. Department of Education, 1987).

5-11

School Climate Improvement Process

contact:

Dr. Eugene R. Howard, Director School Improvement/Leadership Services Unit Colorado Department of Education Denver, Colorado

students served:

All students

description:

The School Climate Improvement Program (SCIP) is based on the premise that a positive climate leads to positive results in learning achievement. SCIP involves the evaluation of school climate factors and the implementation of an eight step school climate management process. A validated survey instrument is used to measure the positive and negative nature of the following school factors:

o caring
o trust o respect o cohesiveness

o opportunities for input o school renewal o high morale o continuous academic
and social growth

The eight steps in the process are:

1. the formation of the School Climate Improvement Committee (SCIC);
2. the collection of base-line data about the school and the students;
3. raising the level of faculty, student, and parent awareness;
4. assessing the school's climate; 5. brainstorming and prioritizing
regarding promising practices;
6. task force formation; 7. task force management; and, 8. the summative evaluation.

A unique feature of this organizational plan is the dual membership of each task force leader. Each leader is a member of a task force and also a member of the SCIC (Dalton Public Schools, n.d.).

5-12

STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM IN GEORGIA

The Georgia State Board of Education is empowered under the Quality Basic Education Act (QBE) to establish a state-wide school climate management program to help
local schools and systems requesting assistance in developing school climate improvement and management
processes. Such projects are designed to optimize local reSburces through voluntary community, student,
teacher, administrator, and other school personnel participation. These processes are designed for, but
not limited to, promoting positive gains in student achievement scores, student and teacher morale, community support, and student suspensions, expulsions, dropouts, and other negative aspects of the total school
environment.

The Georgia State Board of Education, upon request, is authorized to provide the necessary on-site technical assistance to local schools and systems and to offer other assistance through regional and statewide conferences and workshops, printed material, and such other assistance deemed appropriate.

The State Board of Education shall, upon request of a local school system, produce model codes of behavior and discipline and shall produce guidelines for application and administration of such codes. The results of this program are annually presented to the Georgia State Assembly for review in determining future appropriations for state-level technical assistance necessary to perform the duties assigned to the state board under the education code.

The State of Georgia defines school climate as those qualities that affect how teachers, students, parents, and the community at large view their schools. Elements of a school's operation that contribute to a positive climate include:

o

trust, caring, and mutual respect among

those involved;

o

flexibility;

o

effective leadership; and,

o

rules that are cooperatively developed

and responsive to human needs.

5-13

Positive school climate is evidenced by positive gains in student achievement scores, student and teacher morale, community support, and student and teacher attendance, while decreasing student suspensions and expulsions, dropouts, and other negative aspects of the total school environment.

Activitie's resulting in a positive school climate might include:

o those which contribute to effective
communication between and among students, school staff, parents and the community at large;

o

those which contribute to a wholesome

and productive learning environment

conducive to the academic achievement

and personal growth of students; and,

o

those which lead to interactive

resolution of conflicts and problems

within the school community.

5-14

MODEL SCHOOL CLIMATE PROGRAMS; GEORGIA
School Climate Program (Coweta County) School Climate Improvement Program (Whitfietd County)

PAGE 5-16 5-18

5-15

PROJECT

School Climate Program (Grades K-12) Coweta County

TARGET POPULATION

The School Climate Program is utilized at every school in the system and covers grades K-12. The program is directed at students and staff, both certified and non-
certified.

PROJECT GOALS

The goal of the program is to improve the overall school climate of each school in the system to facilitate a more positive
learning environment. The program seeks to improve communication between students, staff and administrators and between schools, parents and the public.

DESCRIPTION

The School Climate Program is conducted through the use of climate surveys
administered at each school. Surveys are completed by students, certified staff and non-certified staff. The same survey is utilized for both certified and non-
certified staff. Results of the student surveys are tabulated at each school and returned to the district office. The results of the staff surveys are tabulated at the district office.

The two climate surveys were written by the
School Climate Committee which is composed of representatives from elementary, junior and senior high schools and district level staff. Several existing survey instruments were considered for use in the project. The committee modified items from these surveys and wrote new questions to customize the two climate surveys.

The surveys deal with areas such as communication and co-operation among school staff, staff compensation, communication between students and staff, levels of parent and community involvement, and the condition and adequacy of school facilities and supplies. Lead teachers are responsible for the administration of the surveys at the schools. District level grade supervisors are responsible for the overall administration of the program.

The results of the questionnaires are returned to the principal of each school. Based on the response to the survey each

5-16

PROJECT OUTCOMES
SOURCE OF FtJNDING CONTACT

school develops a school improvement plan to address the areas of greatest need identified by the survey. The improvement plans are submitted to the district office for review. The plans are reviewed with the school's principal and are either accepted or modified. Update reports are provided by the principals of each school documenting implementation of the various aspects of a particular school's improvement plan.
The first year of the School Climate Program has been successful. Results of the school climate surveys have led to increased communication between students, staff and administrators and to a more cooperative working environment. The program has led schools to pay more attention to specific areas of need such as seeking more involvement from parents and the community. The programs biggest asset has been in identifying the specific needs of individual schools. A parent survey may be added to further enhance the effectiveness of the program.
The School Climate program has been completely supported by local funds. The primary costs of the program are associated with the administration of the program at the district office level.
Mr. Bob Welch Associate Superintendent Coweta County Schools 55 Savannah Street P.O. Drawer 280 Newnan, GA 30264 (404) 253-3958

5-17

PROJEC'l'

School Climate Improvement Program Whitfield County Public School System

'l'ARGE'l'

All students in grades K-8.

POPOLA'l'I ON Teachers, staff, and the community.

PROJEC'l' GOALS

The objectives of the Whitfield County School Climate Improvement Program are:

o to increase attendance; o to increase bonding among students; o to increase student and staff morale; o to improve test scores; o. to reduce the number of referrals to
juvenile court; o to reduce vandalism; and, o to reduce the dropout rate.

DESCRIP'l'ION

The Whitfield School Climate Improvement Program is modeled after the process
developed by the St~te of Colorado's League of Schools for Climate Improvement. The program is designed to improve the climate of the school by providing participants with a wide-range of activities and services to improve school climate awareness and perception. Improvement in school climate is determined by measuring the extent to which eight school climate factors are positive or negative. These
factors are:

o caring;
o trust; o opportunities for input; o respect; o cohesiveness; o school renewal; o high morale; and, o continuous academic and social growth.

There are several school program process and material determinants which indicate positive school climate. Program determinants include:

o active learning; o individualized performance
expectations and varied rewards; o varied learning environments,
flexible; curriculum, and extracurricular activities; o support and structure for each student; and,

5-18

o rules which have been cooperatively determined.
The school process determinants which indicate a positive school climate are:
o problem solving ability, conflict resolution, and involvement decisionmaking;
o school improvement goals, pupil learning goals, and school planning processes;
o effective communications through formal processes;
o autonomy with accountability; and, o effective teaching-learning
strategies.
Adequate resources, supportive logistical systems, and the suitability of the school plant and grounds are important material determinants in assessing school climate.
The school climate improvement process implemented by the Whitfield County Public Schools involves eight steps. These are:
1. the formation of the School Climate Improvement Committee (SCIC) to manage the process, provide leadership and project support--the committee is composed of parents, students, and staff members;
2. the collection of base-line data to measure the impact of the climate improvement project;
3. raising the level of faculty, student, and parent awareness through workshops and visitations and mini-audits in other schools;
4. assessing the school's climate; 5. brainstorming and prioritizing
alternatives for improving school climate; 6. the formation of task forces with specific responsibilities; 7. task force management; and, 8. the summative evaluation which involves the collection and interpretation of school climate reports and the evaluation of changes in school climate.
5-19

PROGRAM OUTCOMES
SOURCE OF FUNDING CONTACT

The Whitfield County School Climate Program has been evaluated by the Georgia Governor's Council. Baseline data including demographic and academic descriptions of participants, student dropout rates, longitudinal analyses of district dropout rates, and surveys measuring the satisfaction levels of all participants including students, parents, school staff, and program staff are collected every year.
Since the program's implementation there has been a major decrease in school vandalism and in the number of juvenile court cases.
The Whitfield School Climate Improvement Program is funded by the Georgia Juvenile Justice Coordinating Council. The program is co-sponsored by the Dalton City School System.
Bobbi Butler, Director School Climate Improvement Program P.O. Box 2167 Dalton, GA 30722-2167 (404) 278-8070

5-20

.c-
-ng;
~
CD (')
.ot

CHAPTER SIX
DISCIPLINE PROGRAMS
The lack of student discipline is frequently cited as the number one problem facing American public schools (Bartosh and Barilla, 1985; Batesky, 1986; McDaniel, 1986; Purvis and Leonard, 1985; Purkey and Smith, 1985). Over the years, a variety of program responses have been developed to address student attendance, behavior, and discipline problems. Generally, these school-based programs have focused on either attendance related problems such as tardiness, absenteeism, and truancy, or on more serious behavior/discipline problems which lead to student suspension or detention. (See Chapter Four for more information on in-school suspension programs.)
TRUANCY
Attendance or truancy programs specifically focus on decreasing student absenteeism. These programs emphasize that children cannot learn if they are not in school. In Increasing Student Attendance, the National School Safety Center (NSSC) states the first step in improving student attendance is simply preventing students from staying out of school without a valid reason. Most researchers agree that the most crucial element in the development of an effective attendance/truancy program is a good record-keeping system.
Dale Mann in "Can We Help Dropouts? Thinking about the Undoable" states that schools are starting to use computerized attendance programs to identify and track at-risk students and to follow-up on student absences by automatically notifying parents when students are absent from classes. Mann notes that several large school districts are using these computerized systems to record daily attendance, to store and recall parent's home and work telephone numbers, to place calls to parents at different hours of the day, to record messages, and to automatically follow up on student absences through form letters and notices.
Shirley Boes Neill (1979), in Keeping Students in School: Problems and Solutions, identifies several characteristics that are common to successful attendance programs. These characteristics include:
6-1

o

a strong attendance policy;

o

an attendance policy that has been

developed by a representative group of

students, parents, teachers, and

administrators;

o

an attendance policy that is well

publicized and emphasized repeatedly to

parents and students;

\

o

an attendance policy that is

consistently and equitably enforced

by all staff members including

teachers, counselors, the principal, and

other school staff; and,

o

immediate follow-up on all absences.

Neill (1979), further states that the most effective
truancy policies define limits and allow for escalation-each unexcused absence beyond the first calls for greater discipline measures on the part of the administration and school district to deal with the problem.

The National School Safety Center (1986) has identified a series of strategies which have worked to improve student attendance in schools around the nation. These strategies vary with the severity of the problem-prevention, early intervention, and a response for chronic truants. According to the NSSC the most effective truancy prevention strategies are:
o the establishment of a Community Truancy Prevention Committee;
o a clear truancy policy;
o parent and community meetings and/or newletters; and,
o law enforcement school visitations.

The NSSC (1986) states that the existence of actual truancy problems requires strategies which are designed to diagnose the problem and to prevent students from developing more serious attendance and behavior problems. The most effective intervention strategies
appear to be:

6-2

o an efficient classroom recording process and the prompt reporting and recording of absences by the school administration;
o immediate follow-up of absences;
o parental involvement;
o the denial of academic credits for excessive absences;
. 0 a public awareness campaign;
o school counselor liaisons with local law enforcement and community agencies;
o alternative placement of students with serious truancy problems; and,.
o the establishment of legislative attendance requirements (the number of days of attendance required to pass and the maximum number of excused and unexcused absences allowed) .
According to the NSSC (1986), chronic truancy problems require strict discipline strategies. These include:
o the establishment of in-school suspension programs;
o the development of Saturday school programs;
o local enforcement of compulsory school attendance laws by law enforcement authorities;
o the establishment of a truancy court referral process;
o the creation of Student Attendance Review Boards (SARBs) to organize school, law enforcement, and local government responses to student attendance problems;
o juvenile court proceedings;
o truancy fines assessments; and,
o strict enforcement of truancy laws.
6-3

It is clear from the research literature that parental involvement is an essential part of the effort to keep students in school. Researchers (Neill, 1979) note that "regular attendance is a parental responsibility" and both "students and parents must be held responsible." As a result, communication between the school and parents is crucial to the success of truancy programs. Schools are responsible for maintaining contact with parents through either phone calls, letters, conferences, and/or parent education programs. The NSSC (1986) states that the resolution of attendance and truancy problems
... necessarily involves parents, community members, law enforcers, juvenile justice personnel and youth-serving professionals. These groups, along with educators, need to form a support network to prevent students from dropping out of school.
Thus, most researchers and educators agree that, to be effective, attendance and truancy programs must be part of a comprehensive program. An effective program addresses the needs and special problems of students and their families through alternatives that provide a wide range of services and assistance.
DISCIPLINE
As stated previously, the lack of discipline is perceived as the number one problem in American schools. Researchers and educators cite a number of factors which have contributed to the severity of the discipline problem. Most significant among these is the fact that the nature of youth and the schools have changed over time. More specifically, researchers and educators (McDaniel, 1986; Morris and Elliott, 1985) find that:
o the public schools increasingly reflect the problems and changes in American society;
o school discipline is different--there are more activities, alternatives and requirements, and less structure;
o the student population is more diverse, and as a result, students' attitudes, respect for authority, and standards of discipline vary;
6-4

o the youth of today live with more freedom and independence than ever before--some of this is by parental default;
o students are confronted with a variety of influences that undermine school discipline;
o students are more outspoken;
o students are more knowledgeable;
o students know their rights;
o many discipline practices are ineffective and obsolete; and,
o teacher education programs have not emphasized the teaching of discipline.
There is a growing consensus among educators and researchers that the greatest problem is not the misbehavior itself, but how the situation is handled by teachers and administrators. In IIUnderstanding Alternatives for Classroom Discipline,lI Robert C. Morris and Joseph C. Elliott (1985) state that lIit has become practically impossible for educators to control and guide their student's actions,lI and that unfortunately lithe sad truth is that many teachers and administrators are inadequately prepared to deal with discipline problems. 1I Morris and Elliott (1985) note that
... many disciplinary practices fail to achieve [their] desired objectives because they are designed more as an expedient response to misbehavior, rather than an effort to identify and remedy the cause of the misbehavior.
Stainback, Barban, and Stainback (1986) in IIPractical Methods for Preventing Disruptive Behaviors in the Classroomll state that the main objectives of discipline practices are the prevention of disruptive behaviors in the classroom and lithe development of a positive learning climate that provides maximum opportunities for learning. II Stainback and his colleagues state that the prevention of discipline problems is more productive than dealing with problems after they develop.
6-5

The Pennsylvania Department of Education (1984) in Discipline: Policies and Guidelines states that school discipline has several purposes. These are:
o to preserve the optimum environment in which to deliver instructional services;
o to respond to disruptive influences with corrective measures in a firm and consistent manner while attempting to correct deviate behavior and keep disrupters in school; and,
o to remove, as a last resort, the disrupters from the educational environment so that the majority may pursue their educational goals.
Louise C. Bell and Gregory P. Stefanich (1984) in "Building Effective Discipline Using the Cascade Model" state that "discipline is not an end in itself without classroom discipline, learning cannot take place." Bell and Stefanich (1984) further state that
... within rather stressful classroom conditions, discipline means different things to different teachers. What works for one teacher or for one class may not work for another. Each teacher must find the discipline techniques most congruent with their educational philosophy and individual student needs.
In a related article, "School Discipline in Perspective," Thomas McDaniel (1986) states that
... the best approach [to school discipline] is to provide school-wide training in a number of approaches to good discipline ... cracking down, reinstating corporal punishment, security guards--these measures deal only with the symptoms of discipline and probably make things worse ... Schools need workable programs that treat discipline as an educational problem, not merely as a management problem. Schools and teachers [need to] help students learn how to govern their own behavior.
Researchers and educators (Morris and Elliott, 1985) agree that in many respects "discipline has become synonymous with coercion, repression, and autocracy."
6-6

Most of the negative criticism of discipline practices is associated with the use of corporal punishment. According to Morris and Elliot (1985), corporal punishment continues to be a highly controversial issue. They note that supporters of corporal punishment believe that it is an effective disciplinary technique. Morris and Elliot further state that those in favor of corporal punishment contend that it:
o promptly terminates misbehavior;
o informs the student of their transgression;
o demonstrates to other students the consequences of misconduct; and,
. 0 provides a hiatus during which a pupil may be taught more appropriate behavior.
Critics (Morris and Elliott, 1985) of corporal punishment stress that this type of punishment:
o attacks the person rather than the problem;
o produces many unwanted side effects such as bodily harm;
o serves the needs of the attacking teacher to release anger and stress;
o loses the power to control misconduct with continued use; and,
o is no longer effective and it probably never was.
Opponents of corporal punishment argue that the strongest evidence demonstrating the need for discontinuing the use of corporal punishment and the development of positive discipline methods is found in analyses of the most common reasons why students are disciplined. John Purvis and Rex Leonard (1985) in "Strategies for Preventing Behavioral Incidents in the Nation's Secondary Schools" identify the top five inappropriate student behaviors. These are:
1. not completing assignments;
2. unexcused tardiness to class;
6-7

3. not being attentive in class;
4. littering school grounds; and,
5. not bringing books and other materials.
Purvis and Leonard (1985) note that the five most common behavioral incidents are not violent. In addition, Purvis and Leonard identify the five most frequently used student discipline strategies. These are:
1. student discipline records;
2. telephone calls to parents/guardians by school administrators;
3. administrator and student conferences;
4. administrator and parent/guardian conferences; and,
5. student and teacher conferences.
Purvis and Leonard conclude that the primary focus of disciplinary policies should be on strategies that are effective in the prevention of disciplinary problems. Table 1 lists the most common misbehaviors and provides a brief description of the most effective prevention strategies for each type of behavior.
In a similar study, "How Does High School Discipline in 1984 Compare to Previous Decades?" Weber and Sloan (1986) identify and compare the most frequent and most severe discipline problems occurring in high schools. Weber and Sloan (1986) report that:
o discipline problems are more likely to occur in classrooms and hallways;
o freshman class students cause the most frequent discipline problems;
o outside of the classroom the most frequent discipline problems are smoking and the drinking of alcohol;
6-8

TABLE 1.

MOST COMMON BEHAVIORAL INCIDENTS AND PREVENTION STRATEGIES

INCIDENTS (in order of priority)

STRATEGIES

Not completing assignments, homework, etc.

-Use of homework passes -Point system which allows
optional homework
-Grading of all homework -Individual assignments -School-wide homework schedule

Tardiness to class without an acceptable
excuse

-Direct supervision of classroom entrance and hallways
-Seating chart -Pre-class activities -Consistent recording and
disciplining of tardies -Reward system

Not being attentive in class

-Directly involve students in the lessons
-Set routines -Alternating of teaching
strategies and the pace of lessons -Maximizing class time

Littering of school grounds

-Restricting students to
certain areas of the campus -Assigning students as
visitor guides -Assigning offending
students clean-up projects -Anti-littering campaigns -School-wide cleaning
assignments

Not bringing books and needed materials to class

-Establish a loan system
for supplies
-Regularly inform students of supplies needed
-Record time wasted and assign make-up work
-Meet with parents

SOURCE:

Purvis, Johnny and Rex Leonard. (1985).
"Strategies for Preventing Behavioral Incidents in the Nation's Secondary Schools." The Clearing House. vol. 58, no. 8 pp. 349-353.

6-9

o detention is indicated by all educators as the most frequently used method of discipline;
o in-school suspension and contacting parents are the two most effective disciplinary methods;
o contacting parents is the most effective method of discipline available to teachers; and,
o a larger percentage of administrators than teachers believe that disobeying the teacher is the most serious problem occurring in classrooms.
From their comparison of a 1974 Georgia study and a 1984 Illinois study, Weber and Sloan (1986) identify those student misbehaviors which occur with high frequency. These are:
o the failure to do homework;
o discourtesy to teachers and administrators;
o the use of profane or obscene language; and,
o smoking on school premises.
Table 2 summarizes Weber's and Sloan's analysis of the most common types of student behaviors. They find that the drinking of intoxicants was the only behavior to increase in frequency from 1974 to 1984. Weber and Sloan (1986) conclude that discipline problems and issues have changed and that
... school personnel alone cannot combat these problems. A combined effort of school, community, government, and available resources offer one of few possible solutions to these problems confronting our youth.
Effective Disciplina;y Practices
A review of the research literature on school discipline reveals that many of the recommendations for effective practices are similar in detail. Generally, these recommendations can be grouped according to their
6-10

TABLE 2.
COMPARISON OF MOST COMMON TYPES OF STUDENT MISBEHAVIOR IN THE 1974 GEORGIA STUDY AND THE 1984 ILLINOIS STUDY

TYPES OF MISBEHAVIOR

1974 RANK PERCENTAGE

Truancy

1

Failure to do homework and other assignments

2

Discourtesy to teachers and administrators

3

Using profane or obscene language

4

Smoking on campus

5

Stealing small items (pencils, books, etc.)

6

Graffiti/writing obscenities on school property

7

Congregating in hall and lavatories

8

Destruction of school property

9

Lying of serious nature

10

Using narcotics

11

Stealing valuable items (autos, money, etc.)

12

Cheating on testsa

13

Cheating on homeworka

15

81.2 69.9 60.5 55.3 54.1 53.4 41. 3 39.8 39.5 25.9 24.4 22.5
19.1
15.8

Unorganized fighting Drinking intoxicants Possession of narcotics Selling narcotics

14

18.0

16

15.0

17

12.8

18

11.3

Mugging-taking of student valuables Other

(tie) 19

7.1

(tie) 19

7.1

Carrying switchblades knives, guns, etc.

21

3.0

Sex offenses Gang fights

(tie) 22

1.1

(tie) 22

1.1

Physical violence against teachers and administrators

24

0.4

1984 RANK PERCENTAGE

7

5.4

2

13.5

4

10.5

5

9.8

3

10.6

12

1.8

16

1.1

10

3.1

9

3.9

18

0.4

15

1.3

17

0.5

13

1.3

8

5.1

1

15.1

19

0.4

22

0.1

26

0.0

11

2.0

23

0.1

26

0.0

20

0.2

23

0.1

a The 1984 study combined these two items into one item--cheating.

Source: Weber, Thomas A. and Charles A. Sloan. (1986). "How Does High School Discipline in 1984 Compare to Previous Decades?" The Clearing House. vol. 59, no. 7 (March) pp 0 32 6- 329 .
6-11

emphasis--institutional and/or process, preventive teaching behaviors, and intervention teaching behaviors.
James A. Burns (1985) in "Discipline: Why Does It Continue To Be A Problem? Solutions In A Changing School Culture" states that "the reason that specific programs and practices have not resolved school discipline problems is that they do not address the institutional culture of the school." Burns states that there are six common school values which improve discipline in the schools. These are:
1. The principal and teachers should agree upon standards of conduct and the respective roles of all key personnel.
2. The principal/designee is not the disciplinarian of the school, teachers are.
3. Expectations of student behavior should be emphasized and enforced through proper supervision and consistent consequences.
4. Students who are chronic discipline problems must not be allowed to control classroom/school situations.
5. Teaching values to students must become an accepted goal of the school system and be integrated into the culture of the school.
6. The local school board and the superintendent must establish a philosophy that makes these alternatives possible.
Burns (1985) stresses that without "a set of common values and expectations any practice, training, or special program will have a limited or short-term success."
Morris and Elliott (1985) state that educators, administrators, parents, and the public, in general, must
... stop using poor home and community situations to rationalize student behavior and start trying to help these situations in whatever practical ways can be formulated.
6-12

Morris and Elliott (1985) further stress that "real discipline problems seem to surface where there is no involvement or interest in school programs" and that ultimately better discipline will prevail when:
o learning experiences relate closely to the present interests and needs of children who see the use of what they are learning;
o learning is related to social realities which surround the child;
o we practice what we preach as to respect for personality;
o we develop active student participation, creative contributions, social travel, and all else that fosters significant experiences; and,
o we have a better curricula in a better society.
Kevin J. Swick (1985) in "A Proactive Approach to Discipline: Six Professional Development Modules for Educators" states that there are several major supports that combine to influence a productive discipline process. These include:
o involving parents and citizens who not only support positive discipline but provide students with behavior models to follow their development;
o a strong commitment by school administrators to a positive discipline program as exemplified by their support of teachers in carrying out the process in the classroom;
o the existence of a school curriculum that supports the full development of student skills and interests;
o provisions for adequate teacher-student interaction time and needed counseling resources to deal with various behavior issues;
o the availability of learning resources needed to carry out an effective instructional program; and,
6-13

o student training in all parts of the environment related to productive involvement in the teaching-learning process.
Most researchers and educators (Levin, Nolan, and Hoffman, 1985; Morris and Elliott, 1985; Stainback, Barban, and Stainback, 1986; Swick, 1985; Wasicsko and Ross, 1982; Wilcox, 1983) agree that the primary focus of disciplinary policies should be on strategies that are effective in the prevention of disciplinary problems. The objective of most of these practices are to provide teachers with control over "chronic behavior problems without removing the responsibility for controlling their own behavior from students" and the creation of a positive learning environment (Levin, Nolan, and Hoffman, 1985). The most common recommended strategies are listed below:
o involving students and parents in the development of discipline guidelines and the resolution of discipline issues through a problem-solving process;
o teachers must establish explicit limits of behavior and consequences of student misbehavior;
o expectations must be clearly communicated to students and consistently enforced;
o students must know that the teacher cares about them;
o students must be provided with success experiences;
o there must be mutual respect between students and teachers--teachers must never humiliate students;
o teachers must acknowledge, reinforce, and reward good behavior;
o threats, arguments, and confrontations between students and teachers should be avoided;
o teachers must be organized and wellprepared for class;
o teachers need to know each student well;
6-14

o self and group management strategies should be taught students;
o teachers should have positive attitudes;
o the classroom should be cheerful and attractive;
o education should be interesting and relevant;
o school work should be used as a reward, never as a punishment;
o teachers should expect the best from their students;
o teachers should expect minor misbehaviors and be prepared to handle them; and,
o discipline policies should be continually revised as needed.
In addition to the techniques listed above, Levin, Nolan, and Hoffman (1985) state that teachers and administrators should select instructional techniques that are based on acceptable learning principals and disciplinary techniques that reflect and emphasize the philosophy of mutual respect between students and teachers.
The occurrence of discipline problems requires a slightly different approach. Researchers note that "there are no coping skills which are effective with all deviant behavior" (Shrigley, 1985). However, there are techniques which appear to be effective in minimizing the continued occurrence of discipline problems. The objective of these strategies usually is to correct and minimize disruptive misbehaviors in the classroom and to help prevent management problems. There is a consensus among researchers and educators (Stainback, Barban, and Stainback, 1986; Wasicsko and Ross, 1982; Wilcox, 1983) that disciplinary methods should become progressively more severe as individual student misbehavior continues or worsens. These strategies include:
o grouping disruptive students with wellbehaved students;
o when students must be punished, remove privileges;
6-15

o letting the punishment fit the crime;
o ignoring minor misbehavior;
o bargaining with students for appropriate behavior;
o asking small favors of students who misbehave;
o private conferences with students who misbehave;
o warning students who misbehave of the logical consequence of their behavior;
o isolating students who chronically misbehave;
o referring obstinate students to the principal or to whomever is in change of school discipline; and,
o referring students who continually and frequently misbehave to juvenile court.
It is clear from the research literature (Bartosh and Barilla, 1985) that good communication is the key to the resolution of many discipline problems. Researchers agree that meetings and conferences with parents are one, if not the most effective method for coping with discipline problems. The main objectives of parental meetings and/or conferences are to:
o gain parent/family support;
o gather information; and,
o to create an understanding with parents.
Bartosh and Barilla in "Discipline--Still Number One on the Administrator's List of Problems" emphasize that teacher and administrative interaction with parents must be carefully planned to be effective. Furthermore, they state that administrators and teachers should:
o have a clear goal for the conference such as solving the immediate problem or undertaking a long-range effort related to behavioral and academic progress;
6-16

o objectively describe the student's behavior or misbehavior;
o explain school rules governing the misbehavior and the consequences;
o have an update of the student's academic progress and classroom behavior for all classes; and,
o know the student's background and have examined student records for additional information.
Bartosh and Barilla (1985) state that parents should understand the following after a conference with a teacher or school administrator:
o the expected goals of the conference;
o all documented details of the incident;
o the school's policy, philosophy, and consequences of behavior;
o that the teacher or administrator is appealing for parental help;
o the consequences if the incident reoccurs;
o current evaluations of their child's academic progress and behavior in individual classes;
o what the parents can do to help their child improve academically;
o what they can do to reinforce positive behavior; and,
o the importance of parent cooperation in the rehabilitation effort.
Program Components of Effective Disciplina~ Systems
As stated previously, the specific discipline techniques that teachers use in their classrooms vary given the teacher's educational philosophy and individual student needs. However, a review of the research literature reveals certain program components that are essential in the establishment of a comprehensive and well-planned discipline program. According to the the Pennsylvania
6-17

Department of Education (1984), school systems need to develop "soundly conceived comprehensive code[s] for student conduct and discipline. II The Pennsylvania Department of Education suggests the following procedures for school districts:
1. review the existing discipline system; 2. revise co-de requirements, seek input from
the entire school community--administrators, counselors, teachers, students, and parents;
3. the finished product should stress positive behaviors expected of the responsible student;
4. the school board should adopt the proposed code as school policy and widely circulate the code among the school community for comment and suggestions;
5. upon official adoption, the code should be widely available to all members of the school community and parents; and,
6. a full program of staff in-service training should be held prior to the code's implementation.
Sauer and Chamberlain (1985) in "Follow These Six Steps, and Learn to Manage Student Behavior" state that the development of a student handbook for student discipline and behavior is an essential part of successful school discipline programs. According to Sauer and Chamberlain, the development of a discipline handbook requires the following steps:
1. agreement on the purpose of the handbook;
2. creation of a task force;
3. solicitation of reactions from students, teachers, administrators, and parents;
4. a field test of the draft of the document;
5. revision of the draft given stUdent, teacher, administrative, and parental suggestions; and,
6-18

6. the continuation of the process and the development of other materials.
Bartosh and Barilla (1985) in "Discipline--Still Number One on the Administrator's List of Problems" state that discipline record systems are probably one of the most important components of any discipline system. According to Bartosh and Barilla, the characteristics of an effective, quality record system are:
1. the system communicates clearly to others;
2. the system lists types of behaviors that are often repeated;
3. the system indicates the persistence of teachers involved in discipline incidents;
4. the system reveals patterns and locations of problems within the school or class schedule;
5. the system records contain the time of the day, week, or month when incidents occur;
6. the system documents administrators' response to each incident; and,
7. the system documents the level of parent involvement, meetings between administrators and parents, and the results.
Bartosh and Barilla (1985) also stress that discipline record systems should contain all information and data about the student and any incidents. This is necessary for two purposes:
1. to provide an accurate summary of any incidents so that administrators and teachers who later read the record can understand incidents involving students; and,
2. to provide records which can be analyzed to discover trends in student behavior, school problems, and the effectiveness of corrective measures as part of periodic evaluation and revision processes.
6-19

ALTERNATIVE SCHOOLS

Alternative programs and schools appear to be the most common and successful discipline approaches currently being used. The NSSC (1987) states that alternative placement serves two purposes:

o

it removes disruptive or violent students

who pose a threat to the well-being of

other students in the regular school and,

o

it provides disruptive students with an

alternative program designed to meet

their needs.

Thomas, Sabatino, and Sarri (1982) in Alternative Programs for Disruptive Youth identify the positive characteristics of alternative programs and schools for disruptive students. They note that most of these programs:

o are designed for individualized instruction tailored to student's needs and interests;

o have clearly stated goals and a plan for student achievement to which each student must agree;

o have a clear system of rewards for both effort and output;

o

are usually small in size with low

student-teacher ratios;

o expect teachers to develop positive and caring relationships with students;

o have established a climate of respect, with fair and just disciplinary procedures;

o may include parental as well as student involvement in curricula design; and,

o may provide supportive social services to help students handle personal and social problems.

6-20

Thomas (1982) and his colleagues further state that most alternative programs "place high value on innovation, creativity, flexibility, and participatory decisionmaking between students and staff."

In a related report, Alternative Schools for Disruptive Youth, the NSSC (1987) indicates that several characteristics of alternative programs have proven successful in dealing with disruptive youth. These characteristics include:

o

assignment by choice from several

options provided by the school district,

human services, probation;

o

daily attendance and progress reports;

o

continual monitoring, evaluation, and

formalized passage from one step or

program to another;

o

direct supervision of all activities;

o

administrative commitment to the program

and financial support;

o

mandatory parent and student counseling;

o

full-day and rigorous workload with

minimal time off;

o

high standards and expectations of

performance;

o

curricula which address cultural and

individual learning style differences;

o

clear and consistent goals for students

and parents; and,

o

a democratic climate.

In addition, the NSSC (1987) states that alternative programs and schools for disruptive students must have highly structured environments and clearly defined rules and standards to be effective.

The Pennsylvania Department of Education (1984) in Discipline: Policies and Guidelines recommends the following steps in the planning and development of alternative discipline programs.

6-21

1. Select a planning and implementation committee made up of representatives from the school community.
2. Formulate the initial program plan.
3. Structure the program.
4. Establish admission procedures.
5. Develop the educational component.
6. Design strategies for behavioral change.
7. Secure a qualified staff.
8. Specify conditions for return to the student's regular program.
Many researchers suggest that student misbehavior is the result of the student's growing sense of alienation and frustration with the educational environment. Many students with discipline problems are believed to have serious academic problems and learning disabilities which make math, spelling, and reading very difficult. There is a consensus among researchers and educators that student feelings of alienation and frustration are compounded by their lack of success in school and, as a result, students act out this frustration by rejecting the rules and standards of educational institutions through their misbehavior. Thus, it is imperative that the curricula of alternative programs and schools focus on identifying student academic weaknesses and on improving the basic skills of students.
Eileen Foley (1983) in "Alternative Schools: New Findings," states that exemplary alternative programs and schools are characterized by:
o a well-defined student population;
o principals who are strong academic leaders;
o diversified teacher roles which allow for increased managerial participation; and,
o partial course credit, fast paced cycles, and learning contracts that enhance student opportunities to succeed academically.
6-22

In addition, these programs have small class sizes. The individualized attention students receive provides the opportunity for a more personal relationship between student and teacher, greater variety in curricula and teaching strategies, and the development of a student culture which reduces student alienation, allows students to know one another, work together, and foster a sense of commitment. (See the Academic Program section in Chapter Two for more information on Alternative Schools.)
6-23

MODEL TRUANCY AND DISCIPLINE PROGRAMS:

PAGE

1. Attendance Control Center

6-25

2. Computerized Truant Officer

6-26

3. Kane County Truancy Prevention Program ..... 6-27

4.

Services to Truants and Run-aways

6-28

5. Truants Alternative Program On Needs Early

6-29

6. Disciplinary Response Procedures

6-30

(See the Model In-School Suspension Program section
in Chapt~r Four for examples of alternative schools and programs. )

6-24

Attendance Control Center

contact:

Billy E. Whitworth
3210 West Lancaster Fort Worth, TX 76107-3091 (817) 878-3802

students served:

students absent from school, truants, and dropouts

description: The main objectives of the Attendance Control Center (ACC) are to improve student attendance, to improve communications between Fort Worth schools and student's homes, to counsel students and their parents, and to refer families to appropriate resource agencies. The program is based on the premise that parental involvement is the most effective approach for reducing pupil attendance problems.
The ACC is a joint effort of the Fort Worth ISO, the Fort Worth Police Department, and local community agencies. Police officers are allowed to detain and transport unsupervised school-age youth found off school grounds during school hours. Students are brought to the ACC where a counselor notifies the parents and the student's school. The counselor meets with both the student and the parents and refers them to a community agency for further assistance.
The ACC has been successful in encouraging at-risk students to remain in school and to graduate. A reduction in juvenile daytime crime has been evident since the program was implemented (Texas Education Agency, 1988) .

6-25

Computerized Truant Officer

contact:

M. Roel Pena, Secondary Principal Edinburg Junior High Edinburg, Texas 78539

students served:

all absent students

description:

The Computerized Truant Officer (CTO) is a computerized automatic dialing system. This program is based on the premise that if children are not in school, they can not learn. Accordingly, the only way to ensure that children receive a decent education is to make sure that they attend school. Moreover, it is the school's responsibility to inform parents when students are absent from school.
The daily attendance information is entered into a terminal at the school. This system interfaces with the central computer at the regional service center to produce a list of absent students and their parents' home and/or work telephone numbers. The CTO system immediately documents the telephone numbers called and produces a printout of all the calls answered, as well as the unanswered calls. The CTO redials busy numbers and unanswered calls. The system is also capable of recording responses.
In the first six weeks after the autodialer was installed, attendance rose from 92.5 percent to 97.34 percent. As a result, visiting teachers are able to visit all the absent students in the district on a daily basis. There has been a marked reduction in the number of students referred by the school district to juvenile authorities for chronic absences and truancy. Moreover, parents have enthusiastically supported the program and the district's overall effort to reduce student absencei (Pena, 1985a, 1985b) .

6-26

lane County Truancy Prevention Program

contact:

Douglas L. Hoeft, Director Kane County Truancy Prevention Program
Geneva, IL (312) 232-5955

students served:

chronic truants and their families

description: The Kane County Truancy Prevention Program (KCTPP) is a comprehensive program which
operates through the local schools, the regional truancy prevention office, local
community social services agencies, and the
courts. The KCTPP combines counseling with the threat of severe legal consequences for
both the student and their parents. Families can either work with counselors (through the school or through community service agencies) or face the legal system. If local staff efforts are ineffective, the administrator petitions the Truancy Prevention Program which assigns the case
to an outreach worker. Within 24 hours,
the outreach worker contacts the student,
in school or at home, and tries to determine the cause of the truancy. A legal notice is sent to the student's parents, advising them of their legal responsibility to see that their child attends school. If the efforts of the outreach worker fail or a complex family problem is discovered, the student and his or her parents are referred to an adult family counselor, who secures the aid of
appropriate community service agencies.
If the truancy problem persists, a certified letter is sent to the parents, directing them to attend a conference at the Truancy Prevention Program office in the county courthouse. At this conference, the attendance law is explained to the parents, and a contract, requiring the parents to take specific action to deal with the child's attendance problem is drawn up, and the parents are served with a formal legal notice. If this procedure fails, the case is referred to court where the parents can be fined or ordered to jail (Hanson and Hoeft, 1983).

6-27

Services to Truants and Runaways

contact:

Jack L. Cameron, Project Director Services to Truants and Runaways Program
P.O. Box 1611 201 East Myrtle, Suite 200 Angleton, TX 77515 (409) 849-5711 ext. 1592

students served:

youth between the ages of ten and 17 years

description: The goals of the Services to Truants and Runaways (STAR) Program are: o to provide both therapeutic and prevention programs to students; o to provide outreach services to youth, and families; and, o to reduce the number of children
involved in the juvenile justice system. The STAR therapeutic program offers the
following services:
o 24-hour crisis intervention;
o professional therapy; o vocational and psychological testing; o client advocacy and support; and, o information and referral. These services are provided by professional therapists and volunteers and are free. The main objectives of the STAR prevention
program are: o to provide information about truant and
runaway behavior and the consequences of dropping out and running away; o to help youth avoid being victimized; and, o to help youth realize that they are not alone and that there are individuals and community resources available to provide help and support. The dropout prevention program provides information through public and private presentations. Parent group meetings and staff in-service workshops are often an integral part of these presentations. The program uses videotapes, discussion, and handouts to stimulate the discovery of new information, strategies, and resources (Texas Education Agency, 1988).

6-28

Truants Alternative Program On Needs Early

contact:

Pamela Parker Chicago Public Schools Bureau of School Attendance 1819 West Pershing Road 6C (c) Chicago, IL 60609
(312) 890-8979

students served:

age 7-16 years; chronic truants; students referred by their principal

description: The Truants Alternative Program On Needs Early (TAP-ONE) is a system-wide truancy program designed to accurately diagnose the causes
of student truancy and develop positive responses to the problem. The program
staff works with each school to implement a "Classroom Truancy Prevention Model" which facilitates the early identification of atrisk students. When a student is chronically absent or truant, Attendance Improvement Managers (AIM), in each target school, prepare
individual student diagnostic profiles and
suggest or provide additional resources and/or treatment services that can assist
the student in establishing a regular school attendance pattern. TAP-ONE interventions include: o individual, family, and/or group
counseling; o tutoring;
o advocacy;
o referral for more intensive diagnostic and treatment services; and,
o suggestions for alternative academic programs and support services.
If the student continues to be chronically truant, the case is submitted to the School Attendance Review Board where representatives from the Illinois Department of Children and Family Services, the Probation Department, and the Police Department negotiate an "Attendance Contract" and monitor its implementation. "If the student continues to be chronically truant, the case is referred to court (TAPONE Brochure, 1987).

6-29

Disciplinary Response Procedures
Levels of Misconduct and Disciplinary Response Procedures
Table 3 represents a continuum of misbehaviors based on the seriousness of the act and the frequency of occurrence. The infractions classified at Level I are relatively minor and involve acts which only minimally interfere with the orderly conduct of the educational process. Often these Level I misbehaviors take the form of simple classroom disturbances which do not disrupt the learning of other students or which involve minor infractions of general school rules and represent no threat to the health and safety of others. By contrast, Level IV misconducts involve criminal acts and are so serious that they represent a direct and immediate threat to the welfare of other individuals. These acts (Level IV) always require the intervention of law enforcement authorities.
At the two levels between these extremes, the seriousness of the misconduct remains a primary classification factor, but the frequency of occurrence also plays a significant role in determining the most appropriate disciplinary response. For example, minor misconduct appropriately classified at Level I could move to Level II and subsequently to Level III if the act persisted after intervention had been attempted at a lower level. Although the seriousness of the infraction remains the same, the frequency of occurrence requires that it be classified at a higher level where a different set of disciplinary responses could be applied.
In terms of seriousness, most Level II misbehaviors could probably be characterized as "victimless infractions," since they generally do not involve the welfare of others but could have a serious effect on the student's own education. On the other hand, misconducts in Level III take on added gravity because they frequently involve a violation of the personal or property rights of others.
6-30

Disciplinary Response Procedures and Response Options
AcCOmpanying the levels of misconduct in table 3 are the disciplinary procedures and response options suggested for use at each level. Procedures are viewed as minimal actions which must take place at each level. options, on the other hand, include the range of disciplinary alternatives which might appropriately be applied to the infraction.
By way of illustration, Level III infractions call for several procedural actions, one of which is a disciplinary conference with the parent and temporary suspension of the student. Along with these procedures is a list of response options which may be applied in certain situations to correct or punish any act of misconduct in that level. Since the response options included in table 3 have been selected to fit the types of misbehaviors, they are arranged to begin with those which are the least punitive and progress through the levels to those which are more severe. It should also be noted that the degree of formality, flexibility and discretion exercised in applying these disciplinary responses also changes markedly from Level I to Level IV. As the act or infraction requiring discipline becomes more serious, the response options become more formal and prescribed in character (pennsylvania Department of Education, 1984).
6-31

TABLE 3.

DISCIPLINARY RESPONSES TO STUDENT MISCONDUCT

LEVELS OF MISCONDUCT

EXAMPLES

I. Minor misbehavior on the part of the student which impedes orderly classroom procedures or interferes with the orderly operation of the school.
These misbehaviors can usually be handled by an individual staff member but sometimes require the intervention of other school support personnel.

- Classroom disturbance - Classroom tardiness - Abusive lanquaqe - Nondefiant failure
to complete assiqnments or carry out directions

II. Misbehavior whose frequency or seriousness tends to disrupt the learninq climate of the school.

These infractions, which usually result from the continuation of Level I misbehaviors, require the intervention of personnel on the administrative level be~ause the execution of Level I disciplinary options has failed to correct the situation. Also included in this level are misbehaviors which do not represent a direct threat to the health and safety of others but whose educational consequences are serious enouqh to require corrective action on the part of administrative personnel.

III.

Acts directed aqainst persons or property but whose consequences do not seriously endanqer the health or safety of others in the school.

These acts miqht be considered criminal but most frequently can be handled by the disciplinary mechanism in the school. Corrective measures which the school should undertake, however, depend on the extent of the school's resources for remediatinq the situation in the best interests of all students.

IV. Acts which result in violence to other persons or property or which pose a direct threat to the safety of others in the school.

These acts are clearly criminal and are so serious that they always require administrative actions which result in the immediate removal of the student trom school, the intervention of law enforcement authorities and action by the board of school directors.

- Continuation of unmodified Level I misbehavior
- School Tardiness - Truancy - Smokinq in
unauthorized areas - Usinq forqed notes
or excuses - Disruptive classroom
behavior - Cuttinq class
- Fiqhtinq (simple) - Vandalism (minor) - Possession/use of
unauthorized substances - Stealinq - Threats to others
- Unmodified Level III misconduct
- Extortion - Bomb Threat - Possession/use/transfer
of danqerous weapons - Assault/battery - Vandalism - Theft/possession/sale of
stolen property - Arson - Furnishinq/sellinq/possession
of unauthorized substances

6-32

TABLE 3. (continued)

DISCIPLINARY RESPONSES TO STUDENT MISCONDUCT

~ISCIPLINARY RESPONSE PROCEDURES

RESPONSES OPTIONS

There is immediate intervention by the staff who is supervising the student or who observes the misbehavior.
Repeated misbehavior requires a parent/teacher conference with the counselor and/or administrator.
A proper and accurate record of the offenses and disciplinary action is maintained by the staff member.

- Verbal reprimand - Special assignment - Behavioral contract - counseling - Withdrawal of privileges - Time-out room - Strict supervised study

II. The student is referred to the administrator for appropriate disciplinary action.
The administrator meets with the student and/or teacher and effects the most appropriate response.
The teacher is informed of the administrator's action.
A proper and accurate record of the offense and the disciplinary action is maintained by the administrator.
A parental conference is held.

- Teacher/schedule change
- Modified day - Behavior modification - Time-release program - Social probation - Peer counseling - Referral to outside
agency
- Paddling - In-house suspension - Transfer

III.

The administrator initiates disciplinary action by investigating the infraction and conferring with staff on the extent of the consequences.

The administrator meets with the student and confers with the parent about the student's misconduct and the resulting disciplinary action.

A proper and accurate record of offenses and disciplinary actions is maintained by the administrator.

IV. The administrator verifies the offense, confers with the staff involved and meets with students.

The student is immediately removed from the school environment. Parents are notified.

School officials contact law enforcement agency and aSSist in prosecuting offender.

A complete and accurate report is submitted to the superintendent for board action.

The student is given a full due process hearing before the board.

- Temporary removal from class
- Social adjustment classes
- Homebound instruction - Alternative program - Temporary out-of-school
suspension - Full out-of-school
suspension
- Expulsion - Alternative schools - Other board action
which results in appropriate placement

6-33

!eG')
!CD
.-. _.-CICD0C~I
: 0CD!
;;.
0 ~n _
.-CClO
Dl~
30

CHAPTER SEVEN ANNOTATED DIRECTORY OF STATE-LEVEL PROGRAMS IN GEORGIA

This section briefly describes state-wide programs which deliver services to at-risk students and dropouts among others. The programs listed are sponsored by the Georgia Department of Education. Readers desiring additional information regarding any of these programs should contact the person listed with each program.
PAGE

1. Career Center Equity Projects

7-2

2. Coordinated Vocational Academic

Education (CVAE)

7-4

3. Exceptional Children

7-7

4. In-School Suspension Program

7-8

,5. Job Training Partnership Act

Program (JTPA)

7-9

6. Jobs for Georgia Graduates

7-12

7. Limited English Proficiency Program

7-16

8. Migrant Education Program

7-18

9. Office of Business/Education Partnerships 7-20

10. Parent Education Program

7-21

11. Projects to Improve Effectiveness

7-23

12. Remedial Education Program

7-25

13. School Climate Management Program

7-28

14. School Counseling

7-30

15. School Psychology

7-33

16. School Social Work in Georgia

7-34

17. Special Instructional Assistance Program

7-37

18. Special Services Unit

7-40

19. Student Support Team

7-41

20. Teen Parent Education Program

7-44

21. Vocational Education

7-47

7-1

CAREER CENTER EQUITY PROJECTS
A portion of the federal equity funds received by the state has been utilized to provide assistance to schools to establish or update career centers. Over 98 different school sites have been or are a part of the program. Calling for a cooperative effort from vocational educators and school guidance personnel, the centers help expand counselor and teacher knowledge of effective career guidance materials and uses of microcomputers and other career guidance materials, provide students with current career planning information and provide programs that eliminate sex, age, racial/ethnic, and handicap discrimination and/or stereotyping. Funds are made available to local schools on a 50/50 matching basis.
Objectives
1". To provide assistance to schools to establish or update career centers.
2. To promote a strong working relationship between vocational educators and school guidance personnel.
3. To expand the guidance counselor's knowledge of effective career guidance materials (computerized, print and video) .
4. To provide students with current career planning information.
5. To provide training for counselors at the funded sites in the use of micro-computers and other career guidance materials.
6. To assist with more appropriate placement into programs and subjects.
7. To promote equity.
Student Competencies
The following student competencies are emphasized for students who participate in career center activities:
1. Students will take courses appropriate to their career choice.
7-2

2. Students should understand that all course offerings are available to them, regardless of their sex, race, color, national origin, handicap or age.
3. Students will understand their interests and abilities and how these can help in making career choices.
4. Students will know what jobs are available in their interest and ability areas, locations and the requirements to obtain these jobs.
5. Students will know the benefits, working conditions and opportunities for advancement in jobs.
6. Students will receive assistance in enrolling in a vocational program in which they have interests, aptitudes and abilities.
7. Students will know the job opportunities available after completion of vocational programs.
8. Students will know what careers certain majors will prepare them for and the future prospects for those careers.
.
9. Students will make a plan of high school classes which will be best for them and which will be reviewed and changed as needed.

CONTACT:

Mr. Phil Hulst, Coordinator Program Improvement and Innovation Unit Georgia Department of Education 1766 Twin Towers East Atlanta, GA 30334-5040 (404) 656-4059

7-3

COORDINATE VOCATIONAL ACADEMIC EDUCATION PROGRAM
CVAE
The Coordinate Vocational Academic Education Program is a support program in the secondary schools for vocational students. Through interlocking basic academic skills and technical training, CVAE prepares students for post secondary technical schools and for business and industry. CVAE teaches responsibility, specific work skills, and pride in achievement.
Program Objectives
o To provide individuals gainful employment in a specific vocational field.
o To provide young people with an education which will prepare them for future training and employment.
o To develop responsible employees for business and industry.
o To develop a well-rounded program that provides a school-to-wo~k transition for youth and ca~eer advancement potential.
o To develop in youth, the civic, social and moral responsibilities necessary for success at work and in society.
o To prepare youth for the demands of employment-interpersonal skills, efficiency, dependability.
o To use schools, local businesses and industry to provide occupational guidance and work experiences for those students in grades nine through twelve with special needs.
o To create a positive attitude toward work.
Program of Instruction
CVAE provides support services to ensure successful participation in the regular secondary vocational program through individualized remediation in basic academic competencies, appropriate attitude building, and self-development activities. Classes provide training in job readiness, employment skills, work adjustment competencies, basic work habits, citizenship, vocational alternatives, and life survival skills.
7-4

The program also provides in-depth remediation in reading and computational skills through an academic remediation team. The program provides special support services for economically disadvantaged students. Work experience settings (paid and unpaid) are provided to those students in economic need or as training for work competency.
Course Content
CVAE is a year-long course which focuses on the combination of competencies necessary for entry, adjustment, and advancement in a occupational field. The curriculum emphasizes remediating individual deficiencies in reading, language, and mathematics which impede the student's progress in the regular vocational classroom. In addition, State prepared materials cover life adjustment and career seeking skills. The CVAE coordinator diagnoses student problems and assesses student progress. The program attempts to provide an atmosphere where students can experience success instead of failure, become more interested in learning, improve attendance, and develop positive attitudes toward self, work, and society, in general.
Enrollment Requirements
Careful consideration is given to the selection of students for entry into this program. A qualified selection team consisting of the CVAE coordinator, vocational instructors, academic teachers, administrators, and counselors review the records of all students entering or currently enrolled in a vocational education program. This comprehensive review identifies students who are unable to meet their full potential in vocational education due to academic and/or economic deficiencies. The CVAE coordinator assisted by other teachers prepares lessons and monitors the student's progress based on the student's individual education prescription.
The program serves students in grades nine through twelve who have been certified as academically and/or economically disadvantaged. Approximately sixty vocational students are assigned to each CVAE team and placed in sequential CVAE classes. Block scheduling in Math, English, "and/or Reading is necessary to facilitate remediation of deficiencies. Special tutorial assistance can be provided to ensure student's success in vocational programs.
7-5

Minimum Standards for Completion and Placements
The ultimate goal of the CVAE program is for each student to complete successfully a minimum of one year in a vocational class and one year in the CVAE program. This provides the student with one or more marketable job entry level skills. Additional years may be required if support services for continued success in the vocational and academic curriculum are needed. After proper preparation, a student can be placed for work experience in a vocationally or career-related field. Job readiness and placement services are priority for economically disadvantaged students. Students should be allowed to enter and exit on the recommendation of the CVAE team and the completion of all areas of remediation as set forth in the student's education prescription.

CONTACT:

Milton G. Adams, State Supervisor Secondary Special Needs Programs 1770 Twin Towers East
Atlanta, GA 30334

7-6

EXCEPTIONAL CHILDREN

This program directs Mental Handicaps, Physical Handicaps, Low Incidence, Behavior Disorders and psychoeducational Program, Federal, Evaluation and Assessment, and Georgia Learning Resources System Units.

This program also:
o is responsible for state regulations and procedures for exceptional students;
o is responsible for state funds and respective programs;
o is responsible for The State Program Plan;
o is responsible for acquisition and disbursement of P.L. 94-142. P.L. 89-313, P.L. 99-457 funds and, other funds, as available;
o provides assistance to local education agencies in the development and expansion of special education programs which meet the mandates of state and federal regulations and state board policies and rules;
o acts as liaison to other agencies in planning programs for exceptional students; and,
o is responsible for communication with nonstate organizations.

CONTACT:

Joan Jordan, Director
Office of Instructional Programs Division for Exceptional Students 1952 Twin Towers East Atlanta, GA 30334 (404) 656-3963

7-7

IN-SCHOOL SUSPENSION

Rationale
The in-school suspension movement is one of the most recent steps in the on-going process of resolving disciplinary problems in public schools. An examination of the history of in-school suspension programs reveals that they have evolved as a result of three majors factors:
1. pressure from the courts to assure the legal rights of students;
2. the growing concern over problems caused by unsupervised students who are suspended or expelled from school; and,
3. the problems caused by students being deprived of an education as a form of punishment.

In-School Suspension and aBE
The in-school suspension program was authorized by the State Board of Education as part of the Quality Basic Education Act (QBE) Part 3, 20-2-155. The program is based on the premise that it is preferable to reassign disruptive students to an isolated, individually oriented in-school suspension program rather than suspending or expelling such students from school. The primary purposes of the program are:
A. to isolate the offending student from regularly assigned classrooms and the daily activities of the school;
B. to help the student continue and complete classroom assignments; and,
c. to provide individually oriented instruction in the
essential skills and knowledge areas since low achievement levels in these areas appear to contribute to student adjustment problems.

CONTACT:

Georgia Department of Education 1852 Twin Towers East Atlanta, GA 30334 (404) 656-2600

7-8

JOB TRAINING PARTNERSHIP ACT (JTPA)
Eight Percent (8%) State Education Coordination and Grants
The Job Training Partnership Act (JTPA), signed by the President on October 13, 1982, signaled the beginning of a third generation of federally mandated manpower legislation. This act, like its predecessors, the Manpower Development and Training Act and the comprehensive Employment and Training Act, aims to . reduce the nation's unemployed population and to direct the economically disadvantaged population into unsubsidized employment. The Job Training Partnership Act creates a new direction in manpower legislation: block grant funding, state-level control through the governor of each state, and the mandated partnership and involvement of the private sector.
The primary emphasis in JTPA is on education and training. Along with the requirement that seventy (70) percent of the funds allocated to Service Delivery Areas (SDAs) be used for training, the act also includes an eight percent (8) set aside for state education coordination and grants (Section 123). The funds $2,900,274 for the period (July 1, 1985 - June 30, 1~86) a~e used. for coordinating job training services.with state education and training agencies in two principle ways.
1. Facilitating training/education coordination through technical assistance, professional development, job placement, counseling and curriculum development (20 percent of funds) .
2. Educating and training eligible participants by developing cooperative agreements between the state education agency, local service delivery areas (SDAs) and local education agencies.
In order for the State of Georgia to achieve the objectives of JTPA, it will be necessary to draw upon the broad range of educational resources available in the State's system of public education: comprehensive high schools, postsecondary vocational-technical schools and adult centers, and institutions of the University System of Georgia. For this reason, in a letter dated April 29, 1983, Governor Harris requested that the State Board of Education and the Board of Regents jointly serve as the state education agency for purposes of administering Section 123 of JTPA.
7-9

Following is a summary of the basic tenets of the proposed plan for joint management by the State Boards of Education and Regents of the functions and activities required by Section 123 of the JTPA.
1. The State Board of Education and the Board of Regents shall jointly share the responsibility for planning, implementing, administering and evaluating the functions and activities required by Section 123 of JTPA.
2. A detailed state plan for Section 123 shall be developed by the State Board of Education and the Board of Regents.
3. A staff consisting of a coordinator and professional, technical, and clerical personnel shall be employed for the purpose of implementing and administering the detailed state plan. The Georgia Department of Education shall be the employing agency and shall provide office space, related support services, and daily supervision for the staff.
4. The State Superintendent of Schools and the Chancellor of the University System of Georgia shall each appoint one staff member to jointly establish goals, objectives and priorities, to evaluate outcomes, and to provide overall coordination of the program.
5. The Georgia Department of Education shall serve as the fiscal agency for this program.
The implementation plan for Section 123 will provide for the following major activities.
A. Serving as a coordinating agent and providing technical assistance for state, area and local entities involved in JTPA.
B. Conducting research and developing projects designed to identify and demonstrate the most effective and efficient ways to achieve the goals of JTPA.
7-10

C. Providing education and training for eligible youth and adults through grants and contracts with local education agencies (for purposes of this plan, local education agencies include comprehensive public high schools, public postsecondary vocational-education schools and adult centers, and institutions of the University System of Georgia) .
D. Monitoring and evaluating activities funded under Section 123 of the act.

CONTACT:

Ed McLeskey, Coordinator
Job Training Partnership Act 1752 Twin Towers East Atlanta, GA 30334 (404) 656-2521

(JTPA)

7-11

JOBS FOR GEORGIA GRADUATES
Youth unemployment has been a serious and persistent problem in Georgia, as it has been throughout the nation. Jobs for Georgia Graduates (JGG) is a comprehensive school-to-work transition program which targets youth with a high risk of being unemployed, regardless of their economic background. Patterned after the highly successful Jobs for America's Graduates Program, JGG is designed to address Georgia's youth unemployment problem by providing direct, intensive assistance to youth who will be moving from high school directly into the labor force. The program is not intended to replace or compete with existing employment and training programs, but rather to reach young people for whom alternatives are not available.
Program Strategy
JGG uses a simple strategy that includes a four-step approach:
o the identification of all high school seniors who plan to enter the job market immediately following high school graduation and who appear to need help or who request help in finding a job;
o the preparation and motivation of students, the development of employment skills, instruction in job competencies and student participation in career associations;
o job placement upon graduation; and,
o the follow-up of student placement (for at least nine months) to ensure job retention.
Target Population
JGG targets those high school seniors who do not pian to pursue further academic or vocational education--those youth most likely to be unemployed upon graduation. These students may lackthe skills, motivation, and preparation necessary to find and retain employment upon graduation. Family income is not an eligibility criterion. Students will be selected for program participation by a joint staff/administrative committee within the school system in which the program operates to ensure that at-risk youth are helped.
7-12

Job Competency-Based Curriculum Instruction
JGG Job Specialists provide instruction utilizing the competency-based curriculum developed by the Jobs for America's Graduates Program. Job competencies are grouped into six clusters and sequenced in order of acquisition.
Career Development Competencies: These competencies include the development of awareness on the part of the student of their own special aptitudes, abilities, interests, life goals, .and desired life styles. Other topics include gaining information about the world of work, identifying those occupations which are consistent with the student's goals and investigating selected occupations and career alternatives. The career development cluster competencies are:
o identifying occupational interests, aptitudes, and abilities;
o relating interest, aptitudes, and abilities to occupations and careers;
o identifying desired life styles and relating them to selected occupations;
o developing a career path for a selected occupation;
o selecting an immediate job goal; and,
o describing the conditions and specifications of the job goal.
Job Attainment Competencies: This cluster includes those skills and abilities needed by students in search of a job. These competencies include:
o constructing a resume;
o conducting a job search;
o developing a letter of application;
o using the telephone to arrange an interview;
o completing an application form;
o completing employment tests; and,
o completing a job interview.
7-13

Job Survival Competencies: These competencies are those required for success on the job. They include:

o appropriate appearance;

o understanding what employers expect of their employees;

o identifying problems of new employees;

o demonstrating time management;

o following directions;

o practicing effective human relations; and,

o appropriately quitting a job.

Personal Survival Competencies: These competencies enable young people to manage their finances and affairs successfully. These competencies include:

o developing a personal budget;

o using credit wisely; and,

o practicing intelligent purchasing.

Basic Competencies: The'basic competencies include those basic skills which everyone must possess to succeed in our society. These are:

0

the ability to comprehend verbal communications;

0

the ability to comprehend written communicat~ons;

0

the ability to communicate in writing;

0

the ability to communicate verbally;

0

the ability to perform mathematical calculations;

and,

0

the leadership and self development competencies.

Leadership and Self Development Competencies: The leadership and self development competencies are those qualities which enable an individual to function effectively in team or group- activities or within an organization. These competencies are:

7-14

o team leadership ability;
o the ability to deliver presentations to a group;
o the ability to compete successfully with peers; and,
o the ability to commit to an organization.

JGG Career Association Activities
Central to the success of JGG is the student Career Association. The Career Association provides the student with a multifaceted selection of activities and the knowledge and motivation needed for success in the world of work. The Career Association provides a system of recognition that some students might not otherwise have a chance to experience.

Job Development/Job Placement Activities
Job development is critical to the success of the JGG program. The JGG specialists encourage employers to hire young people and place them into entry level positions that will lead to a long-term career opportunity.
Job Specialists pre-screen potential applicants for employers and maintain contact with the student for nine months following graduation. Follow-up services including employment skills training and counseling are available when the student needs help.

CONTACT:

Helen N. Parker, Assistant Commissioner Department of Labor
Sussex Place, Room 400 148 International Blvd., N.E. Atlanta, GA 30303 (404) 656-6380

7-15

LIMITED ENGLISH PROFICIENCY PROGRAM
The Quality Basic Education Act requires that the Georgia Board of Education create a program for limited English speaking students. The purpose of the program is to help students develop proficiency in the English language skills of listening, speaking, reading, and writing so that they can be integrated into regular classrooms as quickly as possible.
Eligibility
Students eligible for the program are those whose native language/home language/first language is not English and whose difficulty in speaking, reading, writing, or understanding English prevents their success in school. Students' language proficiency is determined by English language proficiency tests selected by the state superintendent of schools.
Service Delivery
Each district shall assess the level of language assistance each student needs based on the student's English language proficiency and their previous education.
Special language assistance shall be provided through either a pull-out program by an itinerant teacher, a cluster center to which students are transported, a resource center/English to speakers of other languages (ESOL) laboratory, a regularly scheduled class period, or any other model approved by the state superintendent.
Curricula
Program curricula shall take into account the English language proficiency of students, their English listening, speaking, reading, and writing skills, and their understanding of American cultural concepts.
Ixit Criteria
The state superintendent will define the exit criteria for determining when students no longer need language assistance. Such criteria will include performance on selected English language proficiency test(s), readiness
7-16

for classr80m instruction as measured by performance on criterion referenced and standardized tests, and classroom functioning (e.g. grades).

Funding
Subject to appropriations from the General Assembly, the state superintendent shall establish funding procedures based on student counts and class sizes. The funding should be based upon an average class size of six students. The following segments are recommended maximums for funding purposes.
Students in Grades K-3 - 1 segment per day Students in Grades 4-8 - 2 segments per day Students in Grades 9-12 - 3 segments per day
Funding will include the costs of itinerant services or transporting students to cluster sites for instruction.

CONTACT:

Beth Arnow, Coordinator Migrant/ESOL Programs Georgia Department of Education 1962 Twin Towers East Atlanta, GA 30334
(404) 656-4995

7-17

MIGRANT EDUCATION PROGRAM

The Migrant Education Program is a national program that annually provides supplemental education and support services to eligible migrant children to help them overcome the educational disruptions and disadvantages
they face.

A migrant child is one who has moved across school district lines within the past twelve months so that the child's parent or guardian could obtain temporary or seasonal employment in agriculture or fishing activities. Students may continue to be served for five years after the first twelve months of "currently
migrating" status.

Federal law authorizes payments to state educational agencies for assistance in educating children of
migratory agricultural workers. Georgia is divided into four geographical areas which have agencies to ensure
that migrant students receive educational services while they are living in the state. The agencies coordinate educational programs for students in their particular section of the state. Migrant children receive similar services in other states where migrant families move for temporary or seasonal employment.

Approximately half of Georgia's school districts

offer program services for migrants. These programs

ta~get the needs of specific populations and locations.

The following services are those most generally

provided:

.

o instruction designed to meet the specific needs of migrant children;

o

preschool and ki~dergarten programs designed to

prepare three- and four-year-old migrant children

for a successful school experience;

o services to in-school and out-of-sch90l migrant youth 18-21 who have not graduated;

o meaningful migrant parent involvement through the Parent Advisory Council (PAC);

o the Migrant Student Record Transfer System (MSRTS),
a national computer network which receives, stores, and transmits academic and health information on students participating in the program;

o vocational training and career counseling;

7-18

o English To Speakers OT Other Languages (ESOL)
instruction for those children who speak little or no English;
o intercultural education that develops skills of cultural appreciation, understanding and conflict resolution;
o an assurance of sequence and continuity between schools in the instructional program by coordinating the use of textbooks, test materials and methods;
o special teachers, tutors and aides to work with students individually or in small groups on areas of academic weakness;
o summer school programs; and,
o supportive health services, including medical, dental, nutritional and psychological services, in cooperation with other agencies.

CONTACT:

Chapter I/Migrant Education Georgia Department of Education 1962 Twin Towers East Atlanta, GA 30334 (404) 656- 4995

7-19

OFFICE OF BUSINESS/EDUCATION PARTNERSHIPS

The Office of Business/Education Partnerships in the Georgia Department of Education was established to provide coordination of the efforts of Georgia educators and business leaders as they work cooperatively to improve the public schools and the economy of Georgia.
Improving educational programs in Georgia is dependent upon pUblic support and an improving economy. While educational finance is dependent upon economic growth, the ability of the state to promote and retain business and industry is dependent upon the quality of Georgia public schools. Increased cooperation between educators and business leaders will promote the interests of both groups and that of the general public.
Each school system has identified a Business/Education Partnership Coordinator to manage community involvement programs in the school district. Sources of partnership activities are businesses, civic organizations, government organizations, higher education institutions, religious organizations, and individual volunteers. Partnership activities include classroom speakers, tutoring, counseling/mentoring, tours, fund raising, advisory committee, staff training, loaned executives, donations, curriculum development, and assistance with special needs (i.e., drugs, teen-age pregnancy, suicide prevention, and dropout prevention) .

CONTACT:

Ellis Bateman
Assistant State Superintendent 1758 Twin Towers East Atlanta, GA 30334 (404) 656-0479

7-20

PARENT EDUCATION PROGRAM
support and Rationale for Program
The State Department of Education has initiated a Parent Education Program since it is clear that:
1. early intervention to promote intellectual development is essential;
2. what parents do at home with their children is a key factor in student achievement;
3. the way in which parents interact with their children at home is twice as predictive of children's success in school than the family's social or economic status; and,
4. the way in which schools communicate with parents makes a big difference regarding how involved parents become with their c~i.1dren's education.
Positive Parenting Program Goals
A. To help parents give their children the best possible start in life and lay the foundation for school success.
B. To strengthen the family and school partnerships.
C. To provide support for parents as active participants in the educational development of their children.
D. To increase local community and statewide awareness of the importance of parents as teachers of their children.
E. To assist school systems in the development and expansion of parent education programs.
Program Objectives
A. To provide technical assistance to parents concerning positive parenting skills and practices.
B. To provide technical assistance to school systems to assist in the establishment of parent education programs.
7-21

c. To share, involve, and coordinate information and
activities related to Positive Parenting with other state agencies, civic groups, professional groups and community organizations.
D. To implement "Positive Parenting Week," coordinated by the Georgia Department of Education and executed by local systems.
E. To monitor program activities to determine their quality and effectiveness and to revise and evaluate programs.

CONTACT:

Director of Parent Education Georgia Department of Education 1962 Twin Towers East Atlanta, GA 30334-5040
(404) 656-0476

7-22

PROJECTS TO IMPROVE EFFECTIVENESS
Projects to Improve Effectiveness is a program which provides grants to local school systems for the purpose of improving the development, dissemination, and implementation of educational programs in Georgia. The purpose of the program is to promote effective solutions to existing and emerging educational concerns of statewide significance.
Program grants are awarded in three areas:
o development projects; o training centers; and, o the adoption of training center programs.
Development Projects
Development Projects are two-to-three year projects that focus on the planning, development, piloting, implementation, and evaluation of new or improved educational processes .. Unsolicited proposals and proposals submitted in response to a request for proposal (RFP) are reviewed and evaluated by a state appointed review panel. The panel makes recommendations for funding.
All proposals must contain an evaluation design and a plan that will determine the effectiveness of the project and will provide adequate data for the project to proceed through the state validation process.
School systems which receive grants are required to pay a portion of the cost of the project based on their ability to pay. Projects must adequately accomplish their first year objectives and activities to be considered for continuation funding the next year. These projects are also examined annually by an on-site review team of trained state validators.
Training Centers
In order to qualify as a training' center, a local system must have implemented an effective improvement program which has the potential for widespread adoption by other local systems. Training centers usually evolve from development projects which have been validated in Georgia or from validated projects in other states which have been state certified.
7-23

Training Centers offer the following activities and services:

o awareness, training, and follow-up; o demonstration sites which allow other school
systems to observe the operation of effective
programs; and, o evaluation of results following the first year of
program implementation.

Training is provided at the training center or at the local system site. Follow-up services are provided at the implementation site.

After an adoption agreement has been signed by the local system, the system is eligible to receive free training services at the training center. Training centers are funded for one year and are reconsidered for funding each year. Continued funding is contingent on the need
within the state for the services provided by the
training center.

Adoption Grants

Adoption grants are awarded to local school systems which request the implementation of a validated program at a training center. Funds are provided to support some of the initial costs incurred at the local level during the implementation of the validated program. School systems receiving adoption grants are required to pay a portion of the adoption costs.

Initial costs usually include expenses for staff development and materials. Staff development expenditures may include substitute payor stipends for teachers scheduled for training. Stipends are available to those teachers whose training days are not covered by contracts. Materials approved by the training center may be purchased with adoption grant funds. In some adoptions the cost of purchasing tests for evaluation purposes is an allowable expenditure.

Adoption grant information and application forms may be obtained by contacting the training center director. Each school system is eligible for only one adoption grant per fiscal year.

CONTACT:

Dr. Jim Conkwright, Director and Dr. Gerald Klein, Coordinator Program Development and Student Support
Department of Education 1756 Twin Towers East Atlanta, GA 30334 (404) 656-4059

7-24

REMEDIAL EDUCATION
Remedial instruction is designed to help the student whose performance falls below potential. The basic program for these students is more in-depth and individualistic than would be found in regular classrooms. An effective remedial program should provide
o individualized instructional opportunities to assist those students who have not mastered the reading and mathematics skills appropriate for their grade levels;
o assistance to those students who are at risk of not passing, or who have not passed the Georgia Basic Skills Test; and,
o tutorial support for those students who have fallen behind academically and are considering dropping out of school.
The instruction provided by the remedial teacher is based on various diagnostic procedures including both standardized and informal tests and teacher observation. The focus of remedial programs includes attention to both the affective and the cognitive areas of development. A low pupil-teacher ratio facilitates individualized instruction.
Suggested instructional strategies and ideas for planning and implementing a remedial program are addressed in Motivational Strategies for Teaching Language Arts. The manual suggests strategies for teaching students who require reinforcement techniques and presents alternative strategies which offer variety within structure, a tactic often successful with low achieving students.. The manual was produced by the Georgia Department of Education and a copy was sent to each school.
Models
The scheduling models, listed below, delineate the administrative procedures that must be followed to schedule students for remedial education programs. In all models, the REP teacher remains responsible for planning the instructional program, evaluating student progress, and ensuring that the program of instruction meets the individual needs of the students.
7-25

A. REP Teacher Model--students are provided their total instruction in reading and/or mathematics by one teacher.
B. REP Teacher and paraprofessional--same as model A. The duties of the paraprofessional include:
1. conducting small group or individual group activities based on lesson plans developed by the teacher;
2. assisting with supervision of students; and,
3. assisting with student assessment, grading, and data collection on student progress.
C. Mixed Class Model--a designated REP teacher provides instruction to both REP eligible students and regular students.
D. Combined REP/Chapter I Models--program meets the requirements of both QBE and Chapter I statutes and regulations.
1. Limited Pullout--instructional services may be provided to students while they remain in their REP classroom setting or in a different classroom.
2. Replacement Model (Extended Pullout)-services are provided to students in a different classroom for a period of time that exceeds the time allowed in the limited pullout model. Students must be eligible for both REP and Chapter I.
3. Team Model--both teachers are involved in planning goals for students and both provide instruction.
4. Split-Funded Model--both REP and Chapter I funds are used to provide a remedial teacher when the class is small or the funds available are not sufficient to provide for a full-time teacher from either program.
E. REP/CVAE Model--the CVAE interlocking Reading/ Language Arts and Mathematics teachers are designated as REP teachers.
7-26

F. Special Supplementary Team Teaching Model--used in non-Chapter I schools and in hardship situations. Remedial instruction is provided during the student's normal instruction time for each subject.
G. Basic Skills Lab--provides remedial instructional opportunities on a daily basis in the areas of reading, mathematics, and/or writing for students.

Alternative Models
A system may request permission as part of the REP Plan to utilize a model different from the models listed above. The system must provide documentation that the proposed alternative model has been effective in remediating student deficiencies.

CONTACT:

Dr. Ellouise C. Collins Georgia Department of Education 1952.Twin Towers East Atlanta, GA 30334 (404) 656-2678

7-27

SCHOOL CLIMATE MANAGEMENT PROGRAM
The Quality Basic Education Act (QBE) requires that the State Board of Education provide assistance to local administrations in the cooperative development and management of positive climate in local schools. The statewide School Climate Management Program helps schools and local systems in developing school climate improvement and management processes.
School climate is defined as those qualities that affect how teachers, students, parents/ and the community view their schools. The following elements contribute to a positive school climate:
o trust/ caring, and mutual respect among teachers, students, parents/ and the community;
o a common purpose;
o 7ffective leadership; and,
o rules that have been cooperatively developed and are responsive to local needs.
Positive school climate is evidenced by positive gains in student achievement scores/ student and teacher morale, community support/ student and teacher attendance, as well as decreased student suspensions and expulsions, fewer dropouts, and improvement in other negative aspects of the total school environment.
School climate can be improved through activities which
o encourage effective communication between and among students, school staff, parents/ and the community;
o contribute to a wholesome and productive learning environment conducive to academic achievement and the personal growth of students; and,
o lead to interactive resolution of conflicts and problems within the school community.
The School Climate Management Program assists local school systems in the development and implementation of procedures. These include:
1. Procedures for assessing school climate as perceived by staff, students, and community representatives.
7-28

2. positive discipline procedures, including model behavior and discipline codes.
3. Opportunities for increased community involvement in instructional and extracurricular activities in the schools.
4. Provisions for teacher involvement in the development of rules for schools.
5. Orientation, training, and implementation assistance as needed.
6. Procedures for assessing program outcomes.
Results of this program shall be presented annually to the General Assembly for determining future appropriations.

CONTACT:

Dr. Jerry Roseberry, Director Student Support Unit
1852 Twin Towers East Atlanta, GA 30334 (404) 656-2600

7-29

SCHOOL COUNSELING
School Counselors provide programs and services that increase the probability of students staying in school. Research on dropout prevention indicates that intervention must begin in the early years. Indicators which profile dropout characteristics often appear by the fourth grade. Counselors utilize the statewide testing program results and other dropout indicators to identify learners who are slipping away or dropping-out of the learning environment. This early identification allows for intervention and remediation efforts to start in the early grades of school. Counselors are trained in intervention techniques needed to help these children get back on track.
Goals and Functions
Some of the goals of school counseling and the functions counselors use are:
1. Reduction in dropout rates and school absenteeism.
a. Conduct small group and classroom guidance activities to increase student self-esteem.
b. Conduct paren~ education seminars, workshops. and groups to improve parent-child relationships through increased understanding of parenting skills and child growth and development.
c. Provide teacher in-service workshops that focus on classroom management strategies that foster a positive classroom learning climate.
d. Conduct individual counseling sessions and make referrals where appropriate. Provide students with career development information, increasing their awareness of future options and the world of work.
2. Reduction in academic under-achievement and other school learning problems.
a. Consult with parents and school staff to develop strategies for reaching unmotivated students.
b. Conduct classroom guidance sessions designed to improve student study skills, test-taking skills, and attitude toward school work.
7-30

c. Conduct small-group counseling for under-motivated and low-achieving students that focus on skill-building, goal setting, and achievement motivation.
d. Serve as student advocate with school staff in aiding their understanding of the student and his or her learning style.
3. Prevention and remediation of emotional distrubances of troubled children.
a. Provide individual counseling to students to help them resolve or cope with personal conflict.
b. Conduct small-group counseling for students experiencing similar problems and teaching them appropriate coping skills.
c. Conduct classroom guidance sessions using a developmental curriculum that emphasizes po~itive living skills.
d. Make appropriate referrals to in-school personnel or public/private community services.
e: Consult with parents and school staff about appropriate interventions with students.
4. Reduction in drug use and teen pregnancy.
a. Conduct classroom guidance sessions on drug education.
b. Provide parents and teachers with resource material on drug abuse prevention.
c. Conduct classroom guidance sessions on sex education.
d. Provide individual counseling and referrals where appropriate.
Outcomes-Based Guidance Program
School counselors can also help students achieve the following through the implementation of an outcomes-based guidance program:
1. Maintain effective relationships with their peer; and adults.
2. Develop healthy, positive lifestyles.
7-31

3. Make effective decisions and set realistic goals. 4. Understand their rights and responsibilities. 5. Anticipate and cope successfully with changes. 6. Resolve conflicts and solve problems.
7. Maintain personal safety (including protection from child abuse).

CONTACT:

O. C. Hill, Coordinator School Counseling Student Support Services Unit 1852 Twin Towers East Atlanta, GA 30334-5040 (404) 656-2600

7-32

SCHOOL PSYCHOLOGY

There are some 400 school psychologists employed in Georgia public schools. They serve students in a variety of ways, including individual evaluation and case study, clinical observation, individual and group counseling, and contact with the students families where appropriate. School psychologists work with educators and related professionals through individual consultation, service on Student Support Teams, provision of staff development programs, and through cooperation with other agencies.
The Georgia Department of Education provides a state consultant position for school psychology services. This consultant1s tasks are to help ensure proper training and credentialing of school psychologists, provide on-going professional staff development for practitioners, and provide relevant input to Department of Education planning on present and projected needs in the area of school psychology. These tasks require continuous awareness of types of student populations in need, activities directed toward them, and steps necessary to enable delivery of adequate services for these students and their educators. This office serves as a statewide resource on numerous issues involving best practices in school psychology .

. CONTACT:

Frank Smith, Consultant
School Psychology Services Student Support Unit
1852 Twin Towers East Atlanta, GA 30334
(404)656-2600

7-33

SCHOOL SOCIAL WORK IN GEORGIA
Focus of School Social Work Program
The social work program in school settings is founded on the following premises.
1. There are many reasons why some students are not successful in school and frequently exhibit undesirable behaviors--underachievement, poor or non-attendance, acting out/disruptive behavior, school phobia, emotional immaturity, chronic nervousness and unhappiness, excessive daydreaming, substance abuse, violence, vandalism, running away and teen pregnancy.
2. Many factors influence school performance, and often these factors lie outside the school environment. These factors include a negative peer group, a dysfunctional family, lack of critical care and supervision, economic inadequacies, burdensome home duties, and health problems.
3. Parents are a valuable resource in solving these problems and should be encouraged to learn more about their child's school and the education their child is receiving. Likewise, schools should be encouraged to listen to the concerns of students and parents.
4. Frequently, parents need to be helped in using school and community resources.
5. Special education services must be provided for those students with physical, mental, social, emotional, or other educational handicaps.
The school social work program focuses on finding effective ways to resolve problems which significantly interfere with a student's learning, achievement or adjustment. The program serves troubled students.
Bole and Function
The role and functions of the school social work program are to:
1. provide direct services to students.
a. To use special education services appropriately to:
7-34

o protect the rights of children; o determine that the process has been
followed; and, o represent the school but serve in
a supportive role for students.
b. Form a working relationship with troubled students.
c. Counsel troubled students individually and in groups.
d. Develop treatment plans or strategies to ameliorate social problems of troubled students.
2. Provide direct services to parents of referred students.
a. Aid parents in developing skills to work with problem children.
b. Serve as liaison between home and school during crisis situations.
c. Conduct home visits to determine causes of school problems.
d. Participate in the development of an educational program for students who need an individualized education plan.
e. Utilize diagnostic skills to prevent or intervene early in developmental problems before they become severe.
3. Provide services to school administrators, teachers, and other school staff on matters pertaining to student's background, living 90nditions, and social needs which affect their functioning in the school setting.
a. Provide information and facilitate the use of resources for meeting clothing, nutritional, housing and health needs.
b. Serve as consultant to school staff in areas of child and family development.
c. Consult with school personnel regarding systemic problems within the school.
d. Facilitate parent/teacher conferences.
7-35

e. Assist school staff to identify ways to improve school climate and to implement plans for enhancing school climate.
4. a. Coordinate student/family utilization of community resources for meeting clothing, nutritional, housing, health, social and mental health needs.
b. Refer child abuse/neglect cases to proper authorities.
c. Serve as liaison between school and community agencies.
d. Conduct community needs assessment.
e. Serve as consultant to community agencies.
5. Monitor progress and measure outcomes of services to school children, their families and the community.

CONTACT:

Dr. Rena Gillespie Student Support Services Unit Georgia Department of Education 1852 Twin Towers East Atlanta, GA 30334 (404) 656-2600

7-36

SPECIAL INSTRUCTION ASSISTANCE PROGRAM
The Special Instruction Assistance Program (SIA) targets those students who are developmentally delayed as measured by a standardized testing instrument approved by the State Board of Education. The purpose of the program is to provide additional assistance to those students beyond that available in the regular instructional program. The Office of Instructional Services administers the SIA program to ensure effective implementation. A summary of program guidelines follows.
Eligibility Determination
There are separate criteria for kindergarten and students in grades one through five. Eligibility is determined by developmental and readiness tests, and the student's eligibility for special education and remedial programs.
Instruc.tional Delivery Models--Grades K-5
Since local school systems' resources and needs vary, the Department provides two models for program implementation. School systems may use one or both of the models in combination to meet individual school needs.
1. Reduced Class Size Model--SIA students are grouped within a regular teacher's classroom. Group size is limited to six to ten eligible students with one group per teacher.
2. Augmented Model--An additional teacher, certified in early childhood education, works with eligible students within the regular teacher's classroom. The group may not exceed ten eligible students in size. The additional teacher must work with each group a minimum of one hour per day.
Parental participation Model
Research has shown that parents are their children's first and.best teach~rs, each school system must attempt to include the parents as instructional par~ners with~n the SIA Program. Obtaining parental permission for the student's involvement in the program is the first step in this process.
7-37

Kinderaarten Model: Each school with a SIA program must provide the parents of participating students with at least six instructional opportunities during the school year. The program provides the opportunity for parents to learn developmental, instructional, and other school related skills.
Grades 1-5 MQdel: Each schQol system must prQvide at least one Qpportunity every six weeks for a parentteacher conference.

ApplicatiQn fQr Funds
Funding is prQvided on a grant basis. To apply, each system must submit its plan tQ the GeQrgia BQard of Education for approval. SubmissiQn Qf a plan is considered an application fQr funding. Funding will be based on the submitted plan, the mQdel to be implemented, and the number of students to be served.

Planning Process

In order to apply for a SIA grant, the schoQl system must submit an implementation plan. The plan must include the following provisions:

1. The plan must be developed with input from:

A. representatives of the system's teachers, administratQrs, and school support personnel; and

B. parents, especially the parents Qf students whQ meet referral Qr eligibility criteria.

2. The plan must:

A. identify the mQdel{s) tQ be used, identify the
schQQls using each mQdel, and prQvide reasons fQr each chQice;

B. prQvide a descriptiQn Qf the curriculum--

Qbjectives, instructiQnal apprQaches, and

materials tQ be used;

.

c. prQvide a descriptiQn Qf hQW the referral
p~Qcess wQrks;

D. provide a descriptiQn Qf parent invQlvement activities--methQd of implementation and curriculum; and,

7-38

E. include a method for evaluating the program such as:
1. short- and long-term measurement of academic improvement;
2. absenteeism rates;
3. parental feedback; and
4. retention patterns.

CONTACT:

Sharon K. Meinhardt Georgia Department of Instruction 1952 Twin Towers East Atlanta, GA 30334 (404) 656-2586

7-39

SPECIAL SERVICES UNIT

The Special Services Unit (SSU) provides technical
assistance to local school systems in their effort to eliminate inequities in educational opportunity by race, gender, and national origin. Funds for these activities are provided through the administration of a Federal Title IV Grant by the Special Services Unit. Each local school system is invited to submit a comprehensive plan outlining the needs, goals, objectives, activities and evaluation components to be used to address these issues. A team of State
Department of Education personnel reviews and rates each plan based on appropriateness of activities,
evaluations, cost effectiveness and court ordered status. Systems then enter into a contractual
agreement with the State Department of Education to carry out the proposed activities. SSU staff is available by phone or on-site visitation, to provide technical assistance necessary to implement the activities as stipulated in the contract agreement and/or other desegregation (race, gender or national origin) issue.

CONTACT:

Ishmael Childs Equity Coordination 1454 Twin Towers East Atlanta, GA 30334 (404) 656-2537

7-40

STUDENT SlJ'PPORl TEAMS
1. What is a Student Support Team?
A Student Support Team is "two or more professionals assigned to identify, plan, and recommend alternative instructional strategies for a given student prior to or in lieu of placement in a special education program.
2. What are the duties of the Student Support Team?
The Student Support Team meets one or more times to review ~nd consider all available information about individual students who are having behavioral or academic difficulty in school. It should explore and recommend (where appropriate) alternative instructional strategies prior to referral to special education. Activities of the Student Support Team should be documented in writing.
3. Are Student Support Teams a Special Education function?
No. Special education staff members may be involved at the discretion of the local superintendent.
4. What strategies should the Student Support Team recommend?
A wide range of alternative instructional strategies might be explored. The following examples are the kinds of suggestions that the Student Support Team might wish to recommend:
a. provide alternative instructional methods/materials;
b. restructure/abbreviate assignments; c. provide extra repetition; d. try a behavior modification checklist
/contract; e. seek help of a specialist, school psychologist
as a resource; f. conduct teacher-parent conference; g. placement in another class; h. services of the State Compensatory Education
Program; i. services of the Chapter II Program; and, / j. services of the Chapter I Program (if eligible).
7-41

5. Who should be a member of the Student Support Team? The Student Support Team should include the referring teacher and a person who is knowledgeable about options that are available in the system. Other participants may be selected from the following:
1. principal; 2. general education teacher; 3. counselor; 4. lead teacher; 5. school psychologist; 6. subject area specialist; and, 7. special education teacher.
6. How often should the Student Support Team meet?
This depends upon the number and nature of referrals.
7. What kind of records should the Student Support Team maintain?
Names of participants, dates of meetings, alternatives considered and final action.
8. Is additional assessment required as part of the Student Support Team process?
No. Existing student records should be thoroughly reviewed. The Student Support Team may recommend additional assessment.
9. Should parents participate in the Student Support Team process?
No. However, this can be done at the discretion of the superintendent.
10. Does a referral to the Student Support Team constitute student referral for Special Education?
No! The Student Support Team referral must occur prior to special education referral except in emergency situations.
7-42

11. Must the Student Support Team process be utilized with all students?
No.

12. Does every student currently in special education have to go through a Student Support Team?
Every special education student must have an eligibility report on file by the end of 1984-85 school year, but only those students identified as having learning or behavioral problems after September 30, 1984, should go through the Student Support Team process.

CONTACT:

Dr. Curtis Dixon, Director Secondary Education Division of Curriculum Services Georgia Department of Education 1954 Twin Towers East Atlanta, GA 30334 (404) 655-2586

7-43

TEEN PARENT PROGRAM
Rationale
In Georgia, in 1981, there were 9,256 live births to unwed teen-age mothers. Generally, two out of three pregnant girls drop out of school. The purpose of the Teen Parent Program is to encourage young mothers and fathers to continue and complete their high school education and to help them acquire skills and knowledge which will help them become better parents and selfsupporting adults. The program components include child growth and development, parenting skills, nutrition, household management skills, job readiness and employment skills.
Objectives of the Grant Program
1. To provide relevant instructional programs for teen-agers who are or are about to become parents.
2. To provide effective instructional materials to high school students on how to become better parents.
3. To improve the attendance of pregnant students and encourage and facilitate the continued education of teen parents.
4. To provide individual and/or group counseling services to assist single parents with problem solving.
5. To provide information to teen parents and inform them of vocational education programs and related support programs.
Grant Reqyirements
Each local system receiving a grant for an after-school parenting program must agree to the following requirements.
1. Teach developed curriculum that includes prenatal and human development, nutrition, parenting skills, employment skills.
2. Provide child care for children of participants by using the nursery as a lab experience for teaching parenting skills or providing staff to care for children.
7-qq

3. Class must be taught by the home economics teacher or by a team composed of a home economics teacher and a co-op teacher if system chooses job placement option.
4. Provide a facility suitable for teaching parents and with enough space to accommodate children.
5. Serve students who have dropped out of school, have children or are pregnant, age range 16-21.
6. Maintain appropriate class size: a minimum of eight, maximum of 15 students.
7. Provide a minimum of 24 hours of instruction.
8. Provide job placement and work experience on a paid job site (optional).
9. Provide a summary report to the state superintendent or authorized representative evaluating the project.

Delivery Model Options
.
1. Provide a short-term class for a minimum of eight and maximum of 15 students per class.
2. A home economics teacher to teach clpss (extended day) or to team with a co-op teacher to provide job placement services if the system chooses the job placement option.
3. Extended-year program option--class instruction in the morning with supervised work experience available in the afternoon.
4. Another model developed by local system.

Use of Funds

1. The instructional material modules are the same as the in-school parenting program and may be
purchased for $5.00 from the Vocational Education Materials Center, Green Street, Athens, GA 30602.

2. Provide salaries for the teacher and staff caring

for the children of participants. The teacher will

be paid by calculating an hourly rate of pay. The

amount is determined by dividing the 10-month

salary

from

the

Georgia

Annual ,

Salary .Schedule

by

1200.

7-45

3. Provide travel and subsistence for the teacher to attend designated staff development programs,
4. Purchase supplementary instructional materials as outlined in the parenting curriculum.

NOTE: A school may apply for both an in-school and an after-school parenting program if the school has a home economics program.

CONTACT:

Martha S. Staples, State Supervisor Consumer and Homemaking Education Georgia Department of Education 1770 Twin Towers East Atlanta, GA 30334
(404) 656-2545

7-116

VOCATIONAL EDUCATION
In keeping with the Quality Basic Education Act major efforts have been made to strengthen vocational education as it relates to the regular student population and potential dropouts. The major programs and projects designed to serve potential dropouts are as follows:
CVAE:
Coordinated vocational Academic Education (CVAE) is a program which includes both vocational and academic teachers jointly planning and teaching potential dropouts in grades 9-12. Approximately 150 schools in the state offer the CVAE program as a part of the high school Gurriculum. (See related section on CVAE for more information) .
RVI:
Related Vocational Instruction (RVI) is a supplementary vocational program designed to assist handicapped students enrolled in vocational education. Students are provided the services of a certified special education teacher with a vocational education endorsement, to work, both in the vocational laboratories and in related basic skill areas. Approximately 130 schools offer the RVI program to students in grades 9-12.
Vocational Applied Mathematics (VAM) student workbooks are available in twenty different vocational subject areas. These are designed for use by vocational teachers, as well as academic math and special education teachers, to assist students in the application of mathematics as it relates to vocational subject areas.
APPLIED WRITING;
Vocational Applied Writing Manuals are available in seven (7) vocational subject areas to assist students in the improvement of writing skills. These are designed for use as supplementary activities to strengthen both . vocational content knowledge and the application of writing skills. Vocational teachers from across the state have been provided an opportunity to receive these materials through staff development workshops.
7-47

APPLIED MATH:

Applied Mathematics is a new high school course
developed through a national consortium of states. It
is being implemented in ten (10) Georgia demonstration
sites in 1988-89. The applied mathematics course is based on mathematics needed in the workplace and is
designed for schools to offer as a full year course designed to meet graduation requirements. It has great potential for all high school students in grades 9-10
including potential dropouts.

APPLIED COMMUNICATIONS:

A new high school course entitled Applied Communications,
developed by a national consortium of states is
available to high school students as a language arts course. This new course is being implemented in ten (10) Georgia demonstration school sites in Georgia during 1988-89. The course may be used as a full year
language arts course for students to receive credit toward graduation. The course concentrates on
communications used in the workplace and is designed for all students including potential dropouts.

PROJECT SUCCESS:

A new vocational program for potential dropouts entitled Project Success was conducted for the first time at
Dooly County High School in 1987-88. It is a schooi within a sch90l concept scheduled on a four hour blocked time basis for a select group of potential dropouts. An identified team of vocational and academic teachers,
including a counselor, operate the program. The team of
teachers and the counselor meet after school at least two days each week to plan and coordinate the program.
Four additional schools in Georgia plan to implement Project Success in 1988-89.

TEEN-AGE PARENTING PROGRAM:

(See related section on Teen-Age Parenting Programs.)

JTPA:

(See related section on JTPA Program.)

CONTACT:

Curtis Kingsley, Director
Secondary Vocational Instruction Division 1752 Twin Towers East Atlanta, GA 30334
(404) 656-2552

7-48

CHAPTER BIGHT
GBORGIA DIRJ:CTORY or SCBOOL-LJWBL PR.OGUMS
This section contains descriptions of dropout prevention and recovery programs in the State of Georgia. Program descriptions were submitted by school systems and sponsoring entities responding to the "Statewide Inventory of System/School Programs for Prevention and Recovery of Dropouts, In-School Suspension, and School Climate Management" completed in January 1988. The descriptions-included in this manual are only a sample of the dropout reduction and prevention efforts currently underway in Georgia. Selection of program descriptions was based upon completion of the form and the comprehensiveness of the,data. Descriptions were provided by staff within the reporting entity, and only minor editing has been performed. Where no data were supplied, that area of the form has been left blank. Information was reported on a two-page form containing the same items as the single page descriptions used in the manual. Readers desiring additional information regarding any of these programs should contact the person listed with each program. A table of contents is included at the beginning of the chapter. A program index is also included as appendix L.
8-1

DROPOUT PJUrvlH'.rION: ALDRRATIVZ ACADEMIC PROGRAMS AND ALDRBATIVB SCHOOLS

PAGE

System Level Programs:. *
Dropout Prevention (774) . 8-6 Dropout Prevention (785) ..... 8-7 Gwinnett 7th Class Program (667) .. 8-8 Mathematics Basic Skill Lab (721) ...... 8-9 Oakwood High School (633) ....... 8-10 Remedial Education Program (633) ...... 8-11
Chapter 1 (674) . 8-12 s
Dropout Prevention/Peer Tutoring (687) 8-13

School Level Programs:

El Care (681)

8-14

The Innovative Demonstration School

of Excellence (721) ............... 8-15

Peer Tutoring Component of

Counseling Program (721) ......... 8-16

Reading/Math Lab (674) ......................... 8-17

Rich's Academy (761) ................. 8-18

Seeds of Greatness (721) ................ 8-19

DROPOUT PJUrvlH'.rION: BOSIBBSS-SCHooL PARTBBRSHIPS
Adopt-A-Student (761) .................. 8-21 Future Stock's Stay in School Program (726) ... 8-22 Stay in School Task Force (772) ......... 8-23 Stay in School Program (705) ..... 8-24

DROPOUT PREVENTION: B:ARLY CHILDHOOD AND ELEMJNTARY PROGRAMS

Curriculum and Remedial Programs (785)

Early Childhood Preventive Curriculum (676)

Elementary Resource Counseling Program (721)

P.A.S.S. (Partnership And Student Success) 697

Pre-First (625) ... 8.o~o e

Remedial Summer School (Elementary) (676) ......

SKIP (785)

o e."

Special Instructional Assistance (721)

Take-Home Computer (721)

8-26 8-27 8-28 8-29
8-30
8-31
8-32
8-33 8-34

*School system code number.

8-2

PIlOI0tlT PRlWUION: SOBS'l'AHCB ABOSB PROGRAMS
Alcohol and Drug Awareness and Prevention Program (721) 8-36
MA.CAD (633) 8-37
Student Assistance Program (635) 8-38 Substance Use Prevention & Education Resource (660) 8-39
PRQPOtlT PRmN'rIOH: PARBN't INVOLVEMENT AND EDOCATION PROGRAMS
ADDITIONS (705) 8-41 Migrant Education Program (721) . 8-42 Parental Involvement (665) 8-43 CHAMPS-EXPLORE Programs 8-44 P.A.S.S. (Parent Assisting Student's Success) (705) 8-45 Volunteer Program (721) 8-46
PR.QPQVJ: PRlMGUION: PUGNANCY AND TBBN PAREU PROGRAMS
Project ADEPT--Adolescent Development and Early Parent Training (761) . 8-48 TEEN ABLE (772) ... 8-49 Teen Parenting Program (687) 8-50 Family Living (674) .. 8-51 Parenting--After School Classes (674) 8-52 Teen Parent Program (629) . 8-53
PR.QPotr!' PMYQTION: JOB-TRAINING AND VOCATIONAL PROGRAMS
Coordinated Vocational Academic Education (641) 8-55 Coordinated Vocational Academic Education (633) .. 8-56 Glynn County OP-ED Program (663) ............. 8-57 Job's For Georgia's Graduates (638) ......... 8-58 Job's For Georgia's Graduates (642) ............ 8-59
JTPA (62 9 ) 8- 60 JTPA (67 4 ) 8- 61
JTPA Summer Program (785) ... 8-62 Related Vocational Instruction (742) .. 8-63 Related Vocational Instruction (648) .... 8-64 Trade and Industrial Education (674) .... 8-65 Vocational Summer School (716) ... 8-66 Vocational/Academic Preparation (VAC) (746) . 8-67
8-3

DRQPOtr.r RECOVERY PROGRAMS:
Adult Basic Education/Adult Secondary Education (742) .... 8-69 Adult Basic Education (687) .. 8-70 Adult Education (721) .... 8-71

MtlL'r1:rACI'1'1!lD PROGRJ\MS:
Children At Risk Committee (794) ... 8-73 The Northlake Network (776) ... 8-74 SPARKS (Student Partners Aiming for Recognition, Knowledge, and Success) (747) .... 8-75

IN-SCHOOL SUSPENSION PROGRAMS:
Oatland Island Alternative School (625) .... 8-77 Self-Improvement Lab--SIL (694) ......... 8-78 Reassignment Center (635) .............. 8-79 In-School Suspension (725) ................. 8-80 In-School Suspension (619) ............. 8-81 Crisis Intervention Program (733) .......... 8-82 Alternative School (742) ................ 8-83 Saturday School (636) ................... 8-84 Irwin County In-School Support Program (677) .. 8-85 In-School Probation Program (755) ............. 8-86 In-School Suspension (785) ............. 8-87 Richmond County Alternative School (721) ....... 8-88

SCBOQL CLIMA'1'1!l MANAGIMIN'l' PROGRAMS:

Business/School Partnership (665) ......... 8-90

School Climate (690) .............. 8-91

East Newnan School

(638)'

........0

~











8-92

School Climate Improvement (755) ................ 8-93

School Climate Improvement Project (772) ........ 8-94

School Climate Management (766)

8-95

8-4

~BOPOQ'1' PRBVElfl'ION: AL'rERHATIVZ ACADEMIC PROGRAMS
AND ALTBRHATIVZ SCHOOLS

PAGE

System Level Programs:

Dropout Prevention (774)* 8-6 5 e _

Dropout Prevention (785) . 8-7

Gwinnett 7th Class Program (667) . 8-8

Mathematics Basic Skill Lab (721) 8-9

Oakwood High School (633) 8-10

Remedial Education Program (633) 8-11

Chapter 1 (674)

8-12

Dropout Prevention/Peer Tutoring (687) .. 8-13

School Level Programs:

El Care (687)

0 e 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

8-14

The Innovative Demonstration School of Excellence (721) .... 8-15

Peer Tutoring Component of Counseling Program (721) .. 8-16

Reading/Math Lab (674) ... 8-17

Rich's Academy (761) .................. 8-18

Seeds of Greatness (721) ................... 8-19

8-5

1. PROGRAN HANB: Dropout Prevention

CODB: 774

2. Program Contact: Fran Jarrard

3. Date Program Began: 23/8/87 5. Aqe Range Served: 5-14+

4. Number of Students ~arved:-1986-87: 2400 -1987-88: 2400

6. Grade(s) Served: K-8

7. Student/Staff Ratio: 1:1875

8. Population Served: All students.

9. Program Bliqibility Criteria: Enrolled in Dublin City Schools (K-8).

10. Program Bzit Criteria: N/A

11. Program~: Dropout Prevention, System Level.

12. Bstimated <avq.) Days participants Spencl in Program: 180

13. Sponsoring Aqency: Dublin City Schools

14. Annual Costs: $20,000

15. Source(s) of Program Funds: $18,000 local, $2,000 Chapter II

16. Description of Program Objectives: Students will develop a positive self-esteem. The school will have a learning atmosphere where students succeed. Potential dropouts will be identified and assisted at the elementary level to insure their staying in school. Parents and other community members will become involved in the school's efforts to prevent dropouts.

17. Description of the Proqram and Services Provided: A group guidance room for dropout and drug abuse prevention activities was set up at the junior high. Room materials were donated by various organizations. A Helping Hand program in grades 4-8 provides one staff member per two potential dropouts. Materials on self-esteem were prepared for kindergarten teachers. Parent seminars on adolescent understanding, drug abuse prevention and teen sexuality were held at the junior high. Study skills presentations were held in grades 4-6. Parents also received Study Tips. An elementary guidance program has been implemented.

18. Specific Successes of the Program/Problems Encountered/Solutions Used: Community involvement, inVOlving industry, organizations, and community leaders, was solicited by adult volunteers, parent seminars, and good publicity. Orientation with school staff and community members, having a focal point (Opportunity Room), and a dedicated staff are essential.

19. Specific Strategies or Program Practices Which are Effective: Parent seminars. opportunity Room. Helping Hand Program. Study skills activities. Self-esteem builders and community involvement.

20. Program Evaluation: No evaluation yet.

21. Address of Project: Shamrock Drive Dublin, Georgia 31021 (912) 272-8122

8-6

1. pROGRAM NAMZ: Drop-out Prevention 2. program Contact: David Holland

COOE: 785

3. Date Program Began: 28/8/87 5. Age Range Served: 14-18

4. Number of Students Served:-1986-87: 34 -1987-88: 25

6. Grad8(s) Served: 9-10

7. Student/Staff Ratio: N/A

8. population Served: Students failing general math in grades 7-9.

9. Program Eligibility Criteria: Failure of one or more general math courses in grades 7-9.

10. Program Zzit Criteria: N/A

11. Program Type: Dropout prevention, system level.

12. Estimated (avg.) Days Participants Spend in Program: 180

13. Sponsoring Agency: Rome City Schools 14. Annual Costs: 00

15. Source(s) of Program 1'uDds: N/A

16. Description of Program Objectives: To match targeted students with students who are academically successful. To give targeted students individualized help in general mathematics. To reduce the number of students who fail general mathematics courses.

17. Description of the Program and Services Provided: The program is a peer tutoring program that uses gifted 11th and 12th grade students to tutor 9th and 10th grade students in general mathematics. The gifted student attends the general mathematics class with their assigned student. The student tutor sits beside student and gives help and encouragement during and after class. The tutor is given elective credit.

18. Specific Successes of the Program/Problems BDcountered/Solutions Used: Tutor orientation. Student and tutor selection. Credit or other reward for tutors.

19. Specific Strategies or Program Practices Which are Effective: To have the student tutor actually sit through the class with the students they are tutoring.

20. Program Evaluation: No evaluation yet.

21. Address of Project: 508 East 2nd St, Rome, GA 30161
(404) 295-7400

8-7

1. PROGRAM NAME: Gwinnett 7th Class Program

2 Proqram Contact: Jerry Raines

3. Date Proqram Began: 16/2/87 5. Age Range Served: 16-18

4. NUmber of Students serv&Q~-1986-87: 51 ~1987-88: 145

6. Grade <s) Served: 12

7. Student/Staff Ratio: 15:1

8. Population Served: Seniors needing extra credits to graduate on schedule

9. Program Eligibility Criteria: 4th or 5th year seniors who need up to 1-1/2 units to graduate

10. Proqram Zzit Criteria: N/A

11. Program~: Dropout prevention, system level

12. Estimated <avq.) Days Participants Spend in Program: 45 per term

13. Sponsoring Agency: Gwinnett Board of Education 14. Annual Costs: 00

15. Source(s) of Program Funds: Local and self-supporting

16. Description of Program Objectives: To help students graduate with their class. To help students and parents understand that the school system will help students complete requirements for graduation in alternative ways.

17, Description of the Program and Services Provided: Seniors may take one course per term along with the regular school curriculum in order to complete graduation requirements. Students pay $75 per class. Students may take 1-1/2 units per school year. Classes meet 4 days/week for 45 nights and are offered 4:10-5:50, 6:00-7:40, and 7:50~9:30. There is no full-time staff and teachers are hired as classes for.m. A part-time counselor and librarian are used. The community school director serves as principal.

18. Specific Succ.sses of the program/Problema Encountered/Solutions Used: Develop a schedule of classes and work with the home school counselor. A working relationship with area schools can be developed through information about the classes offered each term. Hiring teachers at the last minute is a problem.

19, Specific Strategies or Program Practices Which are Effective: Develop joint enrollment form for local counselors to complete listing courses needed to graduate, Advise counselors of limited curriculum. Suggest that students take electives or basic required courses at evening school.

20, Program Evaluation: No evaluation yet.

21, Address of Project: 405 Pleasant Hill Road Lilburn, GA 30247 (404) 921-3636

8-8

~ROGRAN NAMB: Mathematics Basic Skill Labs

COOK: 721

2. ~rogram contact: Faye H. Montgomery

3 " Date ~rogram Began: 26,S/81 5. Age Range Served: 15-20

4. Number of Students Se~~-1986-87: 560 -1987-88~ 700

6. Grade(s) Served: 9-12

7, Student/Staff Ratio: 16:1

8. ~opulation Served: Failure of the mathematics portion of the Georgia Basic Skills Test.

9. ~roqram Bligibility Criteria: Pass the Basic Skills Test.

10. Program Bxit Criteria: Dropout prevention, system level.

11. Program Type: 180

12. Bstimated (avg.) Days Participants Spend in Program:

13. sponsoring Agency: Richmond County Board of Ed. 14. Annual Costs: 0

15. Source(s) of Program Funds: Local funds, state REP funds.

16. Description of Program Objectives~ To remediate deficient mathematics skills. To teach test-taking skills. To allow smaller class sizes. To provide teachers trained in remediation. To provide additional hands-on and diagnostic materials for
student use.

17. Description of the Program and Services Provided: Each school has basic skill lab classes in mathematics. Students are placed in the classes upon failure of the Basic Skills Test. Each school (except the magnet schools) employs a full-time lab teacher. The program operates during the regular school day.

18. Specific Successes of the Program/Problema Encountered/Solutions Used: The most effective staff members have been those trained in elementary mathematics. There is a lack of textbooks for remediation, thus other hands-on materials must be provided in large quantities to increase the effectiveness of instruction. Smaller class size requires more classroom space and more staff.

19. Specific Strategies or Program Practices Which are Effective: Teachers have regularly scheduled meetings and in-services for sharing and reinforcing their strategies. Smaller class sizes have been a positive factor.

20. Program Evaluation: Scores on Georgia Basic Skills Test have increased each year the program has been in operation.

21. Address of Project:

2083 Heckle Street Augusta, GA 30910-2999
(404) 737-7359

8-9

1. PROGRAM~: Oakwood High School 2. p:Z:Oqz'am Contact: J. Carla Northcutt

CODK: 633

3. Date P:z:og:z:.... Began: 9/8/78 5. Age Range Se:z:ved: 16-20

4. NUmbe:z: of Students Se:z:ved:-1986-87: 625 -1987-88: 529

6. G:z:ade(s) Se:z:ved: 10-12

7. Student/Staff Ratio: 25:1

8. population Se:z:ved: Unmotivated, dissatisfied, discouraged students

9. P:z:oq:z:am Bligibility C:z:ite:z:ia: Must be 16, have at least 5 units, live in district with parent or guardian if under 18, not be suspended or expelled

10. P:z:og:z:am Bzit C:z:ite:z:ia: Completion of graduation requirements. May return to home school the following semester if desired.

11. P:z:og:z:am Type: Dropout prevention, system level

12. Bstimated (avg'.) Days Participants Spend in P:z:oq:z:am: 45-180

13. Sponso:z:ing Agency: Cobb County School District 14. Annual Costs:

15. Sou:z:ce(s) of P:z:oq:z:am Funds:

16. Desc:z:iption of P:z:ogram Objectives: To provide an alternative setting for students who wish to complete graduation requirements. To enable students to earn additional credit hours toward graduation if they are behind. To provide an open campus alternative for the older high school student.

17. Desc:z:iption of the P:z:oq:z:am and Se:z:vices P:z:ovided: Staff of 29 includes 19 full-time teachers, a counselor, media specialist, principal, and assistant principal. All courses required for graduation are offered. Upper-level science and math are not offered. The program operates in cooperation with the Adult Education Program on campus. There are no additional services and no extracurricular activities. No more than 500 students are enrolled.

18. Specific Successes of the P:z:oq:z:am!p:z:oblema ZIlcounte:z:ed/Solutions Used: A caring, patient staff and an assistant principal with a varied secondary background are essential. Appropriate equipment must be available. A gym and outdoor playing field are important. A media center and a lounge area are important.

19. Specific Strategies or Prog:z:am Practices Which are Effective: New student orientation is held each session. Students are allowed some latitude within the class; for example, if extra time is needed, teachers work to provide it.

20. Proq:z:am Evaluation: Graduation rate above state average.

21. Address of Project: 1560 Joyner Avenue Marietta, GA 30060 (404) 424-7950

8-10

pRQGRAN NAME: Remedial Education Program

CODB: 633

2. proqram contact: Barbara Bounds Selby

3. Date Proqram aeqan: 20/8/86 5. Age Range Served: 14-17

4. Number of Students Served:-1986-87: 300 -1987-88: 475

6. Grada(s) Served: 9-12

7. Student/Staff Ratio: 16:1

8. popuJ.ation Served: Students wo~king below grade level.

9. Proqram Bliqibility C:iteria: Must be on remedial education eligibility list; and/or failure on Georgia Basic Skills Test.

10. Proqram Bzit Criteria: Passing of Georgia Basic Skills Test.

11. Proqram Type: Dropout prevention, school and system level.

12. Estimated (avq.) Days Participants Spend in Proqram: 80

13. Sponsorinq Aqency: Cobb County School District

14. Annual Costs: $40,000

15. Source(s) of Proqram Funds: State

16. Description of Proqram Objectives: To remediate students in grade 9 who score in the 25th percentile or lower on a national norm test in readinq, math or writinq. To remediate students who fail the Georgia Basic Skills Test.

17. Description of the Proqram and Services Provided: Students are in classes of 15-18 students. Teachers work on specific academic weaknesses as well as student strengths in either reading, math, or writing, in order to improve ability and understanding those areas.

18. Specific Successes of the Proqram/Problems Bncountered/Solutions Used: Organization of the program and communication between the coordinator and the responsible person at each school are important. Lack of space and qualified staff are problems.

19. Specific Strateqies or Proqram Practices Which are Effective: Variety of materials and correlation of the materials to the subject area, studied make it easier for teachers to provide remediation.

20. Proqram Evaluation: External evaluation by State Department of Education.

21. Address of Project: 514 Glover Street Marietta, GA 30060 (404) 424-1697

8-11

1. PROGRAH~: Chapter I 2. Program Contact: Martha Gould

CODB: 674 ,.'

3. Date Program Bega-: 28/9/87 5. Age Range Se:98d: 12-15

4. Humber of Studenta Se:98d:-1986-87: 0 ~1987-88: 23

6. Grade Ca) Se:98d: 7

7. Student/Staff Ratio: 11:1

8. Population Se:98d: Students who fail ITBS reading or math test

9. Program Bligibility Criteria: Low score on ITBS reading test; referral from regular teacher; lowest percentile on ITBS math test;

10. Program Bzit Criteria: N/A

11. Program~: Dropout prevention, school level

12. Batimated Cavg.) Daya Participanta Spend in Program:

13. Sponaoring Agency: Chapter I 14. Annual Coata:

15. SourceCa) of Program Funds: Federal

16. Deacription of Program Objectivea: To gain skill in the objectives of the Scott Foresman Focus Reading Series or Prescription Learning Math. To demonstrate achievement on the .
ITBS.

17. Deacription of the Program. and Servicea Provided: The program is the only reading/language arts class for two sections of 7th-graders. The Scott Foresman Focus reading program is used. The math program is a supplementary program-Prescription Learning math lab--for students most in need of remediation as indicated by ITBS scores.

18. Specific Successes of the Program/Problema Bncountered/Solutions Used: Classroom collections of recommended literature are needed, as is an overhead projector. The lab setting works well and it would be desirable to serve more students in this way.

19. Specific Strategies or Program. Practices Which are Effective: Providing many activities to reinforce teaching makes it possible to individualize the reading program. Students can become involved in a literature program on their level through the use of recommended readings.

20. Program Evaluation: No evaluation yet.

21. Address of Project: P.O. Box 10 Franklin, GA 30217 (404) 675-3656

8-12

~ROGRAK~: Dropout Prevention/Peer Tutors

COOK: 687

2. ~z:oqz:am Contact: Jeanette Graham

3. Date pz:oqz:am Beqan: 15/3/87 5. Age Range Served: 14-18

4. Number of Students Sez:ved:-1986-87: 14 -1987-88:

6. Gz:ad8<s) Sez:ved: 9-12

7. Student/Staff Ratio:

8. ~opulation Served: Potential dropouts

9. ~z:oqz:am B1igibility Cz:itez:ia: Failure of 3 or more courses and/or dropped out of school; unable to pass BST

10. ~z:oqz:am Bxit Cz:itez:ia: Agreement between student and classroom teacher that student is
fulfilling contract and achieving at a passing level.

11. ~z:ogz:am!ype: Dropout prevention, school level

12. Bstimated <avq.) Days ~az:ticipants Spend in ~z:oqz:am: 30

13. Sponsoz:inq Agency: Georgia Department of Education 14. ADDual Costs:

15. Souz:ce<s) of ~z:ogz:am I'unds:

16. oescz:iption of Pz:ogz:am Objectives: To identify students, parents, and other persons involved with or concerned about dropouts. To publicize dropout prevention advocacy group goals. To develop a system to identify potential dropouts and to counsel with and prevent dropouts. To provide materials to help students improve communication skills, learn behavior modification skills, and improve academic weaknesses.

17. oescz:iption of the Pz:ogz:am and Services Provided: Potential dropouts are interviewed by counselor. Parents must give permission for participation. Counselor trains the tutors. Tutors meet with their students and teachers. Tutoring is done twice a week on a 1to-1 basis. A counselor is available for private counseling or to assist tutors. Classroom teachers provide aid to tutor. Students also can attend a summer program taught by a counselor.

18. Specific Successes of the Program/Problems Encountered/Solutions Used: Must have cooperation of teaching staff and parents. Tutors must be carefully chosen. At least one counselor per 400 students is needed, and a full-time secretary is needed to handle paperwork.

19. Specific Strategies oz: Program Practices Which are Effective: The summer program allowed time for small group work and individual counseling. St~dents need help with self-concept, study skills, and decision-making skills. Communication and interpersonal skills were also worked on.

20. Program Evaluation: Increased test scores by 25 percent.

21. Address of Project: Route 5, Box 138 Dublin, GA 31021 (912) 272-1155

8-13

1. PROGRAM DMZ: EL CARE

CODB: 687

2. p~oq~am Contact: Mrs. D. M. Joiner

3. Date P~oq~am Beqan: 1/4/87 5. Age Range Served: 13-18 6. G~ade(s) Served: 8-12

4. HUmber of Students Served:-1986-87: 71 -1987-88: 47
7. Student/Staf~ Ratio:

8. population Served: Potential dropouts

9. P~oq~am Bliqibility C~ite~ia: Poor attendance, discipline problem, repeaters, academic deficiencies, subject failure, ITBS failure

10. P~oq~am Bzit C~ite~ia: Tutor, student and teacher recommendations

11. p~~am ~: Dropout prevention, school level

12. BstJmatec1 <avq.) Days Participants Spend in P~oq~am: 120

13. Sponso~inq Agency: State & Laurens Co. Board 14. Annual Costs: $10,000.

15. Sou~ce<s) of P~oq~am Funds: State Dept. of Education, Laurens County Board.

16. Desc~iption of P~oq~am Objectives: To increase student, faculty, parent and community awareness of the dropout problem. To increase involvement of parents in dropout problem. To identify potential dropouts. To identify families of potential dropouts.

17. Desc~iption of the P~oq~am and Services P~ovided: EL CARE (East Laurens Coordinated Rescue Effort) serves students twice weekly on alternate days. Students are tutored in subjects they are failinq or are in danqer of failinq. A task force of seven persons from the school and community oversees the program. Tutors serve five days a week.

18. Specific Successes of the P~oq~am/p~oblema Bncounte~/SolutionsUsed: Tutors must be chosen carefully. The program supervisor must have time to perform the job adequately. Space and scheduling considerations must be handled.

19, Specific St~ategies o~ P~oq~am P~actices Which a~e Effective: Sell the objectives of the program to the community, teachers and students. Allow teaching staff to make suggestions about the program.

20. p~og~am Evaluation: Internal evaluation indicated test score gain average of 35 percent .
.
21. Address of P~oject: Route 6 Dublin, GA 31021 (912) 275-3386

8-14

1. ~ROGRAN HaMZ: Innovative Demonstration School of Excellence 2 ~J:oqJ:am Contact: Faye H. Montgomery

. COOS: 721

3. Dat. pJ:ogJ:am Began: 22/8/85 5. Age RaDge S.rved: 5-15

4. NumbeJ: of Students S.rved:-1986-87: 500 -1987-88: 7000

6. GJ:ada (.) S.rved: K-8

7. Student/Staff Ratio: 25:1

8. ~opul.tion Served: Elementary and middle school students.

9. ~J:oqJ:am Zligibility CJ:it.J:ia: Principal must have strong management skills, instructional background, and consistent leadership style.

10. ~J:ogJ:am bit CJ:it.J:ia:

11. pJ:oqJ:am~: Dropout prevention, multifaceted, school climate mgmt.

12. S.tiJDated (avq.) Day. ~a"icipant. Spend in ~J:ogJ:am: 180

13. SponsoJ:inq Agency: State Department of Education 14. Annual Co.t.: $1,400.

15. SouJ:c.(.) of ~J:ogJ:am Funds: Innovative Grants or local board of education

16. De.cJ:iption of PJ:ogJ:am Obj.ctive.: To improve teacher competencies and give them new techniques and strategies to meet diverse needs of students. To improve basic reading, math and writing skills of students. To improve student self-concept and to improve school/community relations.

17. DcJ:iption of the PJ:ogJ:am and Sez:vice. PJ:ovided: A 2-day workshop on 'Effective Teaching for Higher Achievement' is offered. Phase II is an effective curriculum. Projects are adopted/adapted to support the existing curriculum. Classroom teachers are trained to effective utilize each project.

18. Spec~fic Succ of the ~J:oqJ:am/PJ:oblems Bncount.J:ed/Solutions Used: No additional materials are needed. Validated projects vary in cost and equipment needs.

19. Specific Strategi OJ: PJ:ogram PJ:actic Which are Zff.ctive: The effective instructional practices include six components. The information in each of these components is extremely valuable for teachers.

20. ProgJ:am Evaluation: External evaluation by on-site team and internal evaluation indicated overall increase in test scores and attendance over control site.

21. Address of Project: 3116 Lake Forest Dr. Building 311 Augusta, GA 30909 (404) 737-7359

8-15

1. PROGRAN HAMB: Peer Tutoring Component of Counseling Program.

COOl:: 721

2. Proq~_ Contact: Dr. Robetta McKenzie, Leroy James

3. Oate P~_ Beg'&Il: 10/10/85 5. Age RaDge Served: 14-19

40 HUmbe~ of Students Served:-1986-81: 0 -1981-88: 12

6. G~ade<s) Served: 9-12

7. Student/Staff Rat~o: 1:1

8. populat~on Served: Students with academic difficulties.

9. P~g~_ I:l~gibility ~it.~ia: Referral by parent/teacher for academic need; tutors must have B avg. in subject and be interested in helping people.

10. P~oq~_ B:zit C~ite~ia: Coordinator, teacher/parent recommendation

11. P~og~_ ~: Dropout prevention, multifaceted, school level

12. I:st.imated <avg.) Days Participants Spend ill P~oq~_: 30

13. Sponso~inq.AgeDcy: Hephzibah High School

14. Am:I.ual Costs: 0

15. Sou~c.<s) of P~oq~_ 1'uIld8: N/A

16. O.sc~~ption of P~og~_ Obj.ct~ves: To help students to improve study skills and to improve academic work. To provide tutors with the opportunity to improve interpersonal skills, strenqthen their own learning strategies, and develop an appreciation of the art of teaching.

17. Desc~ipt~on of the Program and Services Provided: Tutors receive 6 weeks of training in interpersonal skills, study skills and computer software. Students are matched to tutors based on student need and tutor expertise. Tutor and student work 1-to-1 as often and as long as it takes to bring the student up to performance standard.

18. Spec~fic Successes of the Program/Problems BIlcountered/Solutions Used: Administration and counseling staff must be committed to the program. Teachers and students must want to use the service and be willing to follow the plan.

19. Specific Strategies or Program Practices Which are Bffective: The use of guidance curriculum materials on interpersonal, study and communication skills has been effective. Computer software is used in addition to textbooks in the tutoring sessions.

20. Program I:valuation: Internal evaluation by teachers, students, counselor

21. Addzess of Project: 2083 Heckle Street Augusta, GA 30910 (404) 737-7310

8-16

1. pacGRAN NAMB: Reading/Math Lab

CODB: 674

2. progJ:am contact: Jan McLendon

.."

3. Date p~og~am Began: 1/9/83

4. Numbe~ of Students Served:-1986-87: 100 -1987-88: 80

5. Age Range Served: 14-18

6. G~acW<s) Sez:ved: .9-12

7. Student/Staff Ratio: 10:1

8. popuJ.at10n Se:ved: Remedial, college-bound students

9. p~~am B11g1b1l1ty ~1te~1a: High risk on CRT, TAP, ITBS, failed Basic Skills Test

10. p~~am Bz1t Criteria: Passing BST, mastering objectives to help pass testing.

11. Proqram Type: Dropout prevention, school level

12. Bstimated <avq.) Days participants Spend in P~ogram: 180

13. sponsoring Agency: State

14. Annual Costs:

15. Source<s) of Program 1'und8:

16. Description of P~ogram Objectives: To meet all Objectives in reading and math.

17. Description of the P~ogram and Se:vices Provided: The Prescription Learning and Education Development Lab places students " based on test scores and works with students individually to improve weak objectives.

18. Specific Successes of the Program/Problema Bncountered/Solutions Used: A workshop instructor is needed to help set up the program. Proper equipment must be available. A low teacher-pupil ratio is needed.

19. Specific Strategies or P~ogram Practices Which are Bffective: A low teacher-pupil ratio allows each student proper attention and immediate feedback.

20. Program Evaluation: External and internal evaluation indicates increased test scores.

21. Address of P~oject: P.O. Box 10 Franklin, GA 30217

8-17

1. PROGRAK NAMB: Rich's Academy

CODK: 761

2 P:ogram Contact: Jerry Ford

3 Data p:og:am Beqan: 5. Age Ranga Se:ved: 14-19

4. Numb.: of Students Se:ved:-1986-87: -1987-88:

6. G:ade(~) Se:ved~ 9-12

7. Student/Staff Ratio:

8. population Served: Dropouts and potential dropouts

9. p:og:am Eligibility C:ite:ia: students not performing successfully in a traditional school setting.

10. p:og:am Zzit C:ite:ia:

11. p:og:am Type: Dropout prevention, recovery, multifaceted, system level

12. Kstimated (avq.) Days participants Spend in p:og:am: 180

13. Sponsorinq Aqency: Exodus, Inc., and others 14. Annual Costs:

15. Sou:ce(s) of P:og:am Funds: To provide a personalized, supportive educational environment with access to additional social service support on the school site.

16. Desc:iption of P:og:am Objectives: The Academy offers a full schedule of classes in the basic academic areas. Access is provided on-sit~ to a range of counseling, health, recreational, cultural, financial, legal, and employment services. In addition, the Adopt A Friend partnership program pairs adult volunteers with program students. Partners are trained and supported by Academy staff. Recreational and/or tutoring activities are geared to the needs, interests and talents of each partner. The Partners program pairs "senior" partners with junior partners.

17. Desc:iption of the P:og:am and Se:vices P:ovided: This program represents an entirely new model for involvement of the private sector in the provision of educational and social services to Atlanta's youth.

18. Specific Successes of the Prog:am/P:oblema Encounte:ed/Solutions Used: The Academy offers many avenues for volunteer involvement. Rich's Cities in Schools Academy represents a partnership between Rich's Atlanta Public Schools, Exodus, Inc. the City of Atlanta, and Fulton County.

19. Specific St:ategies 0: P:og:am P:actices Which a:e Effective:

20. P:og:am Evaluation: Recovery of over 50 dropouts in 1987-88.
21. Add:ess of P:oject: 100 Edgewood Avenue Atlanta, GA 30303 (404) 873-3979

8-18

1. ~ROGRAK HaHB: Seeds of Greatness

CODB: 721

2. ~ro~n:am contact: A. Herndon Shaw

3. Date ~:oq:am Beqan: 24/8/86 5. Aq8 Range Se:ved: 16-21

4. Numbs: of Students Served:-1986-87: 25 -1987-88: 34

6. G:ade(s) Se:ved: 9-11

7. Student/Staff Ratio: 34:1

8. ~opulation Se:ved: Students age 16+ who failed 9th grade on attendance.

9. ~:oq:am Bligibility C:ite:ia: Poor attendance, academic deficiencies, retained at least once, older than the normal 9th grade student.

10. ~:og:am Zzit Crite:ia: Graduation from high school or leaving and failing to return.

11. ~:og:am Type: Dropout prevention, school level.

12. Bstimated (avq.) Days participants SPend in P:og:am: 60 hours

13. Sponso:ing Agency: GA DOE & RCBE

14. Annual Costs: $20,000.

15. Sou:ce(s) of P:og:am Funds: Vocational Ed. Grant & Richmond County Board.

16. Desc:iption of Program Objectives: 90% completion of 9th and 10th grades by target group. 10% reduction of dropout rate at Lucy Laney High School. Development of a transportable dropout prevention program. Mastery of the ten principles of success motivation by target students.

17. Desc:iption of the Prog:am and Services Provided: Students are grouped in a multilevel homeroom and meet after school once a week for motivational/ informational programs led by the homeroom teacher on an extended day contract. Counselors and administrators work with community and business leaders to provide continuous support to target group. A summer school component is included.

18. Specific Successes of the P:og:am!Problems Encounte:ed/Solutions Used: The major problem has been funding for the tangible reinforcement items required. To date, funding has not been found.

19. Specific Strategies or Program Practices Which are Effective: Keeping students together and providing frequent reminders of importance of attendance seem to be critical. Working with students on an individual basic to set attainable goals appears to be effective.

20. Program Evaluation: Internal evaluation by system personnel indicates 20 percent increase in attendance rate and decrease in 9th grade retentions.

21. Address of Project: 2083 Heckle Street Augusta, GA 30910-2999 (404) 737-1155

8-19

])ROPOQ'1' PRIYIN'l'IOH; SCBOOL-BUSIHBSS lAR9BRSBIPS
PAGE Adopt-A-Student (761) . 8-21 Future Stock's Stay in School Program (726) 8-22 Stay in School Task Force (772) . 8-23 Stay in School Program (705) ... 8-24
8-20

1. ltJU)G1l.W DICII: Adopt-A-Student

CODE: 761

2. It:Z:oq:z:Ul contact: Dr. Claude George

3. Date It:z:og:z:&lao Began: 5. Age Range Served: 17-19

4. NUmbe:z: of Students Served:-1986-87: 180 -1987-88: 200

6. G~ada(s) Served: 11-12

7. Student/Staff Ratio: 1:1

8. ltopulation Served: Students performing below grade level and/or potential.

9 It:z:og:z:am Eligibility e:z:ite:z:ia: Ranking in lower 25%; counselor :z:ecommendation.

10. It:Z:oq:z:Ul ZZit C:z:ite:z:ia: Workshop participation, attendance at social and business functions with sponsor, specific education/career counseling.

11. It:z:og:z:Ul Type: Dropout prevention, system level.

12. Estimated (avg.) Days ltarticipants Spend in It:z:og:z:am: 180

13. Sponso:z:ing Agency: Merit Employment Agency 14. Annual Costs: 0

15. Sow:ce(s) of P:z:og:z:am J'unds:

16. nesc:z:iption of It:z:og:z:am Objectives: To encourage students to stay in school and to graduate. To provide academic assistance. To help students acquire skills to identify, seek and-retain specific jobs in a chosen career path.

17. Desc:z:iption of the P:z:ogram and Services Providec1: The program links students from the lower 25% of the high school popUlation with mentor/advocates from the local business community.

18. Specific Successes of the Program/ltroblems Encountered/Solutions Used: A sponsoring business or group of businesses with committed employees to serve as mentor/advocates is required. Cooperation between administration and business is necessary.

19. Specific Strategi.s or ltrog:z:am ltractic.s Which are Effective: Comprehensive orientation of mentor/advocates. Informative, stimulating workshops. Follow-up with school counselors.

20. Prog:z:am Evaluation: External by Georgia State University and Department of Education Foundations. The nUmber of schools adopted increased from 180 to 200.

21. Address of P:z:oject: 210 Pryor Street SW Atlanta, GA 30335 (404) 827-8796

8-21

1. PROGRAM~: Future Stock's Stay in School Program.

CODK: '726

2 Program COntact: Anna Burns

3. l'l.te Program Began: 1/1/87

4. HUmber of Students Served:-1986-87: 700 -1987-88:

6. Grade(s) Served: 9-12

7. Student/Staff Ratio:

8. popul.ation Served.: Students who wo~k part-time.

9. Program Kligibility Criteria:

10. Program Bxit Criteria:

11. Program Type: Dropout prevention and recovery, system level

12. Zstimated (avg-.) Days participants Spend in Program:

13. Sponsoring Agency: Future Stock

14. Annual Costs:

15. Source(s) of Program Funds: Future Stock, Griffin/Spaulding Co. Schools

16. Description of Program Objectives: To. create community awareness of the dropout problem and of the importance of staying in school through the use of a Five-Point Plan: 1) Give priority to high school graduates when hiring; 2) Hire high school students part-time only; 3) Be sure employees maintain school attendance and grades; 4) Give recognition for GED by employees and graduation by employees' children; 5) Participate in encouraging completion.

17. Description of the Program and Services Provided: The school-business partnership program has a full-time director employed by the school system. Future Stock has a stay-in-school program to urge businesses employing students and students who are working to realize that going to school is a full-time job in itself. Participating businesses agree to give priority to hiring high school graduates and other points in the Five-Point Plan.

18. Specific Successes of the Program/Problema Encountered/Solutions Used:

19. Specific Strategies or Program Practices Which are Effective:

20. Program Evaluation: No evaluation yet

21. Addxess of Project: P.O. Drawer N Griffin, GA 30224 (404) 227-9478

8-22

1. ROGRAN~: Stay In School Task Force 2. J:ogJ:Ul Contact: Nancy Smith

CODB: 772

3. Date J:ogJ:Ul aeqan: 1/9/82 5. Age Range Served: 6-21

4, NumbeJ: of Students Served:-1986-87: 10,000 -1987-88: 10,000

6. GJ:ade(s) Served: K-12

7. Student/Staff Ratio:

8. opu1ation Served: Dropouts and potential dropouts.

9. J:OqJ:am B1igibi1ity CJ:iteJ:ia: Any student or dropout.

10. J:oqJ:am Bxit CJ:iteJ:ia: N/A

11. J:oqJ:am!ype: Dropout prevention, recovery, multifaceted, system level

12. Bstblated (avq.) Days articipants Spend in PJ:ogJ:am:

13. SponsoJ:inq Agency: Appalachian Regional Commission 14. Annual Costs: $77,000

15. SouJ:ce(s) of ProgJ:am Funds: Local business, schools, Appalachian Regional

16. OescJ:iption of ProqJ:am Objectives: To lower the local dropout rate.

17. OescJ:iption of the PJ:ogram and Services PJ:ovided: The program is supported by the community, local industry, and a grant from the Appalachian Regional Commission. It works with local businesses to discourage the hiring of dropouts under age 18 and to encourage their employees to obtain GEO's.

18. Specific Successes of the ProgJ:am/Problema Encountered/Solutions Used: Business community must support program. A major public awareness campaign must be mounted. A full-time staff member must be committed to project. There must be flexibility in operation. Funding and facilities are of concern.

19. Specific Strategies OJ: PJ:ogram Practices Which are Bffective: The involvement of the business community is without question the real key to program effectiveness.

20, Program Evaluation: External by Appalachian RegionaL "Commission indicated dropout rate was reduced by 20 percent.

21. Address of PJ:oject: 100 S. Hamilton St. Dalton, GA 30720 (404) 278-8757

8-23

1. PROGRAK~: Stay-In-School 2. Procrram Contact: Kate Pannell

COOK: 705

3. Oat. Program Began: 1/2/85 5 . Agoe Ranqe Served: 5

4. NUmber of Students Served:-1986-87: 5000 -1987-88: 5000

6. Grad8(s) Served: K-12

7. Student/Staff Ratio: 1:1

8. Population Served:

9. Program Bligibility Criteria:

10. Proqram Bzit Criteria:

11. Program Type:

12. Bstimated (avq.) Days Participants SPend in Program:

13. Sponsorinq Agency: Chamber of Commerce, Board 14. Annual Costs: $40,000

15. Souzce(s) of Program Funds: Appalachian Regional Commission

16. Description of Program Objectives: To reduce dropout rate to zero.

17. Description of the Program and Services Provided: The program has three aspects: Industry pledges not to hire dropouts. The community supports the program through PRo Educational programs zero in on potential dropouts and work with all grades to improve the image of education. The program was established through the efforts of the Chamber of Commerce.

18. Specific Successes of the Program/Problems Bncountez:ed/Solutions Used: To get industry involved you must show them how the dropout problem costs them. Community support through PR and a local task force will help. A coordinator will be required to get the program into the schools.

19. Specific Strategies or Program Practices Which are Bffective: Determine potential dropouts by survey. Find a task force director (preferably from business) to win the support of other businessmen. a coordinator who is creative with prevention programs.

Find

20. Program Evaluation: Appalachian Regional Commission evaluation indicates 30 percent decrease in dropout rate.

21. Address of Project: 715 Chestnut Street Chatsworth, GA 30705 (404) 695-4531

8-24

DROPQQT PREVENTION: EARLY CHILDHOOD AND ELEMENTARY PROGRAMS
PAGE

Curriculum and Remedial Programs (785) . 8-26

Early Childhood Preventive Curriculum (676) . 8-27

Elementary Resource Counseling Program (721) .. 8-28

P.A.S.S. (Partnership And Student Success) 697 ... 8-29

P r e - F i r s t (625) 8-30 It

Remedial Summer School (Elementary) (676) .... 8-31

SKIP (785)

8-32

Special Instructional Assistance (721) ... 8-33

Take-Horne Computer (721) ...,_ ..... 8-34

8-25

1. PROGRAN NAMB: Curriculum and Remedial Programs

CODE: 785

2. Program Contact: Jane Hall

3. Date Program Began: 29/10/86 4. Number of Students Served:-1986-87: 1uu -1987-88: 120
5. Age Range Served: 8-10

6. Grade (s) Se%V8Cl: 3

7. Student/Staff Ratio: 22:1

8. population Served: Students from low SES

9. Program Bligibility Criteria: 3rd grade

10. Program Bzit Criteria: N/A

11. Program Type: Dropout prevention, school level

12. B,timated (avq.) Days Participants SPend in Program: 8

13. Sponsoring Agency: Rome City Schools

14. Annual Costs: $600

15. Source(s) of Program I'unds: Rome Rotary Club

16. Description of Program Objectives: To motivate third graders to read for enjoyment. To provide free paperback books to start a home library. To improve reading achievement as a result of increased independent reading. To involve community resources in providing reading enrichment activities and financial support.

17. Description of the Program and Services Provided: 'Reading Recreation in Rome' is designed to make reading important and fun to 3rd-graders. For one hour each month, community resource people present enjoyable reading activities, such as choral reading, readers, theater, oral reading of plays and fables, creative dramatics, puppetry, and story-telling, to students from three low SES schools. Three times a year students may choose a free paper- back book to begin a home library, with funding by Rome Rotary Club. This support allows participation in the national Reading is Fundamental program.

18. Specific Successes of the Program/Problems Encountered/Solutions Used: Community resource people must be willing to commit time and expertise. Business, industry, or service organizations must make a financial commitment.

19. Specific Strategies or Program Practices Which are Effective: The national Reading is Fundamental campaign 'In Celebration of Reading' has proved effective in encouraging extended reading beyond the classroom.

20. Program Evaluation: Survey indicated that students have increased the amount of time they spend in independent reading.

21. Address of Project: 508 East Second St. Rome, GA 30161

8-26

1. l'ROGlUUI NAMB:: Early Childhood I?reventive Curriculum

CODB: 676

2 l'rogram COntact: Marcia Talbert

3. Date l'rogram Began: 1/8/82 5. Age Range Served: 6-7

4. Humber of Students Served:-1986-87: 120 -1987-88: 120

6. Grada(s) Served: K-1

7. Student/Staff Ratio: 9:1

8. l'opulation Served: high-risk 6-year-olds.

9. l'roqram Bligibility Criteria: 25% or lower on reading section of CAT

10. l'rogram Bxit Criteria: Students exit after first year. Some go on to 2nd grade, others are retained.

11. l'rogram Type: Dropout prevention, system level

12. Bst.imated (avg.) Days Participants Spend in Program: 180

13. Sponsoring Agency: Houston Co. Board of Ed. 14. Annual Costs: $500.

15. Source(s) of Program Funds: local

16. Description of I?rogram Objectives: Screening and selection of high-risk students. Diagnosis and prescription. Instructional strategies pertaining to student strengths and needs. Classroom organization and zpanagement (coding and organizing materials, establishing learning centers) .

17. Description of the Program and Services Provided: ECI?C is a diagnostic/ prescriptive reading readiness program for highrisk 6-year-olds in a first grade or transition setting. The programs operates daily for 1-1/2 hours during the typical language arts slot. Groups are rotated to three centers: the center for basal reading instruction, the diagnostic/prescriptive center, and the listening center.

18. Specific Successes of the Program/I?roblems Encountered/Solutions Used: A paraprofessional must be employed and initial implementation costs (for listening center materials, manipulatives, etc.) must be funded.

19. Specific Strategies or Program Practices Which are Effective: The ECI?C Assessment. The prescriptive/diagnostic approach based on the assessment. Use of the listening center.

20. Program Evaluation: External (GA State Validation Team) and internal evaluation indicate that seven classes of at-risk first grade students provided the data for evaluation during 1987-88. There was a significant change in CAT standard scores from 388 in 1987 to 405 in 1988.

21. Address of I?roject: 305 Watson Blvd. Warner Robins, Ga 31093 (912) 929-7775

8-27

1. PROGRAN NAME: Elementary Resource Counseling Program

CODE: 721

2. p:oq:am COntact: Dr. Robetta McKenzie

3. Date p:oq:am Began: 1/9/86 5. Age Range Se:ved: 5-13

4. Humbe: of Studenta Se:ved:-1986-87: 200 -1987-88: 250

6. G:ada (a) Se:ved: K-5

7. Student/Staff Ratio: N/A

8 popUation SeZ'ftd: Elemen_tary students in crisis

9. p:oq:am Bliqibility C:ite:ia: Referral by principal.

10. p:oq:am Jlzit C:ite:ia: Improvement as determined by teacher/counselor observation, or placement in more suitable program.

11. p:oq:am~: Dropout prevention, multifaceted, school climate mgmt.

12. Batimatecl (avq.) Daya Participants Spend in P:oq:am: 1-180

13. Sponao:inq Agency: Richmond Co. Board of Ed. 14. Annual Coats:

15. Sou:ce(a) of p:oq:am 1'uDds: Richmond County Board of Education

16. Deac:iption of P:oq:am Objectivea: To provide crisis and preventive counseling services for elementary students in schools where no counselor is available. To provide resource help for staff development and for securing materials to facilitate optimal student growth and development. To provide'a liaison between the school system and community agencies.

17. Deac:iption of the P:oq:am and Se:vicea P:ovided: One resource counselor serves elementary schools upon request from school administration, working with students in individual and small group settings based on circumstances. Students learn to develop positive self-concepts, goal-setting skills, decision-making skills, study skills, behavioral goals, and good interpersonal relationships.

18. Specific Succeaaea of the P:oq:am/P:oblems Bncounte:ed/Solutiona Used: Additional counselors are needed to help the large student population at the elementary school level. Adequate meeting facilities will insure a proper climate for sessions.

19. Specific St:ategies 0: Prog:am Practices Which are Effective: Utilization of a standard referral form. Utilization of resource counselor on student study support teams when needed. Classroom guidance activities for individual classes. Teacher/counselor team approach to addressing problems of students.

200 Program Evaluation: External by principals and director of guidance indicates use of standard referral form facilitates access to guidance and counseling services for at-risk students.

21. Address of Project: 2083 Heckle Street Augusta, GA 30910 (404) 737-7310

8-28

1. PROGRAH~: PASS Partnership and Student Success

CODE: 697

2. Program Contact: Dr. James P. Hutcheson

3. Dat. Program Began: 1/9/86 5. Aq. Range Served:

4. NUMiber of Students Served:-1986-87: 3 -1987-88:

6. Grade(.) Served:

7. Student/Staff Ratio:

8. Population Served: high-risk 3rd grade math students.

9. Proqram Eligibility Criteria: poor math test scores; underachievement in math; not retained; not served by special education.

10. Program Exit Criteria:

11. Proqram~: dropout prevention, system level.

12. E.timated (avg.) Day. Participant. SPend in Proqram:

13. Sponsoring Aqency: McDuffie County Schools 14. A%Ulual Co.ts: $111,380

15. Source(s) of Program Funds: State and local

16. Dcription of Program Objective.: To improve achievement in mathematics by high-risk 3rd~grade students through the involvement of parents in the instructional process and through an innovative approach to utilizing materials already identified as effective.

17. Description of the Program and Service. Provided: Students are taught the regular math curriculum. Their parents participate in a school-home partnership to aid in student's learning and practice of 3rd-grade math skills. Practice materials for home use, including worksheets, cut-and- paste activities, games, computer programs, musical drills, and flashcards, are provided. Packets are rotated frequently to match classroom study.

18. Specific Succ of the Program/Problema Encountered/Solutions Used: The materials used in the packets are generally already in the classrooms. They may be old or new, teacher-made or purchased. There are many options for implementation of the program, including part-time aides, retired teachers, college students, and media specialists.

19. Specific Strategies or Program Practices Which are Effective: Project funds were used to hire a home-school-student liaison person. Computers and computer problems can be a component of home practice if funding is available.

20. Program Evaluation: Over 75 percent of students in program increased test scores in mathematics.

21. Address of Project: 716 N. Lee Street Thomson, GA 30824 (404) 595-1918

8-29

1. P ~ HaMB: Pre-First

COD.: 625

2. P~~" Contact: Ruth Summerlin

3. Date p~~am Beqan:
5. A98 Range Served: 5-6

4. Hambe~ of Student. Served:-1986-87: 350 -1987-88:

6. G~ade(.) Served: K-1

7. Student/Staff Ratio: 22:1

8 popuJ.ation S.rved:

9 P~" JUigibility C~ite~ia: Less than 70% mastery of curriculum alignment objectives for language
arts and math in kindergarten; teacher referral.

10. P~ogram Bzit C~ite~ia: 70% mastery of language arts and math at kindergarten level; pass stateapproved test for entrance into first grade

11. P~~am !ype: Dropout prevention, school a~d system levels

12. ..timate4 Cavg.) Day. Participant. Spend in P~og~am:

13. Sponao~ing Agency: City of Savannah, Chatham Co. 14. Annual Co.t.: $567,000

15. SouzaeC.) of P~og~am Funds: State and local

16. De.c~iption of P~og~am Objectives: Early childhood is the most critical period in human growth and development. The program seeks to identify and provide those students who are developmentally delayed with special instructional assistance.

17. Dc~iption of the P~og~am and Service. P~ovided: This full-day program is offered in the elementary schools. At least 2 parent conferences are held annually. Parents are invited to volunteer in the school and to attend parent programs. Follow-up and referral services are provided. Staff includes 18 certified teachers and 18 classroom aides.

18. SPeCific Succs of the P~g~am/P~oblema Bncountered/Solution. Used: Effectiveness is measured through teacher input, teacher tests, observation, and California Achievement Test scores.

19. Specific St~ategies o~ Program Practice. Which are Effective:

20. Program Evaluation: Internal evaluation indicates decrease in remedial education referrals.

21. Addres. of Project: 208 Bull St. Room 308 Savannah, GA 31401 (912) 651-7000

8-30

1. PROGRAK RaMS: Remedial Summer School (elementary)

coos: 676

2 . Proqram Contact: Billy G. Lee

3. Date Proqram Beqan: 11/6/87 5. Age' Range Served: 6-14

4. Humber of S~~ts Served:-1986-87: 330 -1987-88: 375

6. Grade(s) Served: 1-6

7. Student/Staff Ratio: 12:1

8. population Served: Students performing below grade level

9. Proqram Sligibility Criteria: Below grade level performance

10. Proqram Bz1t Criteria: Completion of reading and/or math levels. No promotion/retention.

11. Program~: Dropout prevention, system level

12. Sst!mated (avq.) Days Participants Spend in Program: 22

13. Sponsoring Agency: Houston Co. Board of Ed. 14. Annual Costs: $100,000

15. Source(s) of Program Funds: Chapter I, local, student tuition

16. Description of Proqram Objectives: To remediate students functioning below grade levels in math and reading. To help students achieve success in weak areas as diagnosed from ITBS and CRT results. To reinforce specific skills where weaknesses have been identified from ITBS and CRT profile sheets. To develop test-taking and thinking skills.

17. Description of the Program and Services Provided: A 4-week summer school was provided for students needing remediation in math and reading. Teachers worked with students on specific weaknesses diagnosed by ITBS and CRT. Teachers reviewed ITBS and CRT profile sheets and planned individual programs for each student. Students attended 4 hours per day. A staff of 35 teachers, 8 aides, 2 instruction coordinators, and an administrator were housed in 3 centers. The program was not intended for promotion or retention, but retained students could attend for remediation.

18. Specific Successes of the Program/Problema Zncountered/Solutions Used: Students must be carefully identified, and staff willing to work with individuals rather than groups must be selected. Specific skills materials and equipment must be purchased. The program should be different than what was offered during the regular school year.

19. Specific Strategies or Program Practices Which are Zffective: Inservice planning time for teachers. Effective planning before school starts. Teachers should be familiar with student weaknesses from profile sheets. New materials must be studied and used effectively.

20. Program Zvaluation: No evaluation yet.

21. Address of Project: P.o. Drawer N Perry, GA 31069 (912) 929-7830

8-31

1. ~JU)GRAIC DMZ: SKIP

ccmB: 785

2 ~z:oqz:am Contact: Jane S. Hall

3. nata ~z:oqz:am Began: 25/9/87 5 Aqe Range Saz:ved: 5-6

4. Humbez: of Studenta Saz:ved:-1986-87: 16 -1987-88:

6 Gz:ada (a) Served: K

7. Student/Staff Ratio: 8:1

8. ~opulatiOD Sez:ved: Students with developmental deficiencies

9. ~z:oqzo... Bliqibility <:z:itaz:ia: Kindergaz:ten retention; score below the cut-off on kindergarten screening te'st, DIAL.

10. ~z:oqz:am Jlzit <:Z:itaz:ia: Regular classroom performance and state testing program.

11. ~z:oqz:am~: Dropout prevention, school level

12. Batimated (avq.) nays Paz:ticipanta Spencl in ~z:oqz:am: 160

13. Sponaoz:ing Agency: Rome City Schools 14. Annual Coata: $17,000

15. Souzca(a) of Progz:am Funds: GA DOE Special Instructional Assistance Grant.

16. neacz:iption of progz:am Objectivea: To enable students to attain performance level consistent with age and cognitive aeility. To motivate students through building their selfesteem to maintain satisfactory attendance and avoid behavior problems. To involve parents in the instructional program so they may become educational and vocational role models for their children.

17. nescz:iption of the ~z:ogz:am and Saz:vica. ~z:ovicleci: Students with developmental deficiencies are provided a specialized instructional program stressing language and cognitive development, organizational skills, fine and gross motor refinement strategies, motivation strategies emphasizing self-enhancement, and parental involvement. Students are grouped by need, ability level, and activity. Groups of 6-10 children meet each day for 45 minutes with the SlAP teacher. Monthly parent meetings cover topics such as child growth and development, discipline methods, home activities to enhance curriculum, health and nutritional needs, and sibling rivalry.

18. Specific Successes of the Progz:am!Problems Encountered/Solutions Used: The major problem was to find a qualified teacher to work on a part-time basis.

19. Specific Stz:ategies or Pz:ogz:am Practices Which az:e Effective: The monthly meeting for parents is a major strength of the program.

20. Pz:ogram Evaluation: Parental involvement has increased by 50 percent.

21. Add%ess of Project: 508 East Second Street Rome, GA 30161

8-32

1. ~ROGRAN HaMB: Special Instructional Aasistance

COOE: 721

2 ~rogram Contact: Faye H. Montgomery

3. Date ~roqram Began: 24/8/87 5. Aqe Range Served: 6-7

4. HUmber of Students Served:-1986-87: 0 -1987-88: 80

6. Grade(s) Served: K-l

7. Student/Staff Ratio: 20:2

8. ~opulation Served: Kindergarten and 1st grade repeaters.

9. ~roqram Eligibility Criteria: Teacher recommendations; 35th percentile or below on CAT (Kindergarten), 68-84 on Otis-Lennon, 70-85 on WISC-R

10. Program Bzit Criteria: K/developmental: CAT and teacher recommendation; 1st: 61 percent+ on CRT, teacher recommendation

11. ~rogram~: dropout prevention, school level

12. Estimated (avq.) Days ~articipants Spend in Proqram: 180

13. Sponsoring Agency: GA DOE, local district

14. Annual Costs: $494.

15. Source(s) of Proqram fUnds: GA DOE, local district (cost is per child)

16. Description of Program Objectives: To improve attention span, visual and auditory perception, concentration, test performance, fine and gross motor coordination, reading, writing and math skills. To improve child's self-concept and attitude toward school, teachers and learning.

17. Description of the Program and Services ~rovided: An IBM Writing-to-Read Lab and the Richmond County Take-Home Computer program are available daily with a certified teacher and aide or paraprofessional. Students attend lab 1 hour a day and can take the computer home twice for four weeks. Manipulatives are provided in the lab and classroom to improve reading and math skills.

18. SPecific Successes of the Proqram/~robl. . . Bncountered/S01utions Used: Intensive training from IBM Writing-to-Read personnel, hands-on experiences for SIAP teachers and aides. Visits to other labs are recommended. Parent information conferences are vital to parent understanding and support of the program.

19. Specific Strategies or Program Practices Which are Bffective: A stress-free environment and constant but not artificial praise are essential. Lots of repetition may be required for skill mastery. Peer coaching and parental involvement wit homework and field trips are essential.

20. Program Eva1uation: No evaluation yet

21. Address of Project: 3116 Lake Forest Drive Augusta, GA 30909 (404) 737-7359

8-33

1. ttaoGRUl NAIIB: Take-Home Computer

COOB: 721

2. ttz:oqz:am Contact: Faye H. Montgomery

3. Date ttz:oqz:am Began: 5/2/87
5. Age aange Sez:ved: 6-11

4. HUmbez: of Students Served:-1986-87: 120 -1987-88: 300

6. Gz:ada <s> Served: K-l, 3

7. Student/Staff Ratio:

8. ttopuJ.ation Sez::vec1: Developmental Kindergarten, REP, Ch. I, Project HELP

9. ttz:ogz:am Bligibi1ity Cz:itez:ia: Attend inner city school, participate in one of: REP, Chapter I, Project HELP, special education

10. pz:oqz:am ZZit Cz:itez:ia:

11. pz:oqz:am Type: Dropout prevention, system level

12. Bstimated <avg. > Days participants Spend in Pz:oqz:am: 30

13. Sponsoz:inq Agency: Richmond County Board

14. Annual Costs: $12,000

15. Souz:ce<s> of ttz:ogz:am runda: Richmond County Board of Education

16. Descz:ipt.ion of Pz:oqz:am Objectives: To improve reading and math skills by reinforcing learning at home. To give students more time on task. To provide first-hand experience in computer literacy and keyboarding for students and parents. To involve parents in the educational process. To encourage parents and students to work together toward a higher level of cooperation and communication.

17. Descz:ipt.ion of the ttz:oqz:am and Sez:vices ttz:ovid8d: Parents and children are trained to use computers to practice mathematics and reading skills. County teachers and administrators serve as trainers and two full-time aids manage facilities. Training is held once weekly from October to May at the Richmond County Educational Technology Center.

18. Specific Successes of the Pz:oqz:am!ttz:oblems Bncountez:ed/Solutions Used: A computer lab site is needed. The location must be centrally located or accessible by bus. Office personnel to handle paperwork are required.

19. Specific Strategies oz: Pz:ogz:am Pz:actices Which az:e Effective: Prescriptive assignments make work more meaningful and effective. Contacting parents individual to invite participation increases attendance. Asking parents to log time spent using the computer at home encourages regular use.

20. pz:ogz:am Evaluation: Internal evaluation by administrator indicates increased parental involvement increased scores in grade 3.

21. Addz:ess of Pz:oject: 3116 Lake Forest Drive Building 311 Augusta, GA 30909 (404) 737-7359

8-34

UBOP0tl'l' PRI\1EN'1'ION: SOBS'l'ANCK DUSK PROGRAMS

PAGE

...... ....... . . . . Alcohol and Drug Awareness
and Prevention Program (721)

.

. . . 8-36

MA.c.AD (633)

8-37

Student Assistance Program (635) .... 8-38

Substance Use Prevention & Education Resource (660) ......... 8-39

8-35

1. P~ lDIIII: Alcohol & Drug Awareness & Prevention Proqram.

COJ)B: 721

2. program Contact: Dr. Robetta McKenzie

3. Date p=qram Began: 23/9/85 5. ~ Range Served: 10-19

4. NUmber of Student. Served:-1986-87: 150 -1987-88: 40

6. G~ade(.) Served: 6-12

7. Student/Staff Ratio: 24:2

8. Population Serv8d: First-time alcohol/drug use offenders.

9. p=qram 1l1iqibility Criteria: First-time offenders and their parents as recommended by principal attend program in lieu of suspension.

10. Program Bzit Criteria: N/A.

11. Program~: Dropout prevention, system and school levels.

12. B.timated <avq.) Day. Participant. Spend in Program: 2

13. SponsoriDg Agency: Richmond County Board

14. Annual Co.t.: $100

15. Souzae(.) of Program rands: Richmond County Board of Education.

16. De.cription of Program Obj.ctive.: ~o provide a means to help reduce or prevent alcohol/drug use/abuse. ~o reduce lost school time foz students facing suspension. ~o present data on legal and medical consequences of alcohol/drug use. ~o improve communication between students and parents. ~o develop alternatives to problem situations. ~o provide information on available agencies and services.

17. De.cription of the Program and S.rvic.. Provided: One session is conducted by nurses and security personnel, the second by counselors, principals, and community resource personnel. Slide presentations, overhead transparencies, questionnaires and lectures are prepared by the Guidance/ ~esting Department. Content is periodically uPdated.

18. Specific Succ of the Program/Problem. Bncount.red/Solutions U.ed: School system must be committed to provide service. Presenters must be trained and have materials in hand prior to session. Parents and students must be involved. Scheduling sessions after school assures commitment by presenters and participants.

19. Specific Strategies or Program Practice. Which are Bffective: Involve several different departments/community agencies as presenters. Require participation of both parent and student. Provide separate sessions for parents and students.

20. Program Bvaluation: External and internal by questionnaire indicates decrease in recidivism rate.

21. Address of Project: 2083 Heckle Street Augusta, GA 30910 (404) 737-7310

8-36

1. PROGRAM NAMB: MACAD

CODI:: 633

2. P:og:am Contact: Tom Mathis

3. Date P:og:am Began: 1/9/87 5. Age Range SeJ:V8d: 11-21

4. NUmbe: of Students SeJ:V8d:-1986-87: 65 -1987-88:

6. G:ade(s) Served: 6-12

7. Student/Staff Ratio: 12:1

8. Population SeJ:V8d: Students with drug and alcohol offenses.

9. P:og:am Bligibility C:ite:ia: Misconduct, drug and alcohol offenses

10. P:og:am lzit C:ite:ia: Successful completion of class.

11. P:og:am ~: Dropout prevention-system & school, school climate mgmt (sch)

12. Bstiaatecl (avq.) Days Participants Spencl in P:og:am: 4

13. Sponso:inq Agency: United Way

14. Annual Costs: $50

15. Sou:ce(s) of P:og:am Funds: Federal grant

16. Desc:iption of P:og:am Objectives: To provide a primary prevention and education program and an intervention alternative for students facing suspension for drug use.

17. Desc:iption of the P:og:am and Se:vices P:ovided: Four two-hour sessions for parents and student include factual information on substance abuse, legal and medical consequences, effective listening and communication skills, student drug assessment, and session evaluation.

18. Specific Successes of the P:og:am!P:oblems BncounteJ:ecl/Solutions Osed: Space must be available. Personnel need to be well-trained. Resources (tapes, films, etc.) must be current and interesting. Parents must be involved.

19. Specific St:ategies 0: P:oq:am P:actices Which a:e Effective: Students and parents are required to attend all sessions. Fewer school days are lost to student.

20. Prog:am Evaluation: No evaluation yet

21. AddJ:ess of P:oject: P.O. Box 1088 Marietta, GA 30061 (404) 426-3433

8-37

1. PBOGRAII NAMB: Student Msistance Program 2. Pr~am Contact: Nawatha White

CODB: 635

3. Date Program Began: 1/8/86 5. Age Range Served: 11-19

4. HUmber of Students Served:-1986-87: 3500 -1987-88: 3477

6. Grade(s) Served: 6-12

7. Student/Staff Ratio: 3477:1

8. PopuJ.ation Se:ved: All students.

9. Program Bligibility Criteria: Referral by self, teacher, administrator, parenti member of regular class where drug education is taught.

10. Pro~ram Bzit Criteria:

11. Program~: School climate management (system and school levels)

12. Bstimated (avq.) Days Participants SPend in Program: Varies

13. Sponsoring Agency: Turning point

14. Annual Costs: $40,000

15. Source(s) of Program runda: Turning point

16. Description of Program Objectives: To provide group and individual counselinqp To provide a peer education program involving high school students and 6th-7th graders. To promote drug-free activities, anti-drinking and driving messages, and a drugfree school. To promote drug abuse prevention and help for students who have been negatively affected by drugs.

17. Description of the Program and Services Provided: The program operates on a regular school schedule, with some activities after school and on week- ends. The coordinator works closely with counselors and administrators. The program provides student support groups for those who want to learn more about drugs and their effects, for experimental users and children of alcoholics, and for follow-up to treatment. There is also an individualized counseling program. Presentations are made to classroom-size groups. A peer educator program for high school and middle school students is provided. The Educating Against Drugs club promotes drug-free activities.

18. Specific Successes of the Program/Problems Encountered/Solutions Used: Little equipment is required. A private office with little traffic is required. The coordinator must work well with students and parents. Support and cooperation of faculty must be obtained.

19. Specific Strategies or Program Practices Which are Effective: The peer teacher aspect has been one of the strongest. Another helpful strategy is working with established programs and personnel within the school system.

20. Proqram Evaluation: No evaluation yeti there has been an increase in drug prevention activity and dissemination of information.

21. Address of Project: 1800 Park Avenue Moultrie, GA 31768 (912) 890-6181

8-38

1. ROGRAK HaMS: Substance Use Prevention & Education Resource

CODE: 660

. --. .... 2 ~~.. Contact: Elaine Crawford

3. Date ~oq~. . Began: 3/11/86 5. Age Range Served: 12-20

4. Numbe~ of Students Served:-1986-87: 122 -1987-88: 76

6. G~ade(s) Served: 6-12

7. Student/Staff Ratio: 12:1

8. opulation Served: Teenagers and parents.

9 ~oq~" Eligibility C~ite~ia: First offense only of possession or use of drugs or alcohol.

10. ~o~. . Bxit C~ite~ia: Contractual agreement with parent and student offender to attend four
sessions regarding use/possession of drugs/alcohol.

11. ~~. . fYpe: Dropout prevention, system level

12. Est.imated (avq.) Days articipants Spend in roqram: 4

13. sponsoring Agency: Metro Atlanta Council

14. Annual Costs: $4,500

15. Source(s) of roqram Funds: United Way, Gulf Western Foundation

16. Desc~iption of Program Objectives: To provide a positive alternative for students facing extended suspension for their first alcohol or drug abuse offense. To provide parents and guardians with information about counseling and treatment services. To help prevent drug and alcohol use and abuse among students. To increase communication skills and positive inter-action between parents and students.

17. Description of the Program aDd Services Provided: The SUPER program provides uniformity in dealing with student alcohol and drug problems. The program may be elected in lieu of 5 of 8 days suspension for possession or use of alcohol or drugs. Information is provided by counselors, law enforcement and mental health personnel. Four sessions of two hours each are held.

18. Specific Successes of the Program/Problems Encountered/Solutions Used: Location must be convenient. Training for counselors has been provided by MACAO. Workbooks and evaluation forms must be printed. Supplies and equipment should be kept on site. Equipment needs include an overhead project, VCR, and TV.

19. Specific Strategies or Program Practices Which are Effective: The first session presents an overview of data. During the 2nd and 3rd sessions, counselors work with students and parents to open communication lines. The 4th session deals with legal aspects and physiological /psychological problems.

20. Program Evaluation: Metropolitan Atlanta Council on Alcohol/Drugs

21. Address of Project: 786 Cleveland Ave. SW Atlanta, GA 30315 (404) 763-6828

8-39

DRQPotlT PREVEtrJ:ION: PAUNT INVOLVBMJDrr AND EDUCATION PROGRAMS PAGE
ADDITIONS (705) 8-41 Migrant Education Program (721) 8-42 Parental Involvement (665) 8-43 CHAMPS-EXPLORE Programs 8-44 P.A.SoS. (Parent Assisting S t u d e n t ' s Success) (705) 8-45 .000.0 Volunteer Program (721) 8-46 .00.00 00 00
8-40

1. PROGRAM NUGI: ADDITIONS

CODB: 705

2. pz:ogz:am Cont:act:: Kate Pannell

3. nat:e Pz:oqz:am Beqan: 1/10/87 5. Age Range S.z:ved: 5-15

4. Nambez: of St:udaDt:. Sez:ved:-1986-87: 3000 -1987-88:

6. Gz:ada<.) S.z:ved: K-8

7. St:udeDt:/St:aff Rat:io: 30:1

8. populat:ion S.z:ved: All students

9. pz:ogz:am Bligibilit:y Cz:it:ez:ia:

10. Pz:ogz:am Bzit: Cz:it:ez:ia:

11. pz:ogz:am~: Dropout prevent, multifaceted, school climatemgmt. (system)

12. B.t:imat:ed <avg.) nay. paz:t:icipant:. Spend in Pz:ogz:am: 25

13. Spon.oz:iDq Aqency: Board of Ed., Chamber

14. Annual Co.t:s: $1000

15. Souzc.<.) of pz:ogz:am ruoda: Appalachian Regional Commission

16. ne.cz:ipt:ion of Program Object:ive.: To provide teachers with volunteer help in classroom to relieve them of menial duties. To provide individual help to students needing remediation, help following absence, or enrichment. To reduce dropouts by providing opportunities for one-on-one attention for successful classroom experience.

17. ncz:ipt:ion of t:h. Program and S.z:vic.. Provided: Each school has school and parent coordinators who work on a part-time basis to organize program. Parents are asked to volunteer to work in the school. Teachers who need help are determined. Teachers and parents are paired according to needs and hours of need. Orientation and welcome are given for parents.

18. Specific Succ of t:he Progz:am/Pz:Oblema BDcount:ez:ed/Solut:ion. Us.d: A big kick-off at PTA open houses can introduce the program. Keep a positive attitude among teachers and parents.

19. Specific St:rat:egies or Program Pract:ic Which are Zffect:ive: Provide incentives, such as the Red Apple Award for 100 hours service or the Golden Apple Award for the most hours service.

20. Program Evaluat:ion: Dropout rate in the county has decreased by over 25 percent.

21. Address of Project:: 715 Chestnut Street Chatsworth, GA 30703 (404) 695-4531

8-41

1. l'lU)GItAII NAIIB: Migrant Education Program

CODIl: 721

2 l'rogJ:am. Contact: Faye H. Montgomery

3 Date l'rogram. BeqaD: ' /8/80 5. Age RaDqe Served: 2-20

4. HUmber of Students Served:-1986-87: 43 -1987-88: 40

6. Grade (s) Served: K-12

7. Student/Staff Ratio: 40:1

8 l'opulation Served: Migrant students

9. l'rog'ram. Bligibility Criteria: Parents must have crossed district or state boundaries to seek/obtain temporary/seasonal work in agriculture/fishing.

10. Program. Ilzit Criteria: If a qualifying move is not made within 6 years of entry, family is dropped from program.

11. l'rogram.Type: Dropout prevention, multifaceted (system).

12. Ilstimated (avg.) Days l'articipants Spend in Program.: 180

13. SponsoriDq AgeDcy:Capital Migrant Agency

14. Annual Costs: $35,000

15. Source(s) of Program. 1UDd8: Education Consolidation & Improvement Act

16. Description of Program. Objectives: To provide specifically designed curricular programs in academic discipline based on migrant children's assessed needs. To provide supportive services that foster physical and mental well-being, when necessary, for successful participation in basic instructional programs, including dental, medical, nutritional, and physiological services.

17. Description of the program. aDci Services l'rovided: General Tutorial Service in academic subjects, planned jointed with teacher. Clothing and Food Service provides clothing and food through the utilization of community resources. Health Services provides medical, visual, and dental services through the utilization of community resource agencies and the East Coast Migrant Health Project.

18. Specific Successes of the l'roqrem!l'roblems llDcountered/Solutions Used: Identification of children is necessary; families may live in migrant camps or other housing near place of employment and may be remote from local school.

19. Specific Strategies or Program Practices Which are Effective: Locating families involves many different strategies. Personnel must be familiar with employers who use migrant labor and must establish good rapport with employer to be able to interview workers and their families.

20. Program Evaluation: External, State Department of Education

21. Address of Project: 3116 Lake Forest Drive Augusta, GA 30909 (404) 737-7359

8-42

1. PROGRAN~: Parental Involvement

COOK: 665

2 P~oq~am COI1t:act:: Dr. Rosemary Adams

3. Dat:e P~oq~am Beqan:

4. Nambe~ of St:udaI1t:. S.rved:-1986-87: 425

-1987-88:

5. Age RaI1ge Served: 5 year olds

6. G~ade<.) Served: K-4

7. St:udaI1t:/St:aff Rat:io:

8. Populat:iol1 Se:ved: Eiementary

9. p~og~am Kliq1bi1it:y C~it:e~ia: Chapter I

10. P~~. . Bz1t: C~it:e~ia:

11. p~og~am Type: School climate management, school level

12. K.t:Jmat:ed <avg.) Day. Participant:. Spend 111 P~o~am: 36

13. SPOl18o~1I1q AqeI1cy:

14. ADDual Co.t:.:

15. Sou~c. <.) of P~og~am 1'uI1ds:

16. Dc~ipt:iol1 of P~oq~am Obj.ct:ive.: Parents volunteer to work on projects, assist with one-to-one tutoring, art projects, and fundraisers.

17. De.c~ipt:iol1 of t:h. P~oq~am aDd S.rvice. P~ovided:

18. Specific Succ of t:h. P~oq~am/p~oblems BI1coUDt:.~/Solut:iol1.Used: Space must be allotted.

19. Specific St:~at:eqie. o~ P~og~am P~act:ice. W1U.ch a~e Bffect:ive: Training sessions on presentation and checking. Use of awards.

20. P~oq~am Bvaluat:iol1: No evaluation yet

21. Addze of P~oject:: 1201 20th St. NE Cairo, GA 31728 (912) 377-8441

8-43

1. l'l'OGR.\H DICK: CHAMPS -- EXPLORE (Two programs)

COOB:

2. l'roq:am Contact: Jackie K. Martin (CHAMPS) & Van Hill (EXPLORE)

3. Date l'roq:am Began: 1984

5. A9a Range Served: 14-16 year olds

6. Grada<s) Served: High School 7. Student/Staff Ratio:

8 l'opulation Served: Migrant, high risk students

9. l'roqram Bligibility Criteria: Chapter I

10. l'roqram ZZit Criteria:

11. Program Type: Multifaceted

12. Bstimated <avq.) Days l'articipants Spend in l'roqram: Two weeks

13. sponsoring Aqency: Piedmont Migrant Ed. Assoc. Capital Migrant Ed. Assoc.

14. Annual Costs:

15. Source<s) of Program runds: Chapter I

16. D.scription of l'rogram Objective.: Increase student's self-esteem and develop coping abilities as well as enhancing academic skills through better study habits.

17. De.cription of the Program and Servic Provided: Students spend two weeks in an on-campus residential program for high risk students. Sessions are conducted at North Georgia College and at Savannah State College. Activities include career exploration, study skills, computer skills, self-awareness, cultural awareness, goal setting, and decision making.

18. Specific Succ of the Program/Problema Bncountered/Solution. Used: In their fourth year, the programs have been recently recoqnized by the U.S. Secretary of Education as among the best programs of their type in the nation.

19. Specific Strategies or l'rogram Practic.s Which are Bffective: The use of "shadowing" which matches a student with a local business person. The student follows the business person for several hours observing the "real world" of work and the success of others.

20. Program Evaluation: Chapter I evaluation

21. Addre.s of Project: Jackie K. Martin Piedmont Migrant Ed. Assoc. 1600 Lyman Street Gainesville, GA 30501

Van Hill Capital Migrant Ed. Assoc P.O. Box 1349 Thomson, GA 30824

8-44

1. PROGRAH~: Parents Assisting Students Success (PASS)

CODB: 705

2. p~oq~am Contact: Elaine Butler

3. Oat. P~g~am Began: 1/10/87 5. Age Ranqe Served:

4. NUmbe~ of Students S.rved:-1986-87: -1987-88:

6 G~ada (s) Served:

7. Student/Staff Ratio:

8. popUation Served: Parents of 3rd graders

9. P~09%" Bligibility C~it.~ia: All parents eligible in fall, parents of children who fail CRT may attend repeat program in spring.

10. p~oq~am Bzit C~ite~ia:

11. p~og~am~: Dropout prevention, system level.

12. Bstimated (avg.) Days Participants Spend in P~og~am: 4

13. Sponso~ing Agency: Board of Education

14. Annual Costs: $5,000

16. c.sc~iption of P~oq~am Objectives:

15. Source(s) of P~oq~am J'unda: Federal 310 money

16. Desc~iption of P~o~am Objectives: To prepare students to pass CRT. To prevent dropout. To enroll parents not having high school diplomas in GED classes.

17. Desc~iption of the P~og~am and Services P~ovided: Provision of child care is important, as is having teachers present. The atmosphere should be relaxed so that parents will talk about their children, their school and their problems with the school.

18. Specific Successes of the P~og~am/p~oblema mncounte~ed/SolutionsUsed: Keep on task, following a time line. Provide lots of hands-on materials.

19. Specific St~ategies o~ P~og~am P~actices Which a~ Bffective:

20. P~o~am Bvaluation: External by State Board of Education and Adult Education indicates dropout rate has decreased by over 25 percent and more students have been contacted about recovery programs that are available.

21. Addzess of P~oject: 715 Chestnut Street Chatsworth, GA 30705 (404) 695-4531

8-45

1. PROGRAN HaMB: Volunteer Program

CODK: 721

2. p:oq:am Contact: Faye H. Montgomery

3 Date p:oq:am Beqan: 5. Age Range Se:ved: 5-18

4. Nambe: of Students Served:-1986-87: 220 -1987-88: 200

6. G:ada<s) Served: K-12

7. Student/Staff Ratio: Varies

8. population Served: Students who need small group or one-to-one help

9. p:oq:am Kligibility C:ite:ia: Teacher assignment

10. p:og:am Bxit C:ite:ia: None

11. p:oq:am!ype: Dropout prevention, multifaceted, system & school level

12. Kstimated <avq.) Days Pa:ticipants Spencl in p:og:am: Varies

13 .Sponso:inq Agency: PTA, Richmond Co. Board 14. Annual Costs: $500

15. Source(s) of p:og:am Funds: PTA (funds for refreshments and luncheon)

16. Desc:iption of p:og:am Objectives: To provide academic and school-related assistance directly or indirectly to students and teachers. To increase community participation in the schooling process. To increase parenting knowledge and skills.

17. Desc:iption of the P:og:am and Services P:ovided: Volunteers are given orientation training, on-site school training, and computer training (if desired). A handbook is prepared and certification is awarded at the end of training. Teachers respond to a survey of needs for volunteers. A system- level coordinator and volunteer coordinators at each school are named. An end-of-year luncheon recognizes all volunteers and outstanding performance.

18. Specific Successes of the P:oq:am!P:oblems Bncounte:ed/Solutions Used: Recruitment must be done at the school. The school must continuously recognize and support volunteers. PTA involvement is critical.

19. Specific St:ategies 0: p:og:am P:actices Which a:e Kffective: Volunteers should select areas in which they feel comfortable and prepared.

20. P:og:am Evaluation: Internal, by schools and PTA

21. Address of P:oject: 3116 Lake Forest Drive Augusta, GA 30909 (404) 737-7232

8-46

DROPOUT PRlVElfTION: PlUIGNANCY AND TBBN PAlUIN'l'
PllOGRAMS
PAGE Project ADEPT--Adolescent Development and Early Parent Training (761) ....... 8-48 TEEN ABLE (772) ................ 8-49 Teen Parenting Program (687) .............. 8-50 Family Living (674) ................ 8-51 Parenting--After School Classes (674) ..... 8-52 Teen Parent Program (629) ......... 8-53
8-47

1. ~RCGRAN HAMB: Project ADEPT

,,-
"-
CODB: 761

2 ~~am. Contact: Dr. James Young

3. Date ~=9'z:- Began: 1/1/80 5 Age Range Sez:ved:.

4. Humbez: o~ Students Sez:ved:-1986-87: 8 -1987-88:

6. Gz:adeCs) Sez:ved: 8th graders 7. Student/Sta~~ aat1o:

8. ~opuJ.at1on Sez:ved:

9. ~z:ogz:am. B11gib1l1ty Cz:1tez:1a:

10. ~z:ogz:am. Bz1t Cz:itez:ia:

11. ~z:ogz:am. ~: Multifaceted, system level

12. Bst1mated. Cavg.) Days Partic1pants Spend 111 ~z:ogz:am.:

13. Sponsoz:1I1g Agency: Atlanta Public Schools 14. Annual Costs: $208

15. Souz:ceCs) of ~z:ogz:am. Funds: GSU, Fulton Co., National Ctr. for Child Abuse

16. Descz:1ption of ~z:ogz:am. Objectives: To reduce the rate of teenage pregnancy among the student population at G W Carver High. To lower the incidence of child abuse and neglect among G W Carver students who have become parents, through the development of positive parental abilities.

17. Descz:1pt1on o~ the ~z:ogz:am. and Sez:vic.s ~J:Ovided: All 8th graders attend sessions on topics related to adolescent development (interpersonal relationships, human sexuality, drugs, parent interaction, peer pressure, decision-making, etc.). Teenage parents attend weekly sessions on parenting skills. Within school and afterschool sessions are held. After school sessions include the mother and, if practical, the grandmother, of the student.

18. Specific Successes of the Progz:am./Pz:oblems Bncountez:ed/Solutions Used: Twice-yearly follow-ups are made with participants throughout high school. The program is fully co-educational.

19. Specific Stz:ategies or Program Practices Which are Effective:

20. Program Evaluation: Participants increased from 8 to 15 during the year-learned parenting skills courses and academic courses were made available.

21. Address of Project: 210 Pryor St. NW Atlanta, GA 30335 (404) 651-2584

8-48

1. PROGRAK~: Teen Able

CODK: 772

2. P:l:ogJ:&m Co.ntact: Carol Braden

3. Date P:l:og:l:&m Began: 10/1/85 5. Age Range. Se:l:V8d: 12-20

4. Humbe:l: of Students 8erged:-1986-87: -1987-88:

6. G:l:ade(s) Se:l:V8d: 5-12

7. Student/Staff Ratio:

8. Population Served: Pregnant/parenting teenagers

9 P:l:ogJ:&m Bllgibility C:l:ite:l:ia: Age 12-20, positive pregnancy test and/or child under age 1, Whitfield County resident

11. P:l:og:l:&m ~: Multifaceted, system level
12. Kstimatad (avq.) Days Participants Spend in P:l:Og:l:&m: 12-18 months
13. Sponso:l:ing Agency: NG Infant Preschool Council 14. Annual Costs: $81,000
15. Souzce(s) of P:l:og:l:&m Funds: United Way
16. Desc:l:iption of P:l:og:l:8Dl Objectives: To reduce development delays, poor parenting skills, infant mortality, child abuse, and economic deprivation of children born to and reared by adolescent parents. To reduce the number of subsequent teenage pregnancies, the number of teens receiving inadequate pre- natal care, the number of teenage dropouts. To provide teenage parents as speakers and advisors to other teenagers.
17. Desc:l:iption of the P:I:Og:l:&m aDd Sez:vices P:l:ovided: Supportive services include case management, support groups, emergency needs, information, volunteer monitoring, counseling, transportation, crisis intervention, referrals, maternity and infant needs, and a Teen Advisory Board. Volunteers provide most services and maintain contact with clients. Volunteers are trained in listening and communication skills, family relationships, local resources, parenting skills, medical issues relating to pregnancy and childcare, and other areas.
18. Specific Successes of the P:l:og:l:8Dl/P:l:oblems Encounte:l:ed/Solutions Used:
19. Specific St:l:ateqies 0:1: P:l:og:l:8Dl P:l:actices Which a:1:8 Effective:
20. P:l:Oq:l:8Dl Evaluation: External (GA Council on Developmental Disability) indicated increased participation of supportive service providers and an increased level of awareness of the problem.
21. Addzess of P:l:oject: P.O. Box 1831 Dalton, GA 30722 (404) 278-2105, ext. 3010
8-49

1. PROGRAN~: Tee~ Parenting Program

CODE: 687

2. .P~og~aa COD~ac~: Phyllis Harris

3. ])a~. p~og~aa Began: 5/1/87 5. Age Range Served: 14-19

4. Humbe~ of S~udaD~. Served:-1986-87: -1987-88:

6. G~ade(.) Served: 8-12

7. S~uden~/S~aff Ra~io:

8. popula~ioD Served: Potential dropouts

9. Prograa Eligibili~y Cri~eria: high-risk and pregnant students, teen parents

10. Prograa B:zi~ Cri~eria: N/A

11. Prograa~: Dropout prevention/recovery, multifaceted, school climate.

12. E.~ima~ed (avq.) Days Pa~icipan~. Spend in Prograa:

13. Sponsoring Agency: Dept. Family/Children Service 14. Annual Cos~.: $8,000

15. Source(s) of Prograa Funds: State grant

16. Descrip~iol1 of Prograa Objec~ives: To raise self-esteem and set goals. To' provide early detection and adequate prenatal care. To reduce risk of medical complications. To provide overall wellness. To educate teen on prenatal care and effects of substance abuse. To educate teen on AIDS and SIDS. To reduce social problems associated with sexually active teens. To reduce repeat pregnancy. To reduce child abuse and infant mortality.

17. Descrip~iol1 of the Prograa aDd Service. Provided: Teen-to-Teen rap sessions discuss myths about teen pregnancy, make referrals, share ideas, and act as support groups. Other topics include self-esteem, responsible sexuality, drug and alcohol abuse, divorce, teen suicide, depression, and peer pressure. Older teen girls act as a support system for younger girls.

18. Specific Successes of the Program/Problems Encountered/Solu~ionsUsed: The program has been most effective as a student-generated project, and student involvement is crucial. A trusted coordinator should be available on a regular basis. Problems included transportation, scheduling during the school day, and child care.

19. Specific S~~ategie. o~ Program Prac~ices Which are Effec~ive: Integrating responsible students with teens having problems; These student sponsors act within the school to dispel myths about sexuality, to coordinate transportation, and to provide support.

20. Program Evaluation: No evaluation yet

21. Address of Project: P.O. Box 1328 Dublin, GA 31021 (912) 275-0743 or (912) 275-0430

8-50

1. PROGRAM NAMB:: Family Living

CODK: 674

2 P~~am Contact: Larry Olson

3. Date l'~am Began: 28/9/87 5. Age Range Se~: 16-19

4. Nambe~ of Students S.rved:-1986~87: 56 -1987-86: 56

6. G~ade(.) Se~: 11-12

7. Student/Staff Ratio: 28:1

8. Population Served: Teenage juniors and seniors

9. l'~oq~am Kligibility C~it.~ia: 11th or 12th grade; lower level students are considered according to problems and space availability.

10. P~oq~am lIzit C~ite~ia: Completion of work for one semester (90 days) earns 1/2 unit credit.

11. P~og~am ~: Dropout prevention and recovery, school level.

12 . sU:mated (avq.) Days Participants Spend in P~oq~am: 180

13. Sponao~inq Aqency: LEA

14. Annual Costs:

15. Sou~ce(s) of P~oq~am runda: LEA and state QBE funds.

16. Desc~iption of Proqram Objectives: ~o provide a study of the family in society, the relationship of dating to marriage, engagement and wedding plans, careers, marriage customs and laws, family planning, child care, parenting, finance, housing, food and nutrition, divorce, death, wills, insurance, crisis management, alcohol and drugs, smoking, child abuse, suicide, employability, management skills.

17. Description of the Proqram and Services Provided: The class meets five hours per week as part of the Home Economics program. Resource persons are' invited to speak to the group.

18. Specific Successes of the Program/Problema Encountered/Solutions Used: Parental approval for course content is required.

19. Specific Strategies or Program Practices Which a~e Effective: The hands-on labs provide an opportunity for meaningful learning.

20. Proqram Evaluation: Internal by vocational supervisor.

21. Address of Project: P.O. Box 10 Franklin, GA 30217 (404) 675-3656

8-51

1. PROGRAN HaMB: parentinq-After-School

CODB: 674

2 Pz:~. . Contact: Larry Olson.

3. Date Pz:oqz:am Beqan: 13/6/87 5. Age Range S.rved: 14-21

4. HUmbez: of Student. S.rved:-1986-87: 8 -1987-88: 12

6. Gz:ada(.) S.rved: 9-12

7. Student/Staff Ratio: 12:1

8. population S.rved: Dropouts, sinqle parents, married teenaqers.

9. Pz:oqz:am Bliqibility Cz:itez:ia: Preqnant or havinq a child, married or not, or interested in receivinq parentinq information for baby-sittinq, etc.

10. pz:oqz:am Bzit Cz:itez:ia: Completion of 60 hours of instruction earns 1/2 unit credit; job traininq skills may be used to find employment.

11. Pz:~am ~: Dropout prevention and recovery, school level.

12. B.timated (avg.) Day. participant. Spend in pz:oqz:am: 10

13. Spon.oz:inq Agency: GA Dept. of Ed.

14. Annual Co.ts: $6,000

15. Souz:ce(.) of Pz:oqz:am Funds: State Department of Education Grant.

16. De.cz:iption of Pz:oqz:am Objective.: To provide a proqram to teach prenatal and human development, nutrition, parentinq, and employability skills.

17. De.cz:iption of the pz:oqz:am and Sez:vice. Pz:ovidad: Class meets 6 hours per day for ten days. FHA members provide baby-sittinq for students with children. Children also contribute to the lab experience.

18. SpecifiC Succ of the P~am/Pz:Oblema BDcount.z:ed/Solution. Used: Parental approval for course content is required.

19. Specific Stz:ateqie. oz: Pz:oqz:am Pz:actic.s Which az:e Bffective: The hands-on work provides application for classroom instruction.

20. pz:oqz:am Evaluation: Internal by vocational supervisor. Number of participants has increased each year.

21. Address of Project: P.O. Box 10 Franklin, GA 30217 (404) 675-3656

8-52 .

1. PROGRAH~: Teen Parent Program

"

'-

CODE: 629

2. pJ:og'J:am Contact: Frank Malinowski

3 nate PJ:og'J:am Began: 1/8/75 5. Age Ranqe Served; 13-29

4. NumbeJ: of Students Served:-1986-87: 34 -1987-88: 29

6. GJ:ade (s) SeJ:Ved: 7-12

7. Student/Staff Ratio: 9:1

8. populat~on SeJ:Ved: School age pregnant girls.

9. pJ:og'J:am Eligibility CJ:iteJ:ia: Enrolled in Clarke County schools, confirmed pregnancy; HS girls at 5th month, middle school girls immediately.

10. PJ:ogJ:am Bz1t CJ:iteJ:ia: Delivery of child and 6-12 week recuperative period.

11. pJ:ogJ:am Type: Dropout prevention, system level.

12. Zst1mated (avq.) nays Participants SPend in PJ:ogJ:am: 112

13. SponsoJ:ing Agency: Clarke County Schools

14. Annual Costs: $67,000

15. SouJ:ce(s) of PJ:ogJ:am Funds: Chapter II

16. J:)escJ:iption of PJ:ogJ:am Objectives: To continue the academic program of the pregnant teen. To provide information on prenatal health, nutrition, and childbirth. To provide child care and development activities for good parenting skills. To provide maximum problem-solving assistance through work with prenatal clinics, family counseling agencies, mental health agencies, and other community social and youth service agencies.

17. nescJ:iption of the PJ:OgJ:am and Services PJ:ovided: High school and middle schools students attend a central site. Staff includes one full-time coordinator/teacher, one part-time math/science teacher, one part- time homebound teacher, and one full-time aide. Students earn full academic credit at their home schools for classes. All district attendance requirements must be fulfilled.

18. Specific Successes of the PJ:ogram/Problems Encountered/Solutions Used: Transportation is a problem; the site is on the city bus line which serves other health agencies. Facilities should include a refrigerator for milk, juice, and snacks. Carpet is necessary for prenatal exercises. Staff should have contact with essential outside agencies.

19. Specific Strategies or Program Practices Which are Zffective: Close cooperation with medical staff is beneficial in dealing with health problems and attendance problems. Working with specific counselors in each home school facilitates the monitoring of student progress.

20. Program Evaluation: Internal evaluation

21. Address of Project: P.O. Box 1708 Athens, GA 30603

8-53

PROPOO r PREV1iNTION: JOB-TRAINING AND VOCATIONAL
PROGRAMS

PAGE

Coordinated vocational Academic
Education (641)

8-55

Coordinated Vocational Academic
Education (633)

8-56

Glynn County OP-ED Program (663) ............ 8-57

Job's For Georgia's Graduates (638)

8-58

Job's For Georgia's Graduates (642)

8-59

JTPA (629)

0 0

8-60

JTPA (674)

8-61

JTPA Summer Program (785) ..................... 8-62

Related vocational Instruction (742)

8-63

Related Vocational Instruction (648)

8-64

Trade and Industrial Education (674)

8-65

Vocational Summer School (716)

8-66

Vocational/Academic Preparation (VAC) (746)

8-67

8-54

.

1. ~aoGRAK NaMB: Coordinated vocational Academic Education 2. 'J:OC1:l:Ul Contact: Donna M. Street

CODlI: 641

3. Dat. ':l:Og:l:Ul Began: 20/6/80 5. Age Range Served: 14-20

4. Numbe:l: of StudeDt.Served:-1986-87: 88 -1987-88: 92

6. G:l:ada(.) Served: 9-12

7. StudaDt/Staff Ratio: 18:1

8. ,opulation Served: Economically and academically disadvantaged students.

9. ':l:Oq:l:Ul lIligibility C:l:ite:l:ia: Enrollment in vocational program and either economically or academically disadvantaged.

10. ':l:og:l:Ul ZXit C:l:ite:l:ia: Exit high school as vocational completer with viable worker skills OR rise in student's reading and math levels.

11. ':l:oq:l:Ul Type: Dropout prevention and recovery, school level. 180

12. 1I.timated (avg.) Day. 'articipant. SPend in ':l:og:l:am:

13. Spon.o:l:iDg Agency: Dade County Board of Ed. 14. Annual Co.t.: $44,473.

15. SO\l:l:ce(.) of ':l:og:l:am 1'uDds: Carl Perkins Act

16. De.c:l:iption of ':l:og:l:am Objective.: To identify e~igible disadvantaged vocational students. To help students make a career choice and develop a vocational path. To help each student improve at least one letter grade equivalent in vocational class and in communication and computation skills. To have 70% of students complete sequential vocational program. To show higher enrollment in AVTS than non-CVAE students.

17. Dc:l:iption of the P:l:Og:l:Ul aDd S.rvic ':l:ovided: CVAE is a program of the Georgia Vocational Special Needs Department. The program is staffed by one full-time teacher with a master's degree and one half-time certified teacher's aide. Interlocking math and English teachers teach the same student population and keep a close watch on students and communicate frequently about students' needs with each other and the CVAE coordinator.

18. Specific Succ of the ':l:og:l:am/':l:oblema lIDcounte:l:ed/Solution. U.ed: Program must be requested by school system and grant issued by Georgia Dept. of Education. Teacher time, space, number of students, and clerical assistance must be considered. Small class size is essential to prOductivity and has been a problem. It is impossible to meet student needs and to meet the numbers requirements of QBE.

19. Specific St:l:ategie. O:l: P:l:og:l:am P:l:actice. Which a:l:e Effective: Students work ~ell on practical tasks and learn best through hands-on activities. They respond well to field trips and quest speakers. The teacher must be trusted as a counselor, job coordinator, and friend as well as a teacher for the program to be successful.

20. P:l:og:l:am Evaluation: External by Southern Association.

21. Addre of Project: P.O. Box 188 Trenton, GA (404) 657-7517

8-55

1. PROGRAM NAMB: Coordinated vocational Academic Education

CODZ: 633

2 pJ:Og'J:am Contact: Barbara Bounds Selby

4. HUmbeJ: o! Students Served:-1986-87: 350 -1987-88: 441

6. GJ:ada(s) Served: 9-12

7. Student/Staff Ratio: 19:1

8. population Served: Disadvantaged students.

9. pJ:ogJ:am Zligibility CJ:iteJ:!a: One or more years behind age/grade in academic studies . Economically disadvantaged.

10. pJ:oqJ:am Bxit CJ:iteJ:ia: N/A

11. pJ:ogJ:am~: Dropout prevention, system and school level.

12. ZstJmated (avg.) Days PaJ:ticipants Spend in PJ:Og'J:am: 180

13. SponsoJ:!nq Agency: School system

14. Annual Costs:

15. SouJ:Ce(s) of pJ:Og'J:am Funds: Local, OBE, and State/Federal grant.

16. DescJ:iption of PJ:Og'J:am Objectives:To provide aca~c remediation to enable disadvantaged students to meet graduation requirements. To provide an atmosphere to enhance positive self-concept of students so as to profit from educational experiences. To coordinate academic studies with vocational programs in which students are enrolled. To provide job placement assistance for economically
disadvantaged students.

17. DescJ:iption o! the PJ:Og'J:am and Services PJ:ovided: A CVAE coordinator collaborates with other teachers to provide academic and vocational instruction designed to remediate identified deficiencies and to develop skills needed for successful completion of high school graduation requirements. Students are assigned to one CVAE class, one or more vocational classes which may include a cooperative job placement, and the required academic classes.

18. Specific Successes of the PJ:ogJ:am/PJ:oblema BncounteJ:ed/Solutions Used: Teachers must want students to succeed and must be willing to work with special needs students. Enrollment must be limited. Specialized remedial and high interest materials must be provided for instruction.

19. Specific Strategies or Program Practices Which are Effective: The most important factor is the teacher/student interaction. Students must have confidence that at least one person in the school wants them to do well regardless of past failures.

20. Program Evaluation: External by State Evaluation of Vocational Education.

21. Address of Project: 514 Glover Street Marietta, GA 30060 (404) 426-3408

8-56

1. PROGRAM NAMB: Glynn County OP-ED Program

COOl:: 663

2. P~oq~am Contact: L. E. McDowell

3. Date P~oq:am Beqan: 24/8/87 5. Age Ranqe Se:ved: 16-21

4. Numbe~ of Students Served:-1986-87: 72 -1987-88:

6. G~ade(s) Served: 9-12

7. Student/Staff Ratio: 12:1

8. Population Served: Students two or more years behind OR failed 9th grade

9. P:oq~. . Bliqibility C:ite:ia: Retained in ninth grade OR retained two or more years previous to high school OR previously dropped out of school

10. p~oq:am &zit C:ite~ia: Successful score on GED or return to the regular high school program

11. P~am Type: Dropout prevention and recovery, system level

12. Bstimated (avq.) Days Participants Spend in p~oq~am: 360

13. sponso~~q Agency: Glynn County Schools 14. Annual Costs: $75,000.

15. Sou:ce(s) of P~oq~am Funds: GA Dept. of Ed., local taxes, JTPA

16. Desc:iption of P~oq~am Objectives: To provide an educational option for students who have not been successful in traditional education programs. To prepare students for the GED. To provide individualized instruction in academic areas using computers.

17. Desc:iption of the P~oq:am and Services P~ovided:
day. Three full-time instructors teacher students during the regular school Students spend 3 hours each in academic and'vocational classes.

18. Specific Successes of the P~oq~am/P~oblema J:ncounte~/SolutionsUsed: Program is expensive and all possible funding sources must be explored. The program must be sold to both teachers and parents; students are not hard to sell. To get started, we bought an instructional materials package from Remedial Training Institute, but it still required a full year to get underway.

19. Specific St~ategies o~ P~og~am P~actices Which a~e Effective: Guidance personnel must be thoroughly informed of program requirements. Students should not be sent because teachers want to get rid of them. Academic instructors must receive adequate in-service training.

20. P~oq~am Evaluation: Over 50 potential dropouts remained in school.
21. Address of p~oject: 2400 Reynolds Street Brunwick, GA 31520 (912) 267-4220

8-57

1. PROGRAN~: Jobs for Georgia's Graduates

CODZ: 638

2 . P~oq~. . Contact: L. Kay Cawthon

3. Date P~oq~. . Beqan: 9/8/87 5. Age Range Served: 16-19

4. Hambe~ of Studenta Served:-1986-87: 50 -1987-88:

6. G~ade <a) Served: 12

7. Student/Staff Ratio: 50:1

8. population Served: Senior students with few or no career plans.

9. P~~" Bl.iqibil.ity ~ite~ia: Grade level, post-graduation plans, desire to participate.

10. P~oq~. . Bxit C~ite~ia: Successful graduation and successful employment for nine months after graduation.

11. P~oq~. . !YP8: Dropout prevention, school level.

12. Bstimated <ave;.) Days Pa~icipants Spend in P~oq~. .: 8

13. Sponso~inq Agency: GA Department of Labor

14. Annual. Costa: $25,000

15. Sou~ce<s) of P~oq~. . I'unds: GA Department of Labor

16. Desc~iption of P~oq~. . Objectives: To aid senior students in successfully completing their last year of secondary education and transitioning into the work force, military, or post-secondary education.

17. Desc~iption of the P~oq~. . and Services P~ovided: High school job specialists counsel/teach senior students for the primary purpose of assisting students in making a smooth, successful transition from school to workplace. Participants meet with the job specialist no less than one hour per week to learn employability skills and selfimprovement techniques.

18. Specific Successes of the P~oq~am/P~Obl.ems Bncounte~ed/Sol.utionsUsed: Manuals and support equipment such as computers, software, and reference materials on career objective, employability skills, and self-confidence are essential. A ratio of no more than 50:1 is ideal.

19. Specific St~ateqies o~ P~oq~am P~actices Which a~e Effective: Steady and repeat contact with program participants is a must.

20. p~oq~am Eval.uation: No evaluation yet.

21. Address of P~oject: 190 LaGrange Street Newnan, GA 30263 (404) 253-9522

8-58

1. I'ROGRAN NANIl: Job's for Georgia's Graduates

CODB: 642

2 1':09:" Contact: Gene Boccumini

3. nate 1':09':" Beqan: 9/8/87 5. Age Range Se:ved: 17-18

4. Nambe: of Student. Se:ved:-1986-87: 17 -1987-88: 17

6. G:ade<.) Se:ved: 12

7. Student/Staff Ratio: 17:1

8. I'opulation S.:ved: Seniors who will be looking for full-time employment.

9. 1'%'09:_ BUgibility C:ite:ia: Volunteer, join Career Assoc., participate ~n Skills Training Program, actively seek employment after graduation.

10. 1':09':" Bzit C:ite:ia: Graduation; must accept follow-up services for 9 months, must actively seek employment after graduation.

11. 1':og:. . ~: Dropout prevention, multifaceted, school level.

12. B.timated <avq.) nay. Participant. Spend in P%'09:": 5

13. Spon.o:inq Agency: Georgia Dept. of Labor

14. Annual Co.t.:

15. Sou:ce<.) of Prog:. . Funds: Georgia Department of Labor.

16. ne.c:iption of P:og:. . Objective.: To teach seniors necessary skills to get and keep a good full-time job after graduation. To assist the student to acquire full-time employment after graduation in order to reduce high youth unemployment. To encourage students to remain in school and to graduate.

17. ne.c:iption of the P:og:. . aDd S.zvic P:ovided: Students are assigned to a job specialist who provides personal coaching in job-seeking skills and door-to-door job identification to help secure full-time jobs for students after graduation. A highly motivational Career Association modeled after Junior Achievement and FFA was established. Nine full months of follow-up after graduation are required.

18. Specific Succ of the 1':og:am!I':oblems bcount.:ed/Solution. Used: Better attendance at meetings with job specialist can be achieved when meetings are held during regular class periods.

19. Specific Strategies or Prog:am Practices Which are Effective:

20. Prog:am Evaluation: No evaluation yet.,

21. Addr.s. of Proj.ct: P.O. Box 129 Highway 19 Dawsonville, GA 30534 (404) 265-6555

8-59

1. PROGRAH NAME: JTPA

CODE: 629

2. p:roq:ram Contact: Frank Malinowski

3. Date P:roq:ram Began: 1/9/86 5. Age Range S.rved: 13-19

4. NUmbe:r of Student. Se:rved:-1986-87: 35 -1987-88: 70

6. G:rada(.) S.rved: 9-12

7. Student/Staff Ratio: 35:1

8. population S.rved: Economically disadvantaged students.

9. p:rog:ram Bliqibility C:rit.:ria: Learning disability or handicap that is a barrier to employment, economically disadvantaged.

10. p:roq:ram Zzit C:rit.:ria: Pass a standard exit exam over the competencies.

11. p:roq:ram~: Dropout prevention and recovery, system level.

12. Bstimated (avq.) Day. Pa:rticipant. SP8I1Ci in P:roq:ram: 180

13. Spon.o:rinq Aqency: Clarke Co. Schools

14. Annual Co.t.: $87,906

15. Sou:rc.(.) of P:roq:ram Funds: Area Planning & Development Commission.

16. oe.c:ription of p:roq:ram Obj.ctive.: Life and work management skills. Employee expectations. Personal habits. Work habits. Relationships with co-workers. Career decisionmaking. Job-seeking skills. Job-keeping skills.

17. Dc:ription of the P:rog:ram and S.:rvic P:rovided: The program is designed to help students make a smooth transition from school to the work- place and to develop opportunities for success in the community. Full-time staff of 2 teachers, one secretarial aide and a program director/project writer operate the program.

18. SPecific Succ of the P:roq:ram!P:roblems Bncount.:red/Solution. Used: A local PIC council that has an approved competency-based JTPA and other programs for a school-year project must exist. This program was a summer school project. There must be a good working relationship with the local planning development agency.

19. Specific St:rateqi o:r P:roq:ram P:ractic Which a:r. Eff.ctive: Teachers need to be aware of problems of economically disadvantaged Ind handicapped students. The best teacher would have experience with special needs students. The program is designed for students who will have trouble getting/keeping jobs because of personality, handicap, etc.

20. P:roq:ram Evaluation: External/internal by system and APDC Center.

21. Add:re of P:roj.ct: P.O. Box 1708 Athens, GA 30603 (404) 353-3438

8-60

1. PROGRAN NaNB: JTPA

CODJI: 674

2. Program Contact: Eric Hartlein

3. Date Program Began: 24/8/84 5. Age Range Served: 16-18

4. NUmber of Student. Se~:-1986-87: 15 -1987-88: 15

6. Grade(.) Served: 10-12

7. Student/Staff Ratio: 15:1

8. Population S.rved: Low income, handicapped.

9. Program Jlligihility Criteria: Income, handicap.

10. Program Jlzit Criteria: Complete 15 competencies or get a job.

11. Program ~: Dropout prevention, school and system level.

12. Z.timated (avq.) Day. participants Spend in Program: 180

13. Spon.oring Agency: PIC Council

14. Annual Costs:

15. Source(.) of Program 1'uDd8: Federal

16. De.cription of Program Obj.ctive.: To prepare students to get work and to successfully keep them on the job.

17. Dcription of the Program and Servic Provided: Students are prepared to go to work. They learn to prepare resumes, applications, etc. They are also prepared mentally by teaching them what to expect from the employer and what the employer will expect from them.

18. Specific Succ of the Program/Problems B:Dcountered/SolutioDS Us.d: It is difficult to locate students who qualify on income because the requirement is 50 low.

19. Specific Strategi or Program Practic Which are Zffective: Role-playing, filling out applications, and preparing resumes help individuals have confidence when applying for work.

20. Program Zvaluation: External/internal by JTPA Coordinator.

21. Add:e of Project: P,O. Box 67 Franklin, GA 30217 (404) 675-3656

8-61

1. PllOGRAH NAMB:: JTPA Summer Program

CODE: 785

2. p~og~am Contact: Dwight W. Henderson

3 Date p~og~am 8eg'an: 6/9/81 5. Age Range Served: 14-21

4. Nambe~ ~f Students Served:-1986-81: 50 -1987-88: 50

6. G~ade(s) Served: 7-12

7. Student/Staff Ratio: 25:1

8. population Served: Potential dropouts, disadvantaged, handicapped.

9. P~ogram Eligibility ~ite~ia: Must meet special needs financial criteria, be willing to work and to follow program guidelines.

10. P~ogram Bxit C~ite~ia: Satisfactory completion of the 10-week work period.

11. P~og~am~: Dropout prevention and recovery, system and school level.

12. Estimated (avg.) Days Participants Spend in P~oq~am: 50

13. Sponso~inq Agency: Coosa Valley Area PDC

4. Annual Costs: $53,000

15. Souzce(s) of P~oq~am I'unda: Federal

16. Desc~iption of P~oq~amObjectives: To give students who might~not other- wise be able to get summer employment an opportunity to gain valuable experience. To reward probable dropouts for staying in school by giving them a positive goal. To inject or encourage the input of funding into_the local economy.

15. SOU~C8(S) of Proqram runds: Two full-time staff members operate the program from 7 am to 5 pm Monday through Friday. Students .are not to work more than 40 hours per week.

16. D.sc~iption of Proq~am Objectives: Staff must be willing to work with students who may occasionally have adjustment problems.

17. D.sc~iption of the P~oq~am and Services Provided: Motivated staff must set goals' and be supportive of students when they are right and positively corrective when they are wrong. Staff must have strong expectations for students and communicate those expectations.

18. Specific Successes of the Proqram/Problems Encountered/Solutions Used:

19. Specific Strategies or Program P~actices Which are Effective:

20. Proqram Evaluation: External/internal by coordinator.

21. Address of Project: 508 East Second Street Rome, GA 30161 (404) 295-7400

8-62

1. J?ROGRAK NIZ: Related vocational Instruction

COOB: 742

2 J?2:oqz:am Contact: Glenda Hobby

3. Dat. J?2:og2:am Began: 11/8/77 5. Ag. Range. S.rved: 15-20

4. Numbe2: of Student. S.rved:-1986-87: 23 -1987-88: 27

6. G2:ade(.) Ser98d: 9-12

7. Student/Staff Ratio: 27:2

8. J?opulation S.rved: Handicapped.

9. J?2:og2:am Bliq1bility C2:ite2:ia: Handicapped, placed in special education with recommendation for RVI support services.

10. J?2:og2:am B:zit CJ:it.2:ia: Graduate or possess one or more salable vocational job entry level skills.

11. J?2:og2:am ~: Multifaceted, school and system level.

12. B.t1mated (avg.) Day. J?aJ:ticipant. SPend in J?2:Og'2:am: 540

13. SPon.o2:ing' Agency: GA Department of Education 14. Annual Co.t.: $9,000

15. SOU2:c.(.) of Prog2:am runds: State, federal grants.

16. Dc2:iption of J?2:og2:am Obj.ctive.: To provide the handicapped learner with job entry level skills at the completion of vocational education. To provide resource assistance to students and to teachers in whose classes the student is enrolled.

17. Dc2:iption of the J?2:Og'2:am and Se:rvic.. J?2:ovid8d: A full-time RVI specialist and a part-time paraprofessional serve a maximum of 26 students during the school day. Activities on extended day and extended year contracts include job promotion, placement and supervision activities; curricular and program modifications with vocational teachers; vocational assessment; developing/updated IEPs and instructional materials; youth club activities; and contact with ancillary agencies and advisory members.

18. Specific Succ of the P2:Og'2:am!J?2:oblems BnCount.J:ed/Solution. U.ed: The program requires the cooperation of regular, special and vocational teachers and administrators, accomplished only by expert program salesmanship.

19. Specific Strategies 02: P2:og2:am P2:actice. Which a2:e Effective: Multi-disciplinary teaching using varied equipment and instructional materials is very effective for teaching the handicapped.

20. J?2:og2:am Evaluation: External (State Dept.), internal by contracted audit.

21. Addze of Project: 601 East Madison Ave Ashburn, GA 31714 (912) 567-4378

8-63

1. P~ HaMS: Related Vocational Instruction

CODB: 648

2. p~og~am Contact: Sandra J. Vance

3. Date p~oq~am Beqan: 1/9/77 5. Age RaDg8 Served: 14-21

4. HUmbe~ ~~ Students Served:-1986-87: 36 -1987-88: 30

6. G~ade(s) Served: 9-12

7. Student/Staff Ratio: 7:1

8. popuJ.ation Served: Handicapped.

9. p~oq~am Bliqibility C~ite~ia: Identified handicap, demonstrated need for support services in vocational labs.

10. p~oq~am Bxit C~ite~ia: High school graduation.

12. Bstilllated (a'99.) Days PaRicipants Spend 1n P~oq~am: 180
13. Sponao~inq Agency: Special/Vocational Education 14. Annual Costs:
15. SoU%Ce(s) of P~oq~am Funds: Vocational Education, Special Needs.
16. Desc~iption of P~oq~am Objectives: To identify vocational interests and aptitudes. To implement a special vocational program for the handicapped. To provide opportunities to successfully enter and participate in existing vocational educational programs at the level nearest the student's needs and capabilities. To monitor entry and participation in existing vocational education programs.
17. Desc~iption of the Proq~am and Services P~ovided: The program provides support services to handicapped students enrolled-in vocational programs, enabling students to acquire job-entry level skills through vocational education. RVI coordinates students' course of study with short and long range career goals through an IEP. It provides job placement assistance. It also affords opportunities for enrichment, cultural growth, and personal development through the Vocational Youth Enrichment Camp.
18. Specific Successes of the p~oq~am/p~oblems Bncounte~/SolutionsUsed: Size of school, number of vocational programs available, and special education enrollment must be considered. Administration must be willing to coordinate resources. Special funding can provide needed materials and equipment. The instructor plays a vital role in mainstreaming students. Positive publicity or the handicapped is generated.
19. Specific St~ateqies o~ P~oqram Practices Which are Effective: Active advisory committee that is not part of an umbrella advisory committee. Participation in RVI Enrichment Camp. Involvement in vocational and special education activities and programs. Involvement of students in fundraising and field trips.
20. Program Evaluation: No evaluation yet.
21. Address of Project: 8705 Campbellton Street Douglasville, GA 30134
8-64

1. StlU)GRAll NAMIl: Trade and Industrial Education

COOK: 674

2. Stz:ogz:am Contact: Larry Olson

3. Date 9z:oqz:am Began: 25/8/81 5. Aga Range Sez:ved: 15-18

4. Numbez: of Student. Sez:ved:-1986-87: 108 -1987-88: 156

6. Gz:ade(.) Served: 9-12

7. Student/Staff Ratio: 24:1

8. Stopulation S.zvecl: All students.

9. Stz:oqz:am Kliq1bility Cz:itez:ia: Interest in taking elective course or adding vocational endorsement to diploma.

10. Strogz:am Bxit Cz:itez:ia: Completion of two semesters makes student eligible for vocational endorsement.

11. Stz:ogz:am ~: Dropout prevent, multifaceted, school level.

12 timatee! <avg.) Day. participant. SPend .in Stz:ogz:am: 180

13. Spon.oz:1Dq Agency: Heard County District

14. Annual Co.t.: $130,000

15. Souz:ce(.) of Stz:oqz:am Funds: LEA and State Dept. of Ed. OBE funding.

16. Dcz:iption of Pz:oqz:am Objective.: TO expose students to career options in trade and industry. TO teach job skills, proper work habits, and the value of work in and of itself. To place students with local industry in work-related activities. To develop student self-worth.

17. oe.cz:iption of the Pz:oqz:am aDd S.z:vic Stz:ovic1ecl: Two full-time and one half-time teacher lead three clusters. The construction cluster teaches basic skills in carpentry, masonry, plumbing, and writing. The health occupations cluster teaches practical nursing, home care for the elderly and general medical skills such as records-keeping. The transportation cluster teaches gas engine repair, automative systems, and small engine repair.

18. Specific Succ of the Pz:oqz:am/Pz:oblems BDcount.z:ec!/Solutions Usee!: Because the program is expensive, a community survey should be conducted and at least two years of planning and organization are needed.

19. Specific Strategies oz: Pz:oqz:am Practices Which az:e Effectiv.: Hands-on work gives the opportunity to apply theoretical learning from academic classes.

20. Stz:oqz:am Evaluation: External by State Department of Education.

21. Addze of Project: Box 10 Franklin, GA 30217 (404) 675-3656

8-65

1. PROGRAN~: Vocational Summer School

CODE: 716

2. Program Contact: William T. Slade

J. Date Program Beqan: 5/8/87 5. Age Range Served: 14-20

4. HUmber of Students Served:-198~-87: 65 -1987-88:

6. Grade (s) Served: 9-12

7. Student/Staff Ratio: 15:1

8. Population Served: Handicapped, disadvantaged and regular students.

9. Program Zligibility Criteria: Eligible to attend regular school.

10. Program ZZit Criteria: Must earn 1/2 or 1 Carnegie unit with same performance level as regular school year.

11. Program ~: Dropout prevention, school level.

12. Zstimated (avg.) Days Participants Spend in Program: 15 or 30

13. Sponsoring Agency: GDOE and PCsOE

14. Annual Costs: $20,000

15. Source(s) of Program Funda: state and local.

16. Description of Program Objectives:

"

To reinforce academic skills in math, science, and language arts. To

teach the importance of academic success in successful employment. To

provide a positive academic experience.

17. Description of the Program and Services Provided: Individualized instruction is used for most skills training. Academic skills are taught in a group. Academic skills receive hands-on application to reinforce the relevance of academic success to the wor* experience. Students who successfully complete the summer program ar~ enrolled in the JTPA program during the academic year.

19. Specific Strategies or Program Practices Which are Bffective: The program can be used for remediation or enrichment. The program is as close to on-the-job training "as possible. Students are in the same class for four hours.

20. Program Evaluation: Internal by coordinator indicated a decrease in dropout rate by 50 percent among student served.

21. Address of Project: Box 148 Hawkinsville, GA 31036
(912) 783-2726

8-66

1. PROGRAN HaHB: Vocational/Academic Preparation (VAP)

CODB: 746

2 P:oq~_ Contact: J. C. Gober

3. Date P~oq~am Beqa1: 1/8/87 5. Aq8 Range S.rved: 14-18

4. Numbe~ of Student. S.rved:-1986-87: 27 -1987-88:

6. G~ada(.) Served: 9-12

7. Studant/Staff Ratio: 27:6

8. Population S.rved: Over-age and below grade level.

9. P~oq~am Bligibility ~ite~ia: Failure of at least one grade and/or potential dropout.

10. '~oq~am Bzit C~ite~ia: Completion of 315 hours earns certificate of vocational competencies; or eligibility to take GED examination.

11. P~oq~am~: Dropout prevention, school and system level.

12. B.timated (avg.) Day. Participant. Spend in P~oq~am: 180

13. Spon.o~ing Agency: Walker County Board

14. Annual Co.t.: $60,000

15. Sou~.(.) of P~og~am runda: Local

16. Dc~iption of P~og~am Objective.: To reinforce basic skills. To convert credit to quarter hours under certain approved circumstances. To provide intensive vocational training as determined by assessment. To provide individualized instruction in academic areas.

17. De.c~iption of the P~og~am and S.rvic.. P~ovided: Students are given the opportunity to reinforce basic computation and communication skills taught by extended-day academic teachers. Opportunities for intensive vocational training are provided as determined by assessment inventories. Each student attends a regular six-period school day: Communication Skills, PE, Computation Skills, and three periods of Vocational Training.

18. Specific Succ of the P=gz:am/p~oblema zncoUDt.~ed/Solution.U.ed: Teachers must be carefully selected to deal with students who have been consistently unsuccessful in academic settings. Support persons must have positive attitudes. Money must be allotted to purchase classroom equipment and supplies to facilitate the use of different teaChing strategies.

19. Specific St~ategie. o~ P~og~am P~actices Which a~e Effective: Students waive the traditional diploma, but individual attention has proved to be incentive for success. These students have often been labeled trouble- makers or underachievers in the regular classroom.

20. Program Evaluation: No evaluation yet.

21. Addres. of Project: P.O. Box 29 LaFayette, GA 30728

8-67

DRQPOtJ'1' BlCOVERY PRQGRAMS:
PAGE Adult Basic Education/Adult Secondary Education (742) .. 8-69 Adult Basic Education (687) 8-70
Adult Education (721) ............................ 8-71
8-68

1. ROGRAN NaMZ: Adult Basic/Secondary Education

CODB: 742

2 rogram Contact: Tommy Helms

3. Date rogram Began: 1/9/66 5. Age Range S.rved: 16-54

4. NUmber of Students S.rved:-1986-87: 44 -1987-88: 52

6. GracW (.) Served; 15: 1

7. Student/Staff Ratio:

8. opulation Served: Dropouts.

9. rogram Bligibility Criteria: Aqe 17 or older, desiring to complete requirements for GED.

10. Program Bzit Crit.ria:

11. rogram~: Dropout recovery, system level.

12. B.timated (avg.) Day. articipant. Spend in rogram:

13. Spon.oring Agency: Turner County Beard of Ed.

14. Annual Co.t.: $15,970

15. Source(.) of rogram Funds: State and federal.

16. Dcription of Program Obj.ctive.: To develop recruitment and retention program techniques for increasing and maintaining adult student enrollment. To develop and/or participate in local and state staff development activities. To develop strategies for volunteer recruitment/training. To develop plans for cooperative efforts of businesses/organizations to enhance delivery of adult education. To develop effective program marketing.

17. De.cription of the Program and S.rvices Provided: The program operates on a nine-month schedule to provide basic education for adults who want to complete the requirements for the GED.

18. Specific Succ of the Program/Problems Encount.red/Solution. Used: The school board and superintendent have a favorable attitude. Teachers are experienced and the physical facility is excellent. Recruitment of students with low basic skills has been a problem.

19. Specific Strategies or Program Practices Which are Bffective: Graduates of the program sometimes return to assist in classes, but a community-wide volunteer recruitment effort would help.

20. Program Evaluation: External by State.

21. Address of Project: 213 N. Cleveland St. Ashburn, GA 31714 (912) 567-3338

8-69

1. ~RCGRAN HaMB: Adult Basic Education Program

CODK: 687

2 ~rogram Contact: Cuthbert C. Farmer

3. Dat8 ~rogram Began: 9/9/86 5. Age Range Served: 16-59

4. NUmbe~ of Students S.rved:-1986-8i~ 150 -1987-88: 128

6. Grada(s) Served: 0-12

7. Student/Staff Ratio: 20:1

8. ~opuJ.ation ~erved: Adults 16 years and older.

9. ~J:Ogram Zligibility Criteria: Age 16+, not enrolled in middle or high school, resident of Georgia.

10. ~roqram ~t Criteria: Open-ended.

11. ~roqram ~: Dropout recovery, system level.

12. ZsUmated. (avq.) Days Participants Spend in ~rogram: 72

13. Sponsoring Aqency:

14. Annual Costs:

15. Source(s) of ~rogram Funds: Federal and state.

16. Description of ~rogram Objectives: To implement a program with emphasis on basic reading, writing, spelling and listening skills. To develop self- respect and respect for others. To implement a program for completion of the GED. To implement a program to enhance life coping skills.

17. Description of the Program and Services Provided: The program provides programs for illiterate and under-educated adults and special populations of adults such as the handicapped, learning disabled, aged, dropouts, and adults in need of English language training.

18. Specific Successes of the Program/Problems ZDcountered/Solutions Used: There must be local interest in the program. Teacher must be able to deliver and retain students.

19. Specific Strategies or Program Practices Which are Bffective: Inventory of returning and new students. On-site visitation. Teacher suggestions. Attendance at state meetings to get new ideas and methods. Use of the media and public appearances to sell the program.

20. Program Evaluation:~ Internal by State Department.

21. Address of Project: P.O. Box 2128 Court Square Station Dublin, GA 31021 (912) 272-5821

8-70

1. PROGRAM NANB:: Adult Education

CODB: 721

2. P:oqram Contact: Sheila H. Allen

3. Date Proqram Began: 1/9/67

4. NUmber of Students Served:-1986-87: 2180

-1987-88: 684

5. Aqe aanqe Served: 16 and older

6 Grade (s) Served:

7. Student/Staff Ratio:

8. Population Served: Dropouts, disadvantaged, bilingual, teen parents.

9. P:oqraa Bliqibility Criteria: Age 16+, not enrolled in regular K-12 program. Age 16-17: permission of parents, former principal, superintendent.

10. Program ZZit Criteria: Open-ended, depending on mastery of goals established upon program entrance.

11. Program Type: Dropout recovery, multifaceted, system level.

12. Bstimated (avg.) Days Participants Spend in Program: 64

13. Spon8orinq Agency: Richmond Co. Board of Ed. 14. Annual Costs: $300,000

15. Source(s) of Program Funds: Federal, state and local.

16. Description of Proqram Objectives: To prepare students to become active participants in the society in which they live through the enhancement of academic, employability and life skills.

17. Description of the Program and Services Provided: The program provides basic literacy, English as a Second Language, language, basic skills instruction in reading, language and math, GED preparation and remedial education. The program operates M-F 8-9:30 pm and Saturday 9 am-1 pm. Staff includes 8 full-time and 20 part-time employees. Services are provided to Head Start, Paine College's lifelong learning program, mental health treatment centers, senior citizens, training shop for handicapped adults, churches, bank, corrections centers, YMCA and YWCA, Augusta College, etc.

18. Specific Successes of the Program/Problems Encountered/Solutions Used: Community facilities are important. Space is needed for storage of equipment and materials. Facilities should be attractive and designed to accommodate adult needs (smoking area, snack area, space for small group/large group/ individual study).

19. Specific Strateqies or Proqram Practices Which are Bffective: For lower reading ability students, individualized attention (1-to-1 tutoring or use of computers) has been successful. Use of audio-visual and computer technology helps keep younger students (age 16-25) involved.

20. Program Evaluation: External by State Department of Education.

21. Address of Project: 1688 Broad Street Augusta, GA 30904 (404) 823-6938

8-71

MtlLTIrACETED PROGRAMS: PAGE
Children At Risk Committee (794) ...... 8-73 The Northlake Network (776) ...... 8-74 SPARKS (Student Partners Aiming for Recognition, Knowledge, and Success) (747) ...... 8-75
8-72

1. PROGRAII NAHB:: Children at Risk Committee

CODZ: 794

2. pz:ograa Contact: Andrew Symons

3. nate Pz:ogz:aa Began: 11/1/87 5. Age Range Sez:ved: 11-17

4. HUmbez: of Students Sez:ved:-1986-87: 11 -1987-88:

6. Gz:ade (s) Sez:ved: 6-8

7. Student/Staff Ratio:

8. Population Sez:ved:

9. Pz:oqz:aa Zligibility Cz:itez:ia: Motivation/discipline problems, singleparent home, poor academic performance, drug/alcohol use, truancy, etc.

10. Pz:ogz:. . Bzit Cz:itez:ia: committee evaluation or removal from the school

11. pz:oqz:aa Type: Multifaceted, school level.

12. Bstimated (avg.) nays Participants Spenc! in pz:oqz:aa:

13. Sponsoz:inq Agency: Waycross Boar~ of Education

14. Annual Costs:

15. Souz:ce(s) of Pz:ogz:aa Funds:

16. nescz:iption of Pz:ogz:am Objectives: To provide students with support in the school setting and/or through outside agencies. To suggest alternative or additional teaching strategies to teachers of students at risk. To provide documentation for possible curriculum adjustments.

17. nescz:iption of the Pz:ogz:am and Services Pz:ovided: The committee serves as support for students experiencing difficulties in school. Parents, teachers, administrators, or students may make a referral when a child is identified as 'at risk' according to eligibility criteria. The committee suggests various strategies in a documented plan, and the child is monitored on a weekly basis for as long as necessary. The committee has 3 permanent members (counselor, social work, psychologist); other members may include an administrator, teacher, or parent/guardian. The committee meets weekly with extra meetings when necessary.

18. Specific Successes of the Pz:ogz:aa!Pz:oblems Zncountez:ed/Solutions Used: Members must be committed to an ongoing program since consistency is vital. Work must be shared to prevent overburdening of members. An efficient and effective record-keeping method must. be developed to facilitate weekly reviews. Parent involvement helps establish consistency between school and home.

19. Specific Stz:ategies oz: Pz:ogz:am Pz:actices Which az:e Effective: Teachers should receive information about students to facilitate improvement of teacher/student relationship. Sharing of strategies offers more variety and helps prevent unnecessary duplication. Use of outside agencies unites school andco~unity and provides extra support.

20. Pz:ogz:am Evaluation: No evaluation yet

21. Addz:ess of Pz:oject: 1200 Colley Street Waycross, GA 31501 (912) 283-0535

8-73

1. PROGRAH NAMB: The Northlake Network

CODB~ 776

2. Program Contact: Dr. Chuck Dyarmett

3. Date Program Began: 2/1/8' 50 Age Range Served: 14-19

4. NUmber of Students Served:-1986-87: 15 -1987-88: 18

6. Grade<s) Served: 9-12

7. Student/Staff Ratio: 18~1

8. Population Served: Potential dropouts.

9. Program Bligibility Criteria: One or more grade level behind; excessive absenteeism; discipline problems; referral from parents, teachers, students.

10. Program Exit Criteria: Completion of one semester in formal class setting. Monitored through high school.

11. Program~: Dropout prevention, school level

12. Bstimated <avq.) Days Participants Spend in Program: 90

13. Sponsoring Agency: Northlake Network 14. Annual Costs: $23,000

15. Source(s) of Program Funds: JTPA 2A funds

16. Description of Program Objectives: To promote and foster the goal of high school graduation for potential and actual dropouts. To incorporate job skill and academic competencies into program. To effectively decrease absenteeism. To provide career, personal and academic counseling services. To maintain monitoring of all participants.

17. Description of the Program and Services Provided:

Staff includes one counselor/coordinator, one part-time

secretary/eligibility clerk. Students attend class one period per day

for one semester. Services include job

skills, basic academic

skills, career counseling, family counseling and possible job

placement. participants are continuously monitored. JTPA serve as

consultants.

18. Specific Successes of the Program/Problems Encountered/Solutions Used: Counselor/coordinator must have exceptional abilities in working with academically and economically disadvantaged youth. Schools must meet JTPA criteria. System must serve as fiscal agent unless an independent source is found. Schools provide teaching space.

19. Specific Strategies or Program Practices Which are Effective: Extensive contact with parents, students, and teachers. Formation of an organized groupo Non-traditional teaching methods. Careful selection of counselor/ coordinator.

20. Program Evaluation: External (JTPA Youth Competencies), internal (local)

21. Address of Project: 850 Woods Mill Road Gainesville, GA 30505 (404) 536-5295

8-74

1. PROGRAN~: Student Partners Aiming for Recognition, Knowledge and Success (SPARKS)

CODE: 747

2. P~og~am Contact: Susan Bishop

3. Data P~og~am Bagan: 1/9/87 5. Age Range Served: 14-17

4. Numbe~ of Students Served:-1986-87: -1987-88: 40

6. G~ade(s) Served: 9-10

7. Student/Staff Ratio: 5:1

8. population Served: 16 years old in 9th grade, below grade level.

9. p~oq:am Bligibility C~it.~ia: Poor self-concept, absenteeism. Student volunteer and thus indicate an interest in own education.

10. p~og~am Exit C~ite~ia: Not determined as yet.

11. p~og~am~: Dropout prevention, system and school level.

12. Zstimated (avq.) Days participants Spend in P~og~am: 180-360

13. Sponso~ing Agency: Walton Co. School Board 14. Annual Costs:

15. Sou~ce(s) of P~og~am Funds: Local and Georgia Department of Education.

16. Desc~iption of P~og~am Objectives: To increase interest and the desire to attend school. To reduce problems of students moving from middle school to high school. To improve grades. To provide support and increase the chances of students remaining in school and graduating. To provide positive identification with an adult and a student partner.

17. Desc~iption of the P~og~am and Services P~ovided: SPARKS is a student advocacy program which aids high risk students in the transition from middle school to high school. Partners provide emptional, educational and psychological support for students. Teacher sponsors make weekly (or more) contact with students. Students meet weekly as a group to check attendance, boost morale, and plan special projects or meetings. Monthly field trips, speakers, etc. are planned. Local businesses have donated funds for T-shirts for the group.

18. Specific Successes of the P~og~am/p~oblems zncounte~ed/SolutionsUsed: A SPARKS coordinator at each participating school can be the backbone for the program. Sponsors should meet at least twice a year to discuss problems and evaluate the program. Partners should be prepared for students who still drop out after working with the program.

19. Specific St~ategies o~ P~og~am Practices Which a~e Effective: Local superintendent/principal must support program. Must work with the assistant principal for attendance/discipline and with the counselors who schedule students. Participation in vocational programs can be very rewarding for these students.

20. P~ogram Evaluation: External (GA Dept. of Education), internal.

21. Address of Project: 115 Oak Street Monroe, GA 30655 (404) 267-6544

8-75

IN-SCHOOL SUSPENSION PRyGRAM$:

PAGE

Oatland Island Alternative School (625) 8-77

Self-Improvement Lab--SIL (694) .. 8-78

Reassignment Center (635) ........ 8-79

In-School Suspension (725) .......... 8-80

In-School Suspension (619) ..... 8-81

Crisis Intervention Program (733) .. 8-82

Alternative School (742) ..... 8-83

Saturday School (636) ........ 8-84

Irwin County In-School Support Program (677) .. 8-85

In-School Probation Program (755) ........ 8-86

In-School Suspension (785) ............... 8-87

Richmond County Alternative School (721)

8-88

8-76

1. PROGRAN HaMZ: Oatland Island Alternative School

CODB: 625

2. P~oq~am Contact: Tony Cope

3. Date p~oq~am Beqan: 1/9/76 5. Age RaDqe Served: 6-8

4. NQmbe~ of Students Sezved:-1986-87: 40 -1987-88: 35

6 G~ade <s) Served:

7. Student/Staff Ratio: 10:1

8. Population Served: Behavior and academic problems.

9. P~oq~am Bliqibility C~ite~ia: Not eligible for special p~ograms; referral from counselor; parent/student interview; student must choose program.

10. P~q~am Bzit C~ite~ia: One semester

11. p~og~am!ype: In-school suspension, system level.

12. Bstimated <avq.) Days Participants SPend in p~oq~am: 90

13. Sponso~iDq Aqency: Savannat Chatham Schools 14. ADDual Costs: $72,000

15. Sou~ce<s) of P~oq~am J'uDda: Local

16. Desc~iption of P~oq~am Objectives: To enhance reasoning, thinking, and decision-making skills. To strengthen abilities in math, language arts, science, social studies and health. To foster an attitude of pride, self- worth and a sense of responsibility for own decisions. To provide a wide variety of educational experiences through learning-by-doing, care of animals and greenhouse plants, design and completion of hands-on projects.

17. Desc~iption of the P~oq~am and Services P~ovided: Staff includes 2 teachers and an aide, all full-time, and 16 others, including carpenter, secretary, janitor, teachers/aides. The school works with the psychology department, system behavior management specialist, and community resource people. The center includes 175 acres of salt marsh, a TV studio, native animal habitat displays, and 30 field trip programs.

18. Specific Successes of the p~oq~am/P~oblema EncoUDte~ed/SolutionsUsed: The site contributes to successful implementation. Students are separated from other students and schools and have responsibilities for animals and plants. Additional staff lead activities in their areas of expertise. Classrooms were remodeled for the program.

19. Specific St~ategies o~ P~og~am P~actices Which a~e Effective: Emphasize responsibility for own actions. Set rules/limits, identify consequences, and stick to them. Small (10) academic learning groups. Let students help make rules. Students/parents/principals sign behavior contracts.

20. P~oq~am Evaluation: Internal evaluation.

21. Address of P~oject: Oatland Island Education Center 711 Sandtown Road Savannah, GA 31410 (912) 897-3773

8-77

1. PROGRAK HAMS: Self Improvement Lab

COOE: 694

2. Program Contact: Dennis L. Jones

3. Date Proqram Began: 24/9/87 5. Age Range Served: 9-21

4. Humber of Students Served:-1986-87: -1987-88:

6. Grade(s) Served: 4-12

7. Student/Staff Ratio: 7:1

8. population Served: Discipline problenus.

9. Program Eligibility Criteria: Misbehavior warranting suspension from class.

10. Proqram ZZit Criteria: Completion of assigned days and assigned tasks. Appropriate behavior.

11. Proqram~: In-school suspension, system level.

12. Estimated (avg.) Days Participants Spend in Program: 3

13. Sponsoring Agency: Macon County Schools

14. Annual Costs: $40,000

15. Source(s) of Program Funds: Local

16. Description of Program Objectives: To provide an alternative to out-of- school suspension. To maintain appropriate behavior. To review consequences of appropriate behavior. To maintain classwork missed while suspended. To return to class with appropriate behavior.

17. Description of the Program and Services Provided: Staff includes one full-time classroom teacher and one full-time paraprofessional. Transportation is provided from five schools to central location. Students are assigned for one to ten days. Students must satisfy a daily checklist of work and behavior and complete the assigned days in order to return to regular classes.

18. Specific Successes of the Program/Problems Bncountered/Solutions Used: Experienced, stable and concerned classroom teacher must be found. The classroom must be separate from regular classes to prevent interaction. Strict behavior and work guidelines must be set and adhered to. Good communication between SIL and home school and maintenance of good records are essential. Transportation must be arranged.

19. Specific Strategies or Program Practices Which are Effective: Separate students from all other students. No talking, sleeping or interaction with fellow students. Well-rounded teacher can tutor students in various subjects. Good communication between schools, parents, and program.

20. Program Evaluation: No evaluation yet.

21. Address of Project: P.O. Box 488 Oglethorpe, GA 31068 (912) 472-8188

8-78

1. PItOGRAII NAM&: Reassignment Center

CODB: 635

2. P:ogram Contact: Ruth Ryce, Lenn Taylor

3 . Date Program Began: 1/9/74 5. Age Range Served: 12-18

4. Humber of Students Served:-1986-87: 488 -1987-88: 174

6. Grade(s) Served: 6-12

7. Student/Staff Ratio: 21:1

8. pop\Uation Served: Behavior problem.

9. Program Bligibility Criteria: Referral by principal or designee on basis of behavior (skipping school/class, tardiness, disruption).

10. Program llzit Criteria: Completion of assigned days and work. Inappropriate behavior may result in extra days.

11. Program~: In-school suspension, system level.

12. BstiJDated (avg.) Days Participants Spend in Program: 3

13. Sponsoring Agency: Colquitt County Board

14. Annual Costs: $27,736

15. Source(s) of Program runda: Local, state

16. Description of Program Objectives: To isolate students as a penalty for misbehavior. To provide students the opportunity to examine circumstances contributing to behavior problems. To help students understand their feelings and examine human relations skills required to achieve positive interpersonal communication with others. To provide an option to out-of- school suspension.

17. Description of the Program and Services Provided: The program provides supervised containment and behavior management experience for students whose inappropriate behavior interrupts the normal education process at their schools. In a positive and structured environment, students are required to practice good classroom behavior and to complete assignments provided to help them maintain and improve classroom performance levels. Group and individual counseling are available. The director is a professional guidance counselor with experience at all levels and training in special education. Program is housed with Program for Exceptional Children.

18. Specific Successes of the Program/Problems Encountered/Solutions Used: The program helped students as well as maintaining attendance levels. Staff need excellent background in psychology and guidance, as well as classroom teaching and working with groups.

19. Specific Strategies or Program Practices Which are Bffective: Use of staff personnel and contacts with parents.

20. Program Evaluation: No evaluation yet.

21. Address of Project: 901 Fifth St. SW Moultrie, GA 31768 (912) 890-6192

8-79

1. PROGRAH HaMB: In-School Suspension

CODS: 725

2 Program Contact:

3. Dat. Program Began: 26/8/81. 5. Age Range S.rved: 10-20

4. Number of Student. Served:-1986-87: 176 -1987-88: 54

6. Grada(.) S.rved: 4-12

7. Student/Staff Ratio: 65:4

8. population Served: Behavior problema, excessive tardiness, truancy.

9. Program Sligibility Criteria: Optional choice (not often selected) for discipline. Required for major rules infraction.

10. Program Zzit Criteria: Completion of assignments and work with 75% accuracy.

11. Program Type: In-school suspension, system level.

12. Z.timated (avq.) Day. Participant. Spend in Program: 4

13. Spon.oring Aqency: Seminole County.

14. Annual Co.t.:

15. Sourc.(.) of Program Funds: Local

16. Dcription of Program Objective.: To modify behavior of students in a manner that will produce appropriate classroom behavior and academic gains. To provide an alternative discipline process using productive educational means to deter incidences of disruptive behavior and to maintain high attendance levels.

17. De.cription of the Program and Servic Provided: Students report to In- School Suspension at beginning of school. Lesson assignments are sent by classroom teachers. Assignments must be completed each day with at least 75% accuracy. Additional days may be added for incomplete work or infraction of In-School Suspension rules.

18. Specific Succ of the Program/Problems Kncount.red/Solution. U.ed: Retains students in school rather than suspending them. Facilities are conducive to this type program because the restroom and two classrooma comprise a suite.

19. Specific Strategies or Program Practices Which are Effective: Students write five pages about why they are in the Center. This keeps the students on-task and lets them evaluate their behavior problems and punishment. This places an emphasis on personal development, social competence, and continued learning.

20. Program Zvaluation: External by Southern Association.

21. Addre of Project: P.O. Box 188 Donalsonville, GA 31745 (912) 524-5135

8-80

1. PROGRAN NaMB: In-School Suspension

CODB: 619

2. p:ogJ:am Contact: Dr. Ed Grisham

3. Date Program Began: 1/8/85 5. Age Range Served: 9-18

4. NUmbeJ: of Students Served:-1986-87: 111 -1987-88: 68

6. GJ:ada<s) Served: 4-12

7. Student/Staff Ratio: 3:1

8. population Served: Disciplinary problems.

9. ProgJ:am Bligibility Criteria: Referred by principal; parental notification, willingness to work, willingness to cooperate with supervisor.

10. ProgJ:am &zit Criteria: Completion of all assignments and exhibition of good conduct.

11. PJ:ogram!ype: In-school suspension, system level.

12. Bstimated <avg.) Days Participants Spend in Program: 3

13. Sponsoring Agency: Calhoun City Schools

14. Annual Costs: $31,000

15. Source<s) of Program Funds: Local

16. Description of Program Objectives: To provide an alternative to out-of- school suspension. To require completion of class assignments and tasks. To provide an avenue for student counseling. To require cooperation and willingness to work by student. To reduce the number of days a student is out of school. To emphasize attendance.

17. DescJ:iption of the ProgJ:am and Services Provided: The program provides a positive means of assigning disciplinary action that allows the student to continue academic progress. One full-time supervisor obtains academic assignments and ensures appropriate daily progress toward completion of assignments. Demographic data about students are obtained and assigned tests are monitored. Students must produce anticipated progress toward all assigned work to be eligible for exit.

18. Specific Successes of the Program/Problems Encountered/Solutions Used: Individual study booths/carrels were built to minimize distractions and keep students on-task. Staff should emphasize that misconduct or lack of effort will earn additional days.

19. Specific Strategies or Program Practices Which are Effective: The requirement to complete assignments is particularly effective.

20. Program Evaluation: Internal by coordinator.

21. Address of Project: P.O. Box 785 Calhoun, GA 30701 (404) 629-9213

8-81

1. PROGRAN HaMB: Crisis Intervention Program

CODE: 733

2. Program Contact: Gloria Lowe

3. Date Program Began: 28/8/80 5. Age Ranqe Served: 9-21

4. HUmber of Students Serv'~:-1986-87: 461 -1987-88: 157

6. Grade(s) Served: 3-12

7. Student/Staff Ratio: 10:1

8. population Served: All grade 3-12 students.

9. Program Bligibility Criteria: Excessive disrespect, fighting, refusal to attend detention, excessive tardiness, breaking of school rules.

10. Program Zzit Criteria: Compliance with rules earns points. 60 points are required for exit.

11. Program~: In-school suspension, school and system level.

12. Bstimated (avq.) Days Participants Spend in Program: 2

13. Sponsoring Agency: Taylor County

14. Annual Costs: $10,000

15. Source(s) of Program Funds: Local

16. Description of Program Objectives: To isolate students for discipline purposes. To avoid out-of-school suspension. To allow students to maintain classwork.

17. Description of the Program and Services Provided: A supervisory teacher and full-time aide operate the program all day, 5 days per week. The program is self-contained and serves as an alternative for students exhibiting inappropriate behavior at school or in school activities.

18. Specific Successes of the Program/Problems Bncountered/Solutions Used: Building/room away from main student body. Individual booths. Access to separate restroom from main student body. Resource materials available. Full-time teacher and aide.

19. Specific Strategies or Program Practices Which are Effective: To further contain students in isolation, lunches are served in program area.

20. Program Evaluation: Internal by administrators.

21. Address of Project: P.O. Box 1936 Butler, GA 31006 (912) 862-3314

8-82

1. PROGRAM NaMZ: Alternative School

CODB: 742

2 Proqram Contact: Wayne Baxter "
3. Date Proqram Beqan: 30/8/79 4. Number of Studenta Served:-1986-87: '15 -1987-88: 40
5. Age Ranqe Served: 5-18

6. Grade (a) Served: K-12

7. Student/Staff Ratio:

8. population Served: Students with history of discipline problems.

9. proqram Bliqibility Criteria: Enrolled in Turner County Schools; has not adapted behavior to conform to norms followinq other discipline.

10. Proqram Ilxit Criteria: N/A.

11. Proqram Type: In-School Suspension, system level.

12. Zstimated (avq.) Daya Participanta Spend in Proqram: 1

13. Sponsorinq Aqency: Turner County Board of Ed. 14. Annual Costs: $5,797

15. Source (a) of Proqram runds: Local

16. Description of Proqram Objectivea: To provide administrators with an alternative means of discipline prior to suspension.

17. Deacription of the Proqram and Servicea Provided: The program allows students to be pulled from any classes in which they have become a problem without suspending them from all classes. They are required to do the same assignments as they would have in their regular classrooms. A full-time person supervises students.

18. Specific Successes of the Proqram!Problema Bncountered/Solutiona Uaed: Instead of placing a student in the alternative school for the entire day, students are pulled only from classes in which they have become discipline problems.

19. Specific Strateqiea or Proqram Practices Which are Bffective:

20. Proqram Evaluation: External by Title II.

21. Address of Project: 213 North Cleveland St Ashburn, GA 31714 (912) 567-3338

8-83

1. PROGRAN HaMS: Saturday School

CODB: 636

2. JiI~oqram Contact: Tommy Price 3. Dat. JiI~og~am Began: 1/9/84 5. Age Range S.rved: 12-19

"
4. Numbe~ of Student. Served:-~386-87: 889 -1987-88: 1191

6. Gra~(.) S.rved: 6-12

7. Student/Staff Ratio: 30:1

8. population S.rVed: Students committing suspendable offenses.

9. JiI~oqram Bligibility C~iteria: Suspendable offense and choose to attend in lieu of out-of-school suspension.

10. Jilrog~am Bzit Crite~ia: Appear as scheduled and abide by established guidelines.

11. p~og~am~: In-school suspension, system level.

12. B.timated (ave;.) Day. Jilarticipant. Spend in Jilrogram: 2-5

13. Spon.o~ing Agency: Columbia County Board.

14. Annual Co.ts: $7,500

15. Sou~c.(s) of P~og~am Funds: Local

16. Dcription of Prog~am Objective.: To keep students who commit suspendable offenses within school setting. To provide an effective deterrent to further misconduct. To place consequences of misconduct directly on student.

17. De.cription of the Jilrog~am and Service. P~ovided: Saturday School operates from 8 am to noon each Saturday. Students may serve suspension time with one day of Saturday School equivalent to one day suspension. Two staff members operate the program, with a third called in when registration exceeds 70. Students are required to bring all textbooks and to work independently. No grades are recorded nor is instruction provided.

18. Specific Succ of the Jilrog~amlJilroblema Bncount.~/Solution.Used: Transportation to and from school is a private responsibility which handicaps participation. When a student is absent, decision must be made regarding make-up or invocation of original suspension.

19. Specific St~ategies o~ Prog~am Practices Which a~e Effective: Requiring the student to give up a Saturday morning has been an effective deterrent. Operating costs are lost in comparison to other options. No teacher planning or grading is required.

20. JiI~og~am ~valuation: No evaluation yet (informal by principal, staff).

21. Address of P~oject: P.O. Box 10 Appling, GA 30802 (404) 541-1414

8-84

1. PROGIUUI NANIIl: Irwin Co. In-School Support Program

CODB: 677

2. Proqram Contact: Rhonda Walters

3. Date Program Began: 4/1/8-6 5. Age Range Served: 5-19

4. NUmber of Students Served:-1986-87: 38 -1987-88: 104

6. Grade(s) Served: K-12

7. Student/Staff Ratio: 6:.1

8. Population Served: Students with disruptive behavior.

9. Program Bligibility Criteria: Enrolled in Irwin County, suspended from school, voluntary, student compliance to rules.

10. Program Zzit Criteria: Completion of days suspended. Dismissal letter signed by staff.

11. Program~: In-school suspension, system level.

12. .st1mated (avq.) Days Participants Spend in Proqram: 2

13. Sponsoring Agency: Irwin County Board of Ed. 14. Annual Costs: $10,000

15. Source(s) of Program Funds: Local

16. Description of Program Objectives: To increase school attendance. To help students increase self-worth. To improve awareness between community, school, service agencies, parents and students. To decrease dropouts. To decrease out-of-school suspensions. To isolate offenders from regular classes and activities. To enable continued progress in classroom assignments. To decrease number of suspensions.

17. Description of the Program and Services Provided: The program provides strategies designed to prevent and/or minimize frequency of nonproductive social behaviors in grades K-12, with an emphasis on early age intervention. The program is staffed by a coordinator (social worker) and full-time aide, with group and individual counseling provided daily. The program is a cooperative effort of the schools, Juvenile Authority, Dept. of Family and Children, Health Department, Police and Sheriffs Departments, psycho-educational services, and local community volunteers.

18. Specific Successes of the Program/Problems Encountered/Solutions Used: The coordinator must be carefully chosen. Administrators and staff must support the program. The facility should be isolated, with separate lunch area and restrooms, and include a telephone, supplies, and soft drink machine (for lunch). Transportation must be available.

19. Specific Strategies or Program Practices Which are Effective: Isolation and strict constructive discipline. Absenteeism, tardiness, or early dismissal must be made up in the program. Students must complete assigned lessons.

20. Proqram Evaluation: No evaluation yet.

21. Address of Project: P.O. Box 225 Ocilla, GA 31774 (912) 468-9510

8-85

1. ~~JN~: In-School Probation Program

CODE: 755

2 ~roqram Contact: Lillian S. Miller

3. Date ~rogram B_gan: 10/1/86 5. Age Range Served: 12-16

4. Number of Students Served:-1986-87: 14 -1987-88:

6. Grada(s) Served: 7-8

7. Student/Staff Ratio: 10:1

8. ~opu1ation Served: Juvenile Court referrals enrolled in schools.

9. ~rogram Eligibility Criteria: On probation for delinquent or status offenses; enrolled at participating school.

10. ~rogram Zzit Criteria: Termination of probation.

11. ~rogram Type: Dropout prevention, system and school level.

12. Estimated (avq.) Days ~articipants Spend in ~rogram: 130

13. Sponsoring Agency: Whitfield County Juv. Ct. 14. ADDual Costs: $10,000

15. Source(s) of ~rogram Funds: Federal via Department of Community Affairs.

16. Description of ~rogram Objectives: To provide a direct link between school and Juvenile Court for juvenile offenders. To enable a select group of chronic offenders to function in'the community by providing close super- vision within a natural school environment. To provide indepth training in juvenile justice for teachers in the program. To provide a court worker to relate to school setting and home environment.

17. Description of the Program and Services ~rovided: The program is led by a probation officer who is also a school teacher. Students are on probation for delinquent or status offenses. The officer makes home visits after school hours and continues to work during holidays and summer. The program provides tutorial instruction, a minimum of three contacts per week with the student, and regular contact with the family. It also provides a support system for families of children involved and referrals to appropriate social service agencies as needed.

18. Specific Successes of the Program/Problema Encountered/Solutions Used: Staff officer should be carefully selected and should be able to develop a trusting relationship with students and their families. Rapport with students and families is a must. The school system's interest in addressing the dropou~ problem should be considered.

19. Specific Strategies or Proqram Practices Which are Effective: Daily knowledge of reasons for absenteeism. Individual teacher classroom reports for performance, attendance, etc. Immediate intervention by officer to deter suspension. Small caseload to allow identification of special talents/ interests and individual assistance.

20. Program Evaluation: External by Juvenile Justice Coordinating Council.

21. Address of Project: P.O. Box 2167 Dalton, GA 30720 278-6558

8-86

1. PROGRAN NAMB: In-School Suspension

COOJl: 785

2. PJ:OqJ:Ul Contact: Dwight W. Henderson

3. Date PJ:OqJ:Ul Beqan: 1/8/80 5. Age Range Se:ved: 12-21

4. NumbeJ: of Students Served:-1986-87: 221 - -1987-88: 200

6. GJ:ade(s) SeJ:V8d: 7-12

7. Student/Staff Ratio: 12:1

8. population SeJ:V8d: All students except TMR.

9. PJ:oqJ:Ul Jlliqibility CJ:iteJ:ia: Assignment by principal or assistant principal.

10. PJ:OqJ:Ul Bzit CJ:iteJ:ia: Satisfactory completion of all work assignments. Review of violation rule. Principal and parent conference.

11. l'J:OqJ:Ul~: In-school suspension, school and system level.

12. Jlst.imated (avq.) Days Participants Spend in PJ:oqJ:Ul: 1-3

13. SponsoJ:inq Aqency: Rome City Schools

14. Annual Costs:

15. SouJ:ce(s) of PJ:OqJ:Ul Funds: Federal and/or local

16. DescJ:iption of ProqJ:am Objectives: To allow students to keep pace with their regular class by permitting them to complete assignments in a very controlled atmosphere. To keep students in school instead of suspending them. To get student's attention if attitude or actions have been viewed as unacceptable.

17. DescJ:iption of the PJ:OqJ:Ul and Services PJ:ovided: Students report to a self-contained classroom at 7:47 a.m. All assignments and relevant materials are stored in the classroom. Rules and consequences of violation are stressed. There is a parental conference with the student and principal prior to release. Staff includes a full-time certified teacher and/or administrator.

18. Specific Successes of the l'J:oqJ:am/pJ:oblems JlncounteJ:ed/Solutions Used: Support from administration in makinq sure rules and guidelines are satisfactory, then enforcing those rules. Attitudes can be adjusted.

19. Specific Strategies OJ: Proqram PJ:actices Which are Effective: Role reversals. Handbook rules review, counseling sessions, tutoring, reading and math labs.

20. PJ:oqJ:am Evaluation: Internal by coordinator.

21. Addzess of PJ:oject: 508 East Second Street Rome, GA 30161 (404) 295-7400

8-87

1. PROGRAH HaMB: Richmond County Alternative Center

CODB~ 721

2 p:roq:ram Contact: Bert T. Thomas

3 Data p:roq:ram ".Jan: 24/ 8/ 81 5. Age Range Served: 12-21

4. NUmbe:r of Students Served:-1986-87: 170 -1987-88: 106

6. G:rada(s) Served: 6-12

7. Student/Staff Ratio: 9:1

8. Population Served: Students with severe discipline problems.

9. P:roq:ram Bliqibility C:rite:ria: At least 3 interventions involving discipline in regular school; sent by Tribunals.

10. P:roq:ram Bxit C:rite:ria: Exit interview by staff to determine changes in attitude, behavior.

11. P:roq:ram!ype: In-school suspension, system level.

12. IIstimated (avg.) Days Pa:rticipants Spend in P:roq:ram: 45

13. Sponso:rinq Agency: Richmond County Board of Ed. 14. Annual Costs: $400,00

15. Sou:rce(s) of P:roq:ram I'unda: Chapter II, local

16. Desc:ription of P:roq:ram Objectives: To change student attitudes in relation to school (academics), peer relationships, personal conflicts, and authority relationships (teacher and administrators)

17. Desc:ription of the P:roq:ram and Services P:rovidad: The program provides a very strict environment with all courses of study (except ROTC). Classes have low teacher/pupil ratios and students are taught individually. Staff includes principal, 'counselor, secretary, 8 teachers, and 2 para-professionals. Special education, remedial reading (Chapter I), computer literacy and vocational programs are offered. Hours are 8 am to 2 pm.

18. Specific Successes of the P:roq:ram/p:roblema IIncounte:red/Solutions Used: Staff must be willing to work with multi-problemed students. Staffing should be top priority. Faculty should be second. Students should be able to get to school easily (central location) and the facility should meet the needs of the multi-problemed curriculum.

19. Specific St:rateqies o:r P:roq:ram P:ractices Which a:re Effective: Restrictive environment. Small pupil/teacher ratio. Teaching strategies of self-motivation and self-concept. Displaying an atmosphere of caring.

20. P:roq:ram IIvaluation: No evaluation yet.

21. Address of P:roject: 2083 Heckle Street Augusta, GA 30910 (404) 737-7150

8-88

,.' SCBOQL CLIMATE MANAGEMENT PROGRAMS:
PAGE Business/School Partnership (665) 8-90 School Climate (690) ......... 8-91 East Newnan School (638) ...... 8-92 School Climate Improvement (755) .... 8-93 School Climate Improvement Project (772) ..... 8-94 School Climate Management (766) ........ 8-95
8-89

1. P~ HaMB: Business/School Partnership

CODB: 665

2. Program Contact: Dr. Rosemary Adams

,."

3 . Date Proqram Beqan: 1/9/87 5 ~ Range Served:

40 ~r ot Students Served:-1986-87: -1987-88:

6. Grada<s) Served: K-4

7. Student/Statt Ratio:

8. popuJ.ation Served: Elementary

9. Program 3ligibility Criteria: Adopt a school by grade level.

10. Program B:z!t Criteria: N/A

11. program~: School climate management, school level.

12. Bstimated <avq.) Days Participants Spend in Program:

13. Sponsoring Agency:

14. Annual Costs:

15. Source<s) ot Program Funds:

16. Description ot Program Objectives: ~o improve public relations and award incentives for students.

17. Description ot the Program and Services Provided: Radio Shack adopted a kindergarten and showed a robot, introduced color computer learning centers, purchased balloons, crayons, etc. for rewards for good work. A bank bought a computer money game to help 2nd grade math and gave ice cream treats for six-week tests, plus a tour of the bank. Support for a science fair included judges and monetary prizes.

18. Specitic Successes ot the Program/Problema BncoUDtered/Solutions Used: Sponsors were asked to request a grade level in order not to overwhe1m the award system.

19. Specitic Strategies Or Program Practices Which are :lttective: Give helping hand awards to businesses. News releases.

20. Program :&:valuation: No evaluation yet.

21. Address of Project: 1201 20th St. NE Cairo, GA 31728 (912) 377-8441

8-90

1. ~ROGRAK HaMB: School Climate

CODE: 690

2 p~J:am Contact: W. Andrew Henderson

3 Date ~J:ogJ:am Began: 5. Aqe Range served: 12-20

4. HumbeJ: of Students Served:-1986-87: 650 -1987-88: 650

6. GJ:ada(s) Served: 7-12

7. Student/Staff Ratio: 18:1

8 ~opu.1ation Served: All students.

9. ~J:ogJ:" Bliqibility CJ:iteJ:ia: N/A

10. ~J:oqJ:" Bzit CJ:iteJ:ia: N/A

11. ~J:oqJ:am~: School climate management.

12. Bstimated (avq.) Days ~aJ:ticipants Spend in ~J:oqJ:am:

13. SPoDSOJ:iDq Agency:

14. Annual Costs:

15. SOUJ:ce(s) of ~J:oqJ:am Funds:

16. DescJ:iption of ~J:oqJ:am Objectives: The entire school is dedicated to maintaining a positive climate, from an emphasis on cleanliness by custodians to high instructional expectations by teachers. School climate cannot be measured. It is a way of thinking: Expect the highest level of behavior, achievement, etc., and do everything possible to perpetuate the positiveness that is created.

17. DescJ:iption of the ~J:og'J:am and SeJ:Vices ~J:ovided: Get a leader with a positive attitude and give freedom to work. The principal must know school personnel and understand how to motivate, inspire and build loyalty.

18. Specific Successes of the ~J:oqJ:am/~J:oblems BDcounteJ:ed/Solutions Used:

19. Specific StJ:ateqies OJ: ~J:og'J:am ~J:actices Which aJ:e Effective: All school staff must be committed.

20. ~J:oqJ:am Evaluation: External and internal.

21. Addzes8 of Project: P.O. Box 579 Lincolnton, GA 30817 (404) 359-312i

8-91

1. ~ROGRAN~: East Newnan School

CODB: 638

2 ~z:~. . Contact: Merry Todd
-
3. Date ~z:oqz:. . Beqan: 1/10/87
5. Age Range Served: 5-10

4. Humbez: of Students Sez:ved:-1986-87: 240 -1987-88:

6. Gz:ade (s) Served: K-3

7. Student/Staff Ratio: 18:1

8. ~opuJ.ation Served: K-3 (many economically deprived students) 0

9 ~z:oqz:.. Bliqibility Cz:itez:ia: N/ A

10. ~z:oqz:. . Bait Cz:itez:ia: None

11. ~z:oqz:. . ~: School climate manaqement, system and school level.

12. BstJmated (avg.) Days Participants Spend in ~z:oqz:am: 180

13. Sponsoz:inq Aqency: Coweta County Schools

14. Annual Costs:

15. Souz:ce(s) of Pz:oqz:am Funds:

16. Descz:iption of Pz:oqz:am Objectives: To maintain a positive school c~imate throuqhout the entire school year. To address areas of weakness concerning school climate. To increase parental involvement in all areas.

1-1. Descz:iption of the Pz:oqz:am and Sez:vices Pz:ovided: Students are involved in the pizza Hut reading program. Each grade level sponsors a good behavior part for students with an A in conduct for the six weeks. A school newspaper is published every six weeks. Community leaders are invited to visit classes. Pictures appear weekly in the Newnan Times Herald. Some students participated in a summer pre-school proqram.

18. Specific Successes of the Pz:oqz:am/PZ:oblems Bncountaz:ed/Solutions Used: Dedication of teaching personnel is the primary factor involved in this program.

19. Specific Stz:ateqies oz: ~z:oqz:am Pz:actices Which az:e Effective: Making positive contact, including notes, phone calls and home visits, with parents.

20. Proqz:am Evaluation: No evaluation yet.

21. Addz:ess of Pz:oject: 89 East Newnan Road Newnan, GA 30263 (404) 253-5973

8-92

1. PROGRll.JC NAMB: School Climate Improvement

CODB: 755

2. Program Contact: Bobbi Butler

3. Date Proqram Beqan: 1/9/85 5. Age Range Served: 5-14

4. Number of St~ts Served:-1986-87: 2305 -1987-88: 2305

6. Grade Cs) Se~: K-8

7. Student/Staff Ratio: 24:1

8 PopuJ.ation Se~: All students.

9. Proqram Bligibility Criteria: Faculty and staff request.

10. proqram bit Criteria: N/A

11. PJ:oqram!ype: School climate management, school level.

12. Bst.tmated Cavq.) Days Participants Spencl in Program: 180

13. Sponsorinq Agency: Whitfield County

14. Annual Costs: $20,000

15. SourceCs) of Program lUnda: Georgia Juvenile Justice Coordinating Council.

16. Description of Program Objectives: To increase attendance. To increase bonding of students to school. To increase student and staff morale. To improve test scores. To reduce the number of referrals to juvenile court. To reduce vandalism. To reduce dropouts.

17. Description of the Program and Services Provided: The program is designed to improve the climate of the school and to provide those participating with a wide range of activities and services to improve awareness, perception and formulation of the plan. All fulland part-time staff in the six project schools are involved. The program operates the entire school day all year.

18. Specific Successes of the Program/Problems Bncountered/Solutions Used: The project needs no special equipment, facilities or, staff, but should follow the process outlined by' the Colorado Department of Education. An awareness of the program and the climate terms is necessary.

19. Specific Strategies or Program Practices Which are Bffective: Enthusiastic principal. Parental and student involvement. System level support. Total involvement of staff and faculty.

20. Program Evaluation: External by Governor's Council, internal.

21. Address of Project: P.O. Box 2167 Dalton, GA 30722 (404) 278-8070

8-93

1. P~ HaMB: School Climate Improvement Project

CODB: 772

2 P~_ CODtact: Louise Eddings

3. Date PJ:OqJ:_ Began: 21/8/85 5. Age RaDga Se~: 6-16

4. HUmbeJ: ~f Students SeJ:Ved:-1986-87: 1050 -1987-88: 1900

6. GJ:ade(s) SeJ:Ved: K-8

7. Student/Staff Ratio: 19:1

8. popuJ.atioD SeJ:Ved: All students.

9. PJ:OqJ:_ Bliqibility CJ:iteJ:ia: None

10. PJ:oqJ:_ Jlxit CJ:iteJ:ia: N/A

11. PJ:oqJ:_~: School climate management, system and school level.

12. Bstimated (avq .) Days Participants SPend in PJ:oqJ:_: 180

13. SpODSOJ:!Dq Aqancy:

14. Annual Costs: $19,999

. 15. Sow:ce (s) of PJ:oqJ:_ 1'1.mds: Grant from Department of Community Affairs.

16. DascJ:iptioD of PJ:oqJ:_ Objectives: To improve overall climate at participating schools. To increase number and occurrence of positive aspects of school climate. To decrease the number and occurrence of negative aspects of school climate. To improve school-community relations and involvement.

17. DescJ:iptioD of the PJ:oqJ:_ aDd Services PJ:ovided: Following self- evaluation, task forces of school personnel, students, and parents meet to plan and carry out projects and activities in an effort to improve the climate both within the school and between the school and community. One project coordinator was hired to assist in completing paperwork and collection of evaluation data.

18. Specific Successes of the PJ:oqJ:am/PJ:oblems BDcounteJ:ed/SolutioDS Used: Emphasis should be on conducting the mini-audit of present school climate to determine areas for creation of task forces. Time for meetings can be during in-service days. Communication is essential. Everyone involved must know about the program before it starts.

19. Specific StJ:ateqies OJ: PJ:oqJ:am Practices Which aJ:e Effective: Having two schools begin allowed each to help the other conduct the miniaudit. Time lines for task force projects have been beneficial.

20. ProqJ:am BvaluatioD: Internal

21. Addzess of pJ:oject: 100 South Hamilton Street Dalton, GA 30720 (404) 278-3903

8-94

1. ~~~: School Climate Management

COD.: 766

2. ~:oq:am Contact: Doris Marlow

3. Date ~:oq:am Beqan: 31/8/87
s. Age Range Se:ved: 14-19

4. Numbe: of Students Se:ved:-1986-87: -1987-88: 950

6. G:ada(s) Se:ved: 9-12

7. Student/Staff Ratio: 16:1

8. ~opW..tion S.:ved.: All students.

9 . ~:oq:am Bliqibility C:ite:ia: N/A

10. ~:oq:am Bz1t C:ite:ia: N/A

11. ~:oq:am~: School climate management, school level.

12. Bstimated (avg'.) Days ~a:ticipants Spend in ~:og:am: 180

13. Sponso:inq Aqency: Carrollton High School

14. Annual Costs: 0

15. Sou:ce(s) of ~:oq:am Funds:

16. Desc:iption of P:oq:am Objectives: To create an attractive atmosphere that is conducive to learning. To foster peer, faculty, and community respect for students. To.increase teacher and administration interaction. To create opportunities for teachers and administrators to associate informally. To improve race relations among students, teachers, and community. To strengthen communication among students, teachers, and parents.

17. Desc:iption of the ~:og:. . and Se:rvices ~:ovided: A:t work and plants have helped beautify the school. A 'Trojan 100' club recognizes students who achieve on all levels. Students, teachers, and administrators attend a social at the end of each semester to recognize students. Student accomplishments are announced on a board in the cafeteria. A teacher exchange program allows visitation of other classes while an administrator conducts the teacher's class.

18. Specific Successes of the ~:og:am/~:oblems lllncounte:ed/Solutions Used: Informal settings for teaCher/administrator communication include faculty breakfasts, football socials, Christmas parties, and spring picnics. A parent support group meets monthly to discuss student needs and school curriculum. Sponsors of clubs and extracurricular activities are encouraged to increase minority participation.

19. Specific St:ategies 0: P:og:am P:actices Which a:e Effective: A homework clinic helps students with assignments and materials. Each teacher is assigned an advisement group of 15-20 students with whom the teacher works throughout their four years of study.

20. Prog:am Evaluation: Internal, by teachers.

21. Add:e88 of P:oject: 202 Trojan Drive Carrollton, GA 30117 (404) 834-7726

8-95

APPENDIX C.
STATE BY STATE RATINGS: PERCENT OF FRESHMAN WHO DO NOT GRADUATE WITH THEIR CLASS 1986

BEST (below 20%)

ABOVE PAR (20 to 25%)

BELOW PAR (25 to 30%)

WORST (Above 30%)

MN 10.7 NE 13.7 ND 14.7 IA 14.0 SD 14.5 WI 15.5 Vt 16.9 MT 17.9 KS 18.3

OH 20.0 CT 20.9 Ut 21. 3 MD 22.2 NJ 22.3 ME 22.8 PA 22.8 IN 23.0 MO 23.8 WY 24.0 Id 24.2 CO 24.6 AR 24.8 NH 24.8 Wa 24.9

AI< 25.3 Va 25.3 IL 25.5 MA 25.8 OR 26.1 HI 26.8 OK 26.9 WV 26.9 MI 27.8 DW 28.9 NM 29.0 TN 29.5

NC RI KY Nv AZ TX SC CA - GA MS Fl NY Al LA

30.7 31.3 31. 6 33.5 35.4 35.4 35.5 36.8 36.9 37.6 37.8 37.9 37.9 43.7

SOURCE:

u.S. Department of Education report on high school freshmen who did not graduate with their class. They dropped out, were pushed out or fell behind.

A-5

APPENDIX D.
FEDERAL LEGISLATION AND FUNDING
The national emphasis on dropouts has affected the federal budget and federal laws in 1987-88. The present budget, which affects the 1988-89 school year, includes approximately $24 million for a competitive grant program aimed at dropout prevention and reentry programs for school systems, community-based organizations, and educational partnerships. The current law, Public Law 100-297, includes ,two major portions dealing with projects and programs designed to address school dropout problems. And of even more importance, this initial federal effort seems to be strong, since the budget for the next financial year also includes approximately $21.5 million. This amount, which has been signed into P.L. 100-436, is sufficient to continue all projects funded under the competitive grants for a second year.
In the future, the dropout prevention program funds will change from a competitive to a formula distribution system. The purpose, allocation, uses of funds, authorized activities, evaluation, and other descriptions of program requirements can be found in P.L. 100-297, Title I-Elementary and Secondary Education Programs, Title I-Basic Programs, Chapter l-Financial Assistance to Meet Special Educational Needs of Children, Part CSecondary School Program for Basic Skills Improvement and Dropout Prevention and Reentry. sections 1101-1108 (H. Report 100-567) (20 USC 2761- 2768). Title VI-Projects and Program Designed to Address School Dropout Problems and to Strengthen Basic Skills Instruction. and Part A-Assistance to Address School Dropout Problems, sections 6001-6007 contain the other major portion of the present law, signed April 28. 1988. Two significant other sections deal with a definition of dropout and a national study of dropouts, both of which are required within certain timetables and with certain requirements.
A-6

APPENDICES

PAGE

A. SUMMARY OF NATIONAL FINDINGS ON DROPOUTS .... A-3

B. SCHOOL NONCOMPLETION RATES

A-4

C. STATE BY STATE RATINGS: PERCENT OF

FRESHMAN WHO DO NOT GRADUATE WITH

THEIR CLASS

A-5

D. FEDERAL LEGISLATION AND FUNDING

A-6

E. STUDENTS' REASONS FOR DROPPING OUT

A-7

F. FACTORS WHICH CONTRIBUTE TO STUDENTS

DROPPING OUT

A-8

G.

FORMULA FOR IDENTIFYING

DROPOUTS

A-10

H. GEORGIA GRADUATION RATE S

. A-12

1. STUDENT DISCIPLINE

A-16

J. SUGGESTED READINGS

A-55

K. INSTRUMENT FOR EVALUATING LOCAL DROPOUT PREVENTION PROGRAMS

A-77

L. INDEX OF GEORGIA PROGRAMS BY DISTRICT

A-79

A-l

A-2

APPENDIX E.
STUDENT'S REASONS FOR LEAVING SCHOOL
Barber and McClellan list some of the reasons given by districts that report student's reasons for leaving school. These reasons are presented in rank order from the most commonly cited to the least-often mentioned.
student had attendance problem student lacked interest in school student was bored with school student had academic problems or poor grades student had problems with teachers student had family problems or responsibilities student had problems with assigned school student disliked a particular course student disliked everything student had problems with counselors student had problems with other students student had discipline problems and was suspended student felt too old for school student had financial problems student was ill school lacked desired program or course miscellaneous reasons student was pregnant student had conflicts with employment student got married student had enough education to work illness in student's family student disliked discipline and rules student had transportation problems student entered military service . student moved and went to another school student had achieved educational goals parents demanded that student leave school don't know could not speak English student disliked some physical feature of school student left because of gangs or racial problems

SOURCE:

Barber, Larry and Mary McClellan. 1987. "Looking at America's Dropouts: Who Are They?" Phi Delta Kappan. vol. 69, no. 4 (December) pp. 264-267.

A-7

APPENDIX F. FACTORS WHICH CONTRIBUTE TO STUDENTS DROPPING OUT

DEMOGRAPHIC FACTORS:

o

low socioeconomic status

o

racial or ethnic minority

o

male students

o

low educational and occupational level of

parents

o

central city or urban school

o

English as a second language

INDIVIDUAL FACTORS:

o

lower levels of self-esteem

o

less sense of control over lives than other

students

o

poor attitudes about school

o

low educational and occupational aspirations

o

marriage

o

pregnancy

o

undiagnosed learning disabilities

o

emotional or physical handicaps

o

language difficulties

o

substance abuse (alcohol, inhalants, drugs)

o

adjudged delinquent or criminal activity

o

victim of a criminal act

o

over age 18

o

employed while enrolled in school

PEER FACTORS:

o

"culture" of skipping classes or school

o

friends who are dropouts

o

peer educational aspirations and expectations

ECONOMIC FACTORS:

o

work to support their families

o

attractiveness of work

o

attractiveness of military service

SCHOOL-RELATED FACTORS:

student oriented:

o

poor academic achievement in school, as measured

by

grades

test scores

grade retention (lag of 1 year or more

in age or grade level)

A-8

APPENDIX F. (continued)

o

behavioral problems in school

absenteeism

truancy

discipline problems (detention,

suspension)

o

not enrolled in college preparatory program

institution-oriented:

o

overcrowding

o

poor physical plant

o

school of substandard quality

o

conscious or unconscious racial or ethnic

prejudice and/or discrimination

o

impersonal authority structure between adults and

students--appears arbitrary, unfair and

ineffective

o

negative attitudes and expectations of teachers

o

lack or teacher autonomy-limits responses to the

needs of at-risk students

o

undifferentiated curriculum which narrowly defines

academic success

o

badly implemented educational reform policies and

procedures

o

inadequate or fragmented school support network

FAMILY-ORIENTED FACTORS:

o

low socioeconomic status

low income

unemployment

welfare recipient

o

English as a second language

o

single-parent family

separation

divorce

death

o

family trauma

illness

unemployment

family alcohol or drug abuse

o

low parental expectations

o

lack of parental guidance and discipline

o

lack of a positive family environment (absence

of learning materials and opportunities for

intellectual and social growth)

o

sexual, physical, or psychological abuse

o

school-age parent$

(Barber and McClellan, 1987; Gawda and Griggs, 1985; GAO, 1986; Hahn, 1987; IEL, 1987; Rumberger, 1987; Ruzicka, Novak, and Benisch, 1981; Van Den Heuval, 1986)

A-9

APPENDIX G. FORMULA FOR IDENTIFYING DROPOUTS
1. Obtain a list of the students entering the 9th grade for a given year (e.g. 1983-1984)
2. Check against the list of 9th grade students from the previous year. Mark off the names of students who were required to repeat the grade (e.g. 1982-1983).
3. Obtain a list of graduating seniors (19861987). Compare the class list of seniors against the class list of students who entered as 9th grade students four years earlier (1983-1984). Mark off the names of those students who are graduating. The remaining list of students is your "dropout list."
4. The dropout list must be checked against each personal record to discover if those students actually dropped out, transferred (or moved), were retained, or died.
5. Transfers are those students who have an official request for a transcript from another school in their personal record. Those students which transferred but have no official request for transcripts in their personal record are counted as dropouts.
6. The number of transfers is subtracted from both the entering 9th grade total and the 12th grade total.
7. Each year a list of the students retained must be kept. These students should be monitored to see if they drop out or finish school.
A-10

APPENDIX G. (continued)

EXAMPLE:

Entering 9th grade students (1983-1984): Retainees (1982-1983): Transfers:
TOTAL

406 - 66 - 31
309

Number of students not graduating: Repeaters from (1982-1983): Transfers: Early Graduates: Deceased Students: Repeaters from (1983-1984)
TOTAL

219 - 66 - 31
2 1 - 21
98

=d9=rt-oh=p~go"ru-a=tds--e-81-9-83---139"""4"0'=998 = 32%

*dropouts

164 = 44%

9th grade 1983-1984

+ 1982-1983 retainees (375)

*NOTE:

If you add in those students who were retained from 1982-1983, after they have been identified as either dropouts, transfers, or deceased, the dropout rate will increase. Thus, it is essential that an accurate list of retainees be kept from year to year.

A-11

APPENDIX H. GEORGIA GRADUATION RATES

SYSTEM

9th Grade Enrollment 1983-1984

Number of Graduates 1986-1987

Percent Graduates 1986-1987

Appling

367

206

56%

Atkinson

125

71

57%

Bacon

156

107

69%

Baker

(See Mitchell County)

Baldwin

557

275

49%

Banks

131

61

47%

Barrow

387

213

55%

Bartow

675

319

47%

Ben Hill

(See Fitzgerald City)

Berrien

249

139

56%

Bibb

1,531

1,168

76%

Bleckley

176

144

82%

Brantley

209

142

68%

Brooks

247

156

63%

Bryan

242

151

62%

Bulloch

576

335

58%

Burke

301

216

72%

Butts

237

124

52%

Calhoun

114

86

75%

Camden

332

188

57%

Candler

132

80

61%

Carroll

873

494

57%

Catoosa

765

419

55%

Charlton

174

71

41%

Chatham 3,339

1,461

44%

Chattahoochee (See Muscogee County)

Chattooga

275

145

53%

Cherokee 1,114

620

56%

Clarke

921

529

57%

Clay

(See Randolph County)

Clayton

2,796

1,937

69%

Clinch

105

79

75%

Cobb

5,369

3,922

73%

Coffee

440

273

62%

Colquitt

620

423

68%

Columbia

855

682

80%

Cook

216

121

56%

Coweta

715

456

64%

Crawford

136

75

55%

Crisp

344

181

53%

Dade

200

123

38%

Dawson

95

74

78%

Decatur

482

241

50%

DeKalb

6,883

5,393

78%

Dodge

334

208

62%

Dooly

144

61

42%

NonCompletions
1986-1987
44% 43% 31%
51% 53% 45% 53%
44% 24% 18% 32% 37% 38% 42% 28% 48% 25% 43% 39% 43% 45% 59% 56%
47% 44% 43%
31% 25% 27% 38% 32% 20% 44% 36% 45% 47% 62% 22% 50% 22% 38% 58%

A-12

SYSTEM

9th Grade Enrollment 1983-1984

Dougherty 1,494

Douglas

1,227

Early

288

Echols

50

Effingham 395

Elbert

358

Emanuel

348

Evans

137

Fannin

267

Fayette

863

Floyd

981

Forsyth

406

Franklin

325

Fulton

3,578

Gilmer

212

Glascock

82

Glynn

979

Gordon

189

Grady

357

Greene

183

Gwinnett 3,744

Habersham 348

Hall

1,154

Hancock

170

Haralson

260

Harris

236

Hart

391

Heard

129

Henry

564

Houston 1,211

Irwin

143

Jackson

164

Jasper

121

Jeff Davis 216

Jefferson 337

Jenkins

159

Johnson

162

Jones

331

Lamar

199

Lanier

114

Laurens

427

Lee

295

Liberty

609

Lincoln

122

Long

78

Lowndes

617

Lumpkin

168

Macon

215

Madison

306

Marion

229

Number of Graduates 1986-1987
1,036 741 182 31 262 230 199 98 192 703 547 325 210
2,416 132 60 472 202 231 103
2,784 271 623 144 156 124 190 78 366 902 87 117 86 129 128 96 84 217 94 66 272 160 346 104 45 357 124 137 189 141

Percent Graduates 1986-1987
69% 60% 63% 62% 66% 64% 57% 72% 72% 82% 66% 80% 65% 68% 62% 73% 48% 106% 65% 56% 74% 78% 54% 85% 60% 52% 49% 60% 65% 74% 61% 71% 71% 60% 38% 60% 52% 66% 47% 58% 64% 54% 57% 85% 58% 58% 74% 64% 62% 62%

NonCompletions
1986-1987
31% 40% 37% 38% 34% 36% 43% 28% 28% 18% 44% 20% 35% 32% 38% 27% 52%
35% 44% 26% 22% 46% 15% 40% 48% 51% 40% 35% 26% 39% 29% 29% 40% 62% 40% 48% 34% 53% 42% 36% 46% 43% 15% 42% 42% 26% 36% 38% 38%

A-13

SYSTEM

9th Grade Enrollment 1983-1984

Number of Graduates 1986-1987

McDuffie

378

221

McIntosh

182

110

Meriwether 483

267

Miller

132

83

Mitchell

289

128

Monroe

238

141

Montgomery 129

73

Morgan

236

114

Murray

417

207

Muscogee 2,657

1,582

Newton

797

388

Oconee

254

160

Oglethorpe 160

99

Paulding

686

343

Peach

418

227

Pickens

195

141

Pierce

201

152

Pike

164

105

Polk

482

318

Pulaski

148

108

Putnam

164

90

Quitman

(See Stewart County)

Rabun

145

103

Randolph

189

112

Richmond 2,880

1,598

Rockdale

903

639

Schley

(See Marion County)

Screven

278

136

Seminole

188

106

Spalding

870

498

Stephens

418

256

Stewart

141

81

Sumter

175

102

Talbot

88

75

Taliaferro (See Greene County)

Tattnall

287

158

Taylor

184

93

Telfair

190

76

Terrell

240

104

Thomas

419

241

Tift

499

399

Toombs

225

134

Towns

67

47

Treutlen

137

68

Troup

303

229

Turner

166

99

Twiggs

145

61

Union

142

98

Upson

310

170

Percent Graduates 1986-1987
58% 60% 55% 63% 44% 59% 57% 38% 50% 59% 49% 63% 62% 50% 54% 72% 76% 64% 66% 73% 55%
71% 59% 55% 71%
49% 56% 57% 61% 57% 58% 85%
55% 50% 40% 43% 57% 80% 60% 70% 50% 76% 60% 42% 69% 55%

NonCompletions
1986-1987
42% 40% 45% 37% 56% 41% 43% 52% 50% 41% 51% 37% 38% 50% 46% 28% 24% 36% 34% 27% 45%
29% 41% 45% 29%
51% 44% 43% 39% 43% 42% 15%
45% 50% 60% 57% 43% 20% 40% 30% 50% 24% 40% 58% 31% 45%

A-14

SYSTEM

9th Grade Enrollment 1983-1984

Number of Graduates 1986-1987

Percent Graduates 1986-1987

NonCompletions
1986-1987

Walker

861

406

47%

53%

Walton

597

335

66%

44%

Ware

332

223

67%

33%

Warren

149

61

41%

59%

Washington 297

147

50%

50%

Wayne

288

220

76%

24%

Webster

(See Marion County)

Wheeler

109

77

71%

29%

White

158

120

76%

24%

Whitfield 804

426

53%

47%

Wilcox

130

73

56%

44%

Wilkes

167

125

75%

25%

Wilkinson 204

155

76%

24%

Worth

409

219

53%

47%

CITY SYSTEMS

Americus

406

Atlanta 6,268

Bremen

92

Buford

116

Calhoun

417

Carrollton 282

Cartersville 181

Chickamauga 144

Commerce

114

Dalton

315

Decatur

221

Dublin

343

Fitzgerald 243

Gainesville 316

Hogansville 70

Jefferson 180

LaGrange

371

Marietta

425

Pelham

144

Rome

442

Social Circle 72

Thomaston

156

Thomasville 251

Trion

104

Valdosta

670

Vidalia

237

Waycross

285

West Point

62

227

56%

44%

3,679

58%

42%

61

66%

34%

71

61%

39%

156

47%

63%

217

77%

33%

125

69%

31%

94

65%

35%

69

55%

45%

251

80%

20%

115

52%

48%

203

59%

41%

165

68%

32%

184

58%

42%

42

60%

40%

85

47%

53%

209

56%

44%

222

52%

48%

60

42%

58%

229

52%

48%

41

57%

43%

96

61%

39%

183

73%

27%

54

52%

48%

395

59%

41%

145

61%

39%

155

54%

46%

(Counted with Troup County)

TOTALS* 95,708

60,018

63%

37%

*NOTE: Totals and averages do not include exceptional students.

A-15

APPENDIX I. STUDENT DISCIPLINE
STUDENT DISCIPLINE
A Publication of THE GEORGIA SCHOOL BOARDS ASSOCIATION. INC.
1987
Georgia School Boards Association 1240 Atkinson Road
Lawrenceville. Georgia 30245 (404) 962-2985
A-16

Table of Contents

Georgia School Board Association

iii

Foreword

iv

Introduction

1

Board Policies Regulating Conduct

3

Drafting Policies and Codes of Conduct

4

Suspensions and Expulsions

5

Corporal Punishment

8

Searches

11

Academic Sanctions

14

Miscellaneous Discipline Practices

15

Discipline of Handicapped Students

17

Public School Disciplinary Tribunal Act

18

Conduct of Hearings or Appeals by Local Boards

20

QBE and School Climate Management Programs

21

Summary

22

References

23

Appendices

25

A- Letter to Parents for Disciplinary Hearing

26

B Student Discipline Hearings Policy-Disciplinary

Tribunals

28

(. Suggested Hearing Procedure for Local Boards of

Education in Student Discipline Cases

31

ii

The Georgia School Boards Association
The Georgia Schools Boards Association (GSBA) is a non-profit organization of the state's 186 local school boards which have joined together voluntarily to improve public education through cooperative effort. Created in 1951, the association provides programs and services to improve the effectiveness of local school boards as policy makers of today's public schools. The purposes of the association are:
- To assist individual board members to become adequately informed concerning educational trends. problems and needs.
- To promote projects for the self-improvement of school board members and administrators.
- To render assistance to local hoard members and administrators.
- To work cooperatively with other groups and organizations for the improvement of public education.
- To provide, publish, and otherwise disseminate educational information and literature.
- To provide services to local boards of education. With its commitment to local boards of education, GSBA fills a unique place in the leadership of public education. It would take many nouns to describe GSBA: representative, advocate, information source. teacher of school boards. advisor. The one label GSBA strives for is leader.
iii

Foreword
Student Discipline is the second in a series of monographs to be published by the Georgia School Boards Association. This monograph is designed to provide basic information to board members. administrators. and school board attorneys concerning the laws which govern student discipline in Georgia's public schools.
Since laws and the interpretations of laws change over a period of time. board members and superintendents are encouraged to keep abreast of the mandates of law. Additionally. they should develop an ongoing dialogue with the school board attorney in order to alleviate potential problems.
GSBA is indebted to two individuals for the publication of this monograph. Sam Harben. attorney. Harben and Hartley. provided legal interpretations and opinions. Donna ONeal. GSBA Director of Information Services. served as editor.
We submit this monograph to the educational leaders of Georgia's school svstems. May it serve the members of local boards of education well.
Gary Ashley GSBA Executive Vice President
iv

Introduction
The appropriate and legal discipline of students for misconduct continues to be one of the most difficult problems confronting school boards and administrators today. Periodic surveys of the general public reveal that most people assume a lack of adequate discipline is prevalent in the classsroom and this assumption is a primary source of the electorate's lack of confidence with the public schools. However, the authority of school boards and administrators to administer discipline has been curtailed substantially in the previous two decades.
The courts have extended to children constitutional protections which require school boards to weigh the legal consequences of all their disciplinary rules and practices against the mandates of due process and equal protection of law as interpreted by the courts. Boards or administrators who impose discipline as remembered in the days of their own school years are hopelessly out of date and out of touch with the law. However. boards and administrators still possess much discretion and authority to deal with discipline problems and disruptive children, What is required today is adherence to basi-: constitutional principles: children are persons under the law who do not lose their constitutional rights when entering the schoolhouse door and. therefore. are entitled to rules and procedures respecting these rights before discipline is imposed.
Prior to the decision of the Supreme Court in Tinker 'v. Des /vloines Independent School District. I and Goss 0. Lopez, 2 most state courts. including Georgia's. viewed a local school board or administrator as acting in loco parentis or in the place of parents for the purpose of preserving order and discipline in the school. Whatever discipline was appropriate for the parent generally was available to the teacher. The Georgia courts extended to public school children few alternatives to following the dictates of strict school administrators. who were recognized as having the authority to suspend or expel students indefinitely in the best interest of the school system for conduct tolerated or ignored today without any right to a hearing before the local board of education.
In a landmark case before Georgia's Supreme Court about the turn of the century, students were suspended from school for the remainder of the school year because their mother entered their classroom and with conduct "unbecoming a lady" criticized their teacher's conduct and methods in the presence of her students.) The superintendent informed the children's father that he felt "duty-bound to suspend all your children" due to their mother's interference. An action was brought in court on behalf of the children alleging they were being punished only for the acts of their mother. The Georgia Supreme Court ruled that when a parent

publicly questions the decisions of a teacher in an offensive manner in the presence of her students, it is not only lawful but the duty of the administrators to exclude from the classroom the children of such a parent. The father of the children was held also to have a duty to restrain his wife from this conduct.
Georgia's view that school children had little, if any, constitutional protections continued until the late 1960s. The Supreme
Court of Georgia, before the Tinker and Goss cases, specifically
ruled that an ordinance of the City of Rome requiring the reading of the King James version of the Bible in all public schools of that city and the offering of daily prayers did not violate any fundamental constitutional right of its students:: nor did the expulsion of children who were Jehovah's Witnesses because they refused to salute the flag. 5 As the court noted in the later case. those students "who do not desire to conform to the [regulations of the school system] can seek their schooling elsewhere."6
Then came the 1960s. student activism. and the Vietnam war. Three students in Des Moines. Iowa were suspended from school because they defied their principal's directive by wearing black armbands to school as a silent protest to our country's involvement in the Vietnam conflict. The U.S. Supreme Court agreed to hear their appeal and reversed the decision of the Des Moines School Board by declaring that "students in school as well as out of school are 'persons' under our Constitution. They are possessed of fundamental rights which the State must respect."7 Students. like teachers. the Court held. "do not shed their constitutional rights at the schoolhouse door. "8
Tinker was followed six years later with the pronouncement of the U.S. Supreme Court in Goss L'. Lopez that the suspension of
the right to attend school by school officials deprives a student of a property right he or she possesses and requires that the student first be afforded due process of law including notice and the right to be heard before being barred from attending school due to misconduct.
With the extension of the first and fourteenth amendments of the Constitution to students. a new era dawned in student discipline. Many of the significant cases in recent years are ap-
plications or reinterpretations of the Tinker and Goss doctrines.
The intent of this monograph is to examine the current state of the law in controlling. deterring. and punishing student misconduct. with some modest suggestions as to policies and procedures school boards and administrators may wish to consider in guiding their judgments in this area of their responsibilities.
2

Board Policies Regulating Conduct
Local boards have the authority to adopt reasonable disciplinary rules and regulations for their school systems. A common approach is to develop and implement a code of student conduct which enumerates clearly the behavior which is undesirable, inappropriate, and considered misconduct subject to specified sanc tions. Student behavior which is considered inappropriate and, therefore, may be disallowed generally is that conduct which "detracts from an orderly environment in which learning can take place."g The rationale for any rule or regulation must be that the conduct or behavior which is to be adjudged misconduct and subject to adverse consequences is prohibited conduct which in terferes in some manner with the learning environment and prevents or inhibits during the school day teaching or learning from taking place.
The legal test to be applied is whether the rules or regulations are reasonably designed to protect students, school property. school personnel. and the educational climate. A rule may not be legally defensible if the need for that rule is not rationally con nected to the protection of students. teachers, property. or an en vironment where learning may occur.
Rules and regulations. as well as decisions of administrators and school boards on issues of appropriate discipline. have been held by the courts to be matters for school officials and not judges. unless in making and enforcing disciplinary rules, the school of ficials have acted illegally, arbitrarily. or discriminatorily .10 Where school officials act rationally and not in violation of clearly established rights of students. their judgments are not subject to attack simply because other school officials, judges. or parents may disagree as to the proper methodology to be used to achieve order and discipline within the school system. I I
However, when rules are adopted which have the effect of repressing students' constitutionally protected rights, such as free speech or other first amendment guarantees, the courts are required to weigh all circumstances to determine if a material disruption to the classroom or general breakdown of orderly discipline was probable and, therefore, justified the restriction. 12
Simply stated, a board has very broad discretion when making policy protecting the safety of students, teachers, or property, such as adoptinq drug and alcohol policies and behavior codes as long as the rules or consequences are not arbitrary nor applied in a discriminatory fashion. However, when basic constitutional rights are restricted, a board must be prepared to prove the necessity for the rule by clearly demonstrating that the conduct sought to be prohibited would clearly disrupt the classroom and substantially interfere with the learning environment.
In some instances, a board's imposition of punishment for con-
3

duct occurring off-campus has been allowed, but only where the evidence supported the conclusion that the conduct had a detrimental impact on other students, teachers, or school activities during the school day. The misconduct off-campus must carryover in some manner to the school day so that disruption to the classroom environment is the result of the student's misbehavior. Some courts, however, have prohibited school officials from punishing students for misconduct off-campus unless students had prior notice that such behavior would result in punishment and the behavior interfered with the welfare of the school system. 13
Two other cases involving off-campus conduct are worthy of note. In Klein v. Smilh. 14 a tenday suspension of a student who made a vulgar finger gesture to a teacher in a restaurant parking lot far from school unrelated to any school activity and not witnessed by anyone else was held to be violative of the student's first amendment rights. But. another case. Fe/lon v. Slear. affirmed a tenday suspension of a student who. in the presence of other students and in a public place. called a teacher a vulgar name.':>
Drafting Policies and Codes of Conduct
A local board is wise to examine periodically all of its policies and regulations which are designed to regulate student conduct. An annual assessment would be valuable for any board to perform. with appropriate involvement from its administrators. teachers. and in some instances. students. parents. and community leaders. The board should ascertain the purpose or goal for each rule and to what extent that goal was achieved because the particular rule was enforced. Any rule which seems ineffective or unnecessary should be repealed.
In evaluating existing rules or policies. a board may apply the following questions 16 to each existing policy:
(1) Is the policy legal according to the current decisions of the state and federal courts?
(2) Is the policy clear and reasonably free from ambiguity and vagueness?
(3) Will the policy withstand any challenge based upon arbitrary or capricious action in relation to its enforcement?
(4) Is the policy enforceable as written? (5) Is the policy indicative of fairness and nondiscrimination? (6) Is the policy reasonable and necessary to the preservation
of any orderly environment in which learning can take place? (7) Has the policy been communicated to all students who are
affected by s'Jch policy. and do they understand the policy. the rationale for the policy. the conduct prohibited. and the consequences which follow from its violation?
4

It is generally undesirable to have rules or policies regulating student behavior which are not necessary. When developing policies. it is prudent to explore all other alternatives to obtain the desired result so that a local system has the least number of rules and regulations restricting students' personal freedoms or rights as is feasible. 17
A board should have a rational reason for each rule and be able to justify its existence and penalties if attacked on grounds the rule or punishment is arbitrary or discriminatory. The rule should be clear and specific to avoid any charge that it is too general or overly broad to be understood or enforced. As much as possible. each student affected by the rule should understand the conduct forbidden by the rule. its rationale. and the sanctions which may follow from its violation. Some systems require all new students not only to read the code of conduct but to pass a written test on the code soon after becoming a student at the particular school.
The board should insist that all of its rules be consistently enforced and uniformly applied to all students without discrimination. Any sanctions for violating rules should be appropriate to the offense and should consider the student's age and past behavior. The board particularly should be aware that the more severe the sanctions. the greater procedural rights a student has before those sanctions may be imposed. In any event. a student should have the right to be heard to some degree as to any defense to allegations of misconduct or position as to appropriate punishment.,
Suspensions and Expulsions
School systems continue to rely upon suspensions and expul sions of students as punishment for violations of rules or regulations. Although the trend seems to be in the direction of in-school suspension and alternative schools. local boards and ad ministrators regularly resort to removing students from school for varying periods of time depending upon the severity of the misconduct or the prior behavior record of the offender.
The courts in most instances have affirmed the use of suspension and expulsion as disciplinary tools when not administered in an arbitrary. capricious. or discriminatory fashion. The decision as to when suspension or expulsion is appropriate is one for the local system after the student has been afforded procedural due
process of law. In Coss u. Lopez. \8 the Supreme Court determined
that suspension from school even for brief periods is an infringement of a constitutionally protected right in that the student has been deprived of a property interest by removing his legitimate entitlement to a public education. a right protected by the due process clause of the fourteenth amendment. The Court ruled that
5

at the very minimum. due process requires that a student be given some kind of notice and right to respond to the allegations concerning his misconduct. A student facing suspension for ten days or less must have "rudimentary" due process, which means that at least the student be given oral or written notice of the charges against him and. if he denies those charges, an explanation of the evidence in support of the charges and an opportunity to present his side of the story. A school administrator may provide rudimentary due process simply by informing the student as to the specific misconduct the student is alleged to have committed. If the student denies the allegation. he must be told on what evidence the allegation is based and be allowed the opportunity to present his explanation or defense. The administrator. if convinced of the student's guilt. may then suspend the student from school for a period not to exceed ten school days if otherwise permitted by local board policy. The administrator is not required to allow a student to call witnesses. confront the witnesses against him. nor have an attorney or his parents present at the time of the conference with the administrator. Another case has held that the entire procedure may take place in one conference in the office of the administrator. 19
However. if school officials propose to suspend a student for longer than ten days. or expel the student for the remainder of the school year or longer. then more than rudimentary due process must be granted. In such a case. a student is entitled to a written statement of charges and an opportunity to present a defense before the board or a hearing tribunal selected by the board. The case of Dixon L. Alabama Slate Board of Education. 20 seems to require that in addition to a written statement of the charges. a student is entitled to the names of all witnesses upon whose testimony the school system is relying and a brief summary of their expected testimony. However. a recent decision of the United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit. !'lash L'. Auburn University. 21 distinguished the Dixon case from one where students are present or have the right to be present at a hearing on the charges and are able to confront the witnesses against them. The court of appeals held that where students are given written notice of the specific acts of misconduct with which they are charged and the sanctions sought by the school system. an opportunity for a hearing before an impartial tribunal, the right to assistance by counsel, and the right to summon witnesses in their own behalf, then the constitutional requirements of due process have been met.
The careful school administrator, however, will continue to draft notices of charges against a student if long-term (more than ten school days) suspension or expulsion is sought in order to avoid procedural due process issues in contested hearings. It is recommended that the written notice contain not only the specific charge of misconduct but a reference to the applicable school policy or discipline code involved and the maximum punishment which may be imposed by the board or hearing tribunal. In addition, the ad-
6

ministrator would be wise to include a brief summary of the evidence expected to be presented. A list of known witnesses who will testify in support of the charges should be included, although witnesses who are not known but are subsequently discovered would net be barred from testifying. A summary of the due process rights of the student would complete a carefully drawn charge letter. A sample letter is included in Appendix A.
A local board would be wise to adopt policies relative to the use of short-term and long-term suspensions. For short-term suspensions. the board should determine under what conditions a principal or other school administrator may suspend a student and for how many days. not to exceed ten school days. Although the courts require only rudimentary due process for short-term suspen sions. the board may choose to include additional requirements such as involvement of parents or written notice to the parents of all of the circumstances surrounding the suspension.
As to the use of long-term suspensions or expulsions (more than ten days), the board's policy should again specify under what circumstances a school administrator may seek long-term suspensions or expulsions. The board will want to provide constitutional procedures for notice to the student and parents and for a hear ing before the board itself or before a tribunal or hearing officer with the right to appeal to the board.
In most cases. the severity of the punishment is a matter for the local board. Attacks made upon the appropriateness or ex cessiveness of the punishment by parents or students have been unsuccessful. The use of long-term suspension or expulsion for the remainder of the school year for violations of drug and alcohol policies generally have been approved by the courtsY Although in some instances the courts have found the punishment to be harsh and seemingly inappropriate. the courts recognize the authority of the board to impose such punishments as in their judg ment is needed to maintain the order and discipline of the local school system. The courts have affirmed such punishment in the absence of evidence that the sanctions imposed were arbitrary or discriminatory or otherwise violative of constitutional protections afforded to students.
It is recommended that a board determine in a discipline code the maximum punishment which may be imposed for specific offenses so that students will have prior notice of how the board views particular misconduct. Although the courts have not always reo quired as an essential element of due process that a student have prior notice of the punishment which could be imposed for a specific offense, the local system may avoid due process disputes by including in its discipline code the maximum sanctions which the board may impose for specific violations.
7

Corporal Punishment
Despite sharply divided opinions as to its effectiveness or educational value, corporal punishment continues to be widely used in our public schools, with no apparent trend toward its elimination. Many teachers seem to rely upon paddling or spanking as a technique to control the classroom, even though some teachers have been prosecuted criminally or sued civilly because of parental allegations that excessive force was used in its administration.
The Supreme Court heard a challenge in 1977 to the use of cor poral punishment in public schools as being violative of the eighth and fourteenth amendments to the United States Constitution. In Ingraham v. Wriqhl. 23 the Supreme Court ruled that the use of cor poral punishment in schools does not constitute cruel and unusual punishment in violation of the eighth amendment since primarily the eighth amendment protects those convicted of crimes and does not apply to disciplinary paddling of public school children. The majority opinion noted that public schools were open to public scrutiny. Teachers and administrators are subject to both civil and criminal liability under state law for any punishment exceeding that which is reasonably necessary. The Court determined also that the due process clause of the fourteenth amendment does not require prior notice and a hearing before a student is paddled in that a requirement of prior notice and a hearing would significantly burden the use of corporal punishment as a disciplinary matter. However. four of the nine justices dissented and urged that disciplinary spanking of school children was covered by the eighth amendment which would prohibit excessive or barbaric force by school officials.
Georgia law specifically authorizes local boards of education to adopt policies and regulations relating to the use of corporal punishment bv principals and teachers. 2ol However. the use of cor poral punishment is limited bv the following requirements::!:>
(1) The corporal punishment shall not be excessive or unduly severe:
(2) Corporal punishment shall never be used as a first line of punishment for misbehavior unless the pupil is informed beforehand that specific misbehavior can occasion its use: provided. however. that corporal punishment may be employed as a first line of punishment for those acts of misconduct which are so antisocial or disruptive in nature as to shock the conscience:
(3) Corporal punishment must be administered in the presence of a principal or assistant principal. or the designee of the
. principal or assistant principal. employed by the board of education authorizing such punishment. and the principal or assistant principal. or the designee of the principal or assistant principal. must be informed beforehand and in the
8

presence of the pupil of the reason for the punishment: (4) The principal or teacher who administered corporal punish-
ment must provide the child's parent. upon request. a written explanation of the reasons for the punishment and the name of the principal or assistant principal or designee of the principal or assistant principal. who was present: provided. however. that such an explanation shall not be used as evidence in any subsequent civil action brought as result of the corporal punishment: and (5) Corporal punishment shall not be administered to a child whose parents or legal guardian has upon the day of the enrollment of the pupil filed with the principal of the school a statement from a medical doctor licensed in Georgia stating that it is detrimental to the child's mental or emotional stability, If a principal or te-acher administers corporal punishment in accordance with board policy and the limitations quoted above. then Georgia law insulates that employee from being held accountable or liable in any criminal or civil action based upon the administration of corporal punishment. if it was administered in good faith and was not excessive or unduly severe. 26 There is at least the implication that if a principal or teacher administers corporal punishment in violation of the limitations placed upon the use of physical punishment then such employee is subject to suit for damages or criminal prosecution for battery or both. There is little guidance as to how corporal punishment is to be administered. i.e. whether by hand or a paddle or some other object. Nor is there a specific directive as to which portion of the anatomy is to be the recipient of the force administered as punishment. although the posterior seems to be the favored and generally accepted object. In Maddox u. Boutwell. 27 a civil action was brought for damages following the administration of corporal punishment to a child alleged to have been excessive and unduly severe. The student had been given a choice between suspension and a paddling. The student chose the paddling and was given four "licks" with a wooden paddle. twenty-four inches long, five inches wide. and one quarter to one-half inch thick. The paddling resulted in pain and bruises_ The court noted that it was to be anticipated that corporal punishment will produce pain and potential for bruising. Some short-term discomfort. according to the court. is to be expected from paddling. The court also found that proper procedures had been followed in the administration of corporal punishment in this case and the school officials were immune from suit. However. the court found a distinction between this case and an Ohio case on the facts where the Ohio child similarly had received three licks but the child's buttocks were badly bruised and blistered and the child had been prevented from lying on his back for a week. 28 There are two recent decisions of the federal courts which hold
9

that excessive corporal punishment may constitute a violation of substantive due process protected by the fourteenth amendment
and give rise to a claim for damages pursuant to 42 U.S.c. 1983.
In Garcia u. Miera, 29 the U. S. Court of Appeals ruled that good faith immunity would not protect a school principal whose corporal punishment was so severe and excessive as to inflict severe bruises and cuts. The case of Jefferson v. Ysleta Independent School District3 held that where a second grade student was tied to a chair for an entire school day as an educational exercise and not as discipline or punishment, the child's constitutional rights were violated. and the school officials were subject to suit.
Permitting a parent to administer corporal punishment to his own child in the presence of the child's classmates has been held as sufficient evidence to support the dismissal of the principal of an elementary schooP\ Where the local board found that the punishment administered to the child by his father with a belt in the presence of other students was too severe, the principal was held accountable for that punishment since he permitted the punishment to take place and in fact witnessed its administration.
Children who are handicapped and are receiving special education services may be subject to corporal punishment as are nonhandicapped children. but it is advisable for school officials to determine from the placement committee or special education administrators under which circumstances. if any, corporal punish ment would be appropriate.
In adopting policies permitting the use of corporal punishment. a board should consider in addition to the other limitations provided by la\\', the requirement that any corporal punishment be administered in private and only by a certificated teacher or ad ministrator. If a teacher or administrator is the victim of some misconduct on the part of a student. it would be prudent for someone other than the victim to administer corporal punishment if that is determined to be the appropriate sanction.
Many cases seem to arise from incidents in which the one administering the paddling is angry or upset by some occurrence causing a perception on the part of the child that the punishment was excessive. An administrator certainly should ascertain that anyone he or she authorizes to administer or witness corporal punishment will do so in conformity with law and policy. An ad ministrator should be cautioned not to permit all teachers to ad minister corporal punishment until it can be determined that each teacher has the requisite experience and judgment to do so in com pliance with policy and law.
Finally. a board should consider at what age it is inappropriate for corporal punishment to be used. It may be that a board upon careful reflection will find that the conduct of very young children can be controlled without the use of paddlings. Also, children who have reached puberty pose potential problems when paddling or spanking is administered. It has been suggested by some students
10

in their adolescence that paddling was motivated by needs other than to promote discipline.
In any event, a board should stipulate by policy as to the behavior which may result in paddling. Board policy shall permit parents to object to corporal punishment at any time. although the objection is not filed on the first day of school as the law prescribes.
Searches
The legal right of teachers and administrators to search students who are suspected of possessing illegal or fo~bidden items was resolved in a 1985 decision of the U.S. Supreme Court in New Jersey v. T.L.O.32 The question in the T.L.O. case was to what extent, if any. the fourth amendment to the Constitution prohibits teachers and principals from searching the persons of students for suspected contraband. The Court held that the fourth amendment protections against unreasonable searches do indeed apply to sear ches conducted by public school officials.
The facts in T.L.O. are important to understanding the significance of the Court's ruling. The case involved a fourteen year old girl accused of smoking in the girls' restroom. She was taken to the principal's office where she denied the accusation. The principal opened her purse and found a package of cigarettes and in removing the cigarettes to confront her with circumstantial evidence of her smoking, he also noticed a package of cigarette rolling papers. He suspected the use of marijuana and. therefore. searched her purse more thoroughly and discovered a small amount of marijuana. empty plastic bags, a note card indicating that other students owed her money. and other evidence implicating her in dealing with marijuana. The police were called and T.L.O. was charged with delinquency. She raised the constitutionality of the search and seizure and urged the exclusion from evidence of the discovery of marijuana.
The case turned on whether the principal's search of T.L.O. was reasonable under the circumstances or was violative of her fourth amendment protection. The Supreme Court adopted a "reasonableness" test to be applied. The Court held that a student may be searched by a school official when there exists reasonable grounds for suspecting that the search will turn up evidence that the student had violated or is violating either the law or the rules of the school. However, the search as actually conducted must be reasonably related in scope to the circumstances which justified the interference in the first place. The search, in other words, must not be excessively intrusive in light of the age and sex of the student and the nature of the infraction.
The importance of the decision in T.L.O. is to recognize that principals or teachers may search students when there exists a
11

reasonable suspicion that the student is in possession not only of illegpl substances but any item contrary to school rules. The reasonable suspicion is less than the standard required of police officers, which generally requires "probable cause," but is more than a mere hunch that the student may be in possession of something improper. A reasonable suspicion to justify the search of a particular student may arise from highly unusual conduct con sistent with the belief that the student is engaged in unauthorized activity. such as furtive, evasive, or hostile conduct, information supplied by another student, and other facts or circumstances which school officials may consider in the totality of the cir cumstances. It would seem logical that several students may be searched if a reasonable suspicion arises that one or more of the students in that particular group is in possession of an illegal or prohibited substance. For example, if the principal observes a group of students on campus appearing to pass around a handrolled cigarette but attempting to conceal its presence, the principal may reasonably suspect that one or more of the students in that particular group is in possession of marijuana and. therefore. search all of them. Obviously. a principal may not search groups of students in a fishing expedition to determine if illegal substances are in possession of any of them.
I he legality ot searching school lockers or desks of students seems to turn on the issue of whether students have a right to expect a degree of privacy as to their lockers or desks against unreasonable intrusion by school officials. When the school has made it clear in its student handbook or discipline code that the school has not relinquished control of lockers and desks and reserves the right to inspect or search the lockers without prior notice to detect health or safety problems or violations of school rules. then general searches of all lockers would be valid. 33
Searches of students' automobiles have produced few decisions in our courts. In a Florida case. State v. D. T. W .. 34 the court held that school officials were permitted to routinely patrol student parking lots and if an illegal substance was observed in plain view. an interior search of the car was reasonable. It may be permissible for school officials to require as a condition to a student being permitted to park his or her car on campus that the student agree to a search if there is a reasonable suspicion that the car contains illegal or contraband substances.
Strip searches of students appear to be clearly an excessive intrusion of the privacy of students. In one particular mass search of students case, Bellnier v. Lund,35 school officials were concerned with the disappearance of three dollars in a fifth grade classroom. In an effort to find the money, teachers inspected first the children's coats, their pockets, and shoes. Then the teachers required the students, in the privacy of their respective restrooms, to remove their clothing in order for the teachers to conduct a strip search. A suit for damages by some parents followed. The court
12

found that the search clearly was invalid and the teachers subject to civil penalties. The court did suggest that it may have reached a different result if the search had been focused on finding items which were extremely dangerous or posed a substantial risk to the student body, although strip searching of students in most instances has been held to be invalid.
The use of canines to aid in searches is subject to the same reasonableness test applied to the search of the persons of students. In Jones v. Latexo SchooL District. 36 students were suspended for possessing illegal substances as a result of the use of a drug-detecting dog to sniff all students. The court found that school searches using dogs must be supported by individualized suspicion that particular students are suspected of possessing drugs or other contraband on school grounds and. therefore. invalidated the searches. Although another case in a different circuit approved the use of dogs to detect drug possession even when there existed no basis to suspect any individual student.37 the rule pronounced in the Jones case appears to be a more sound approach.
In 1982. the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals decided in Horton L'. Goose Creek Independent School District J8 that the use of canines to sniff students is a search which must be based upon individualized suspicion for each student sniffed. However. the sniffing of the exterior of all lockers and automobiles was not considered a search protected by the fourth amendment and was allowed without requiring individual suspicion as to each locker or automobile sniffed by the dog.
While there are many legal issues yet to be determined as to searches in schools. boards of education may generally provide by policy some guidelines to assist administrators. Students and parents should be told that lockers and desks are subject to routine search and students have no expectancy of privacy as to the contents of their lockers or desks. However. persons of students should not be searched unless a reasonable suspicion exists that particular students are in possession of illegal substances or contraband. The use of drugsniffing canines should be restricted to lockers and automobiles and not involve students themselves.
The privacy of students who are to be searched should be respected by requiring in certain instances the search to be conducted by an administrator of the same sex and in privacy. The particular substance being sought is an important factor in deter mining the extent to which the search may be intrusive. If illegal substances are found after a reasonable search. the police may be involved and the evidence obtained admissible in a criminal proceeding.39 Strip searches should never be permitted.
13

Academic Sanctions
The imposition of academic sanctions as punishment for misconduct has been controversial and the subject of litigation in several jurisdictions. Some issues seem to be settled; several are still in doubt.
It seems clear that a student may be denied credit for all work missed while suspended. A board is not obligated to allow a student to make up work lost while on suspension. If suspension results in failure for the entire semester, the courts have held that this consequence of suspension is permissible and not excessive or unreasonable punishment for misbehavior.
The State Board of Education of Georgia has approved a local board's policy prohibiting the possession of alcoholic beverages at a school function which provided as punishment for the first offense expulsion from school for the remainder of the semester and total loss of credits for the entire semester.40 The issue before the State Board was whether the local board had abused its discre tion by revoking credits already earned for an offense at a school function unrelated to the classroom. The State Board found that in such matters local boards have broad discretionary powers and the local board's policy was not arbitrary nor capricious. The State Board reasoned that regardless of when a student's offense occurs during the school term, all students are treated equally in that every student receives the same suspension and discipline: loss of credit for the entire semester. Since local boards nave an in terest in discouraging the use of alcohol or drugs, the local board's policy appeared to the State Board to be reasonable and within the local board's authority. The State Board declined to follow a Pennsylvania case which held in essence that a local board could not change a student's grade as part of a discipline policy for misconduct unrelated to the achievement being graded. However, the statutory laws of Pennsylvania expressed an intent not to use grades as a discipline matter, which the Georgia legislature had not done,
An issue may now be raised as to the intent of the Quality Basic Education (QBE) Act in this regard, as discussed in a later section. Some local boards have determined not to adopt policies which result in academic sanctions for misconduct. Some boards believe it is counterproductive to suspend a student for a few days with no opportunity to makeup work which will result in the student's failure for the entire semester and then to reinstate the student when he or she has no chance of passing any subjects causing the student to be unmotivated and probably to continue to be a discipline problem.
Some local boards have policies which require failing grades for excessive absences or exceeding a particular number of unexcused absences. The State Board of Education has upheld a local
14

policy which required failing grades if a student exceeded the permissible number of days that the student could be absent. The State Board found that the local board's judgment that attendance is an integral part of the learning process without regard necessarily to the grades the student earned on tests was within the discretion of the local board. The local board could find that a student would learn information from class which is not generally tested or capable of being tested and attendance is, therefore. a legitimate part of the grading process. 41
In some states, local boards have attempted to impose academic sanctions for unexcused absences not only by refusing to allow the student to make up work when absent but by lowering the student's grades as a punitive measure. In Kentucky. a local board provided by policy that five points would be deducted for every unexcused absence from each class during the grading period and. when challenged. the court of appeals held the policy to be void.-l2
School systems generally do not have the authority to withhold academic course credit or high school diplomas already earned solely for disciplinary reasons. It is not an unusual phenomenon that high school seniors. after completing their final exams and prior to graduation. will engage in some misconduct which is sometimes severe enough to cause a local board to want to revoke academic credit or withhold a diploma. Some courts have held that a student may be denied the privilege of participating in the graduation ceremony as a penalty for misconduct.-l 3 However. other courts have held that a student could not be denied such participation for disciplinary reasons.-l4
It again seems quite important that students receive prior notice as to any academic consequences for misconduct. Whether a stu dent will be permitted to make up missed work following suspension should be specified clearly in board policy or in a student disciplinary code. Similarly. the academic consequences for unex cused absences or excessive absences should be made clear to students and parents. If students are to be denied participation in extracurricular activities. school organizations or clubs. or participation in graduation exercises as a consequence for misbehavior. they certainly should have prior notice.
Miscellaneous Discipline Practices
School systems have a variety of options as to disciplinary techniques or practices which generally do not infringe upon protected rights of students. Detention of students either during free time or after school as a penalty for misbehavior is a common method of enforcing discipline. The use of detention for short periods probably does not require even rudimentary due process.45 But careful administrators and teachers will certainly inform a student prior to detaining him or her as to the offense the student
15

has committed, and the student will be permitted to explain the behavior.
When detention results in a student not being able to ride home on the school bus, some parents have insisted that the school system is required to provide transportation and not impose that burden upon the parents. It would be permissible for a principal or teacher to take the student home but probably that is not required. The parents can be compelled to provide other transportation. If parents do not have transportation for their children or are unable to provide transportation, then different issues may be involved and the principal and teachers should consider other alternatives. The failure of the school system to provide transportation because the student was detained after school would seem to be improper only when an unreasonable hardship for the stu dent or parents results or the student's well being is somehow endangered.
Many local boards allow administrators to suspend students from the school bus for indefinite periods of time following misconduct on the bus. Again. such suspensions do not rise to the level of a due process violation. unless the suspension from riding the school bus results in suspension from school itself because there is no other means available to the student to attend school. Ad ministrators should consider whether unusual circumstances or hardships exist. The fact that the parents are inconvenienced is not enough. When an imposition results to the parents' schedule. the parents are included in the disciplinary process which may be benficial to the school system.
Some school systems have assigned students work detail as punishment. Generally. this would seem to be permissible as long as the chores assigned are reasonable for students and not dangerous nor harmful to them. Washing black boards and windows and picking up trash are time honored means of discipline and within the discretion of school officials.
The trend within public schools is toward the use of in-house suspension or alternative schools rather than suspension or expulsion of students. If administrators propose to reassign students to an in-house suspension program or alternative school for some period of time even in excess of ten days. and neither program results in a loss of the privilege of attending school or earning academic credit. then only rudimentary due process is needed.
The State Board of Education has been authorized by the QBE Act to create an in-school suspension program. 46 The legislature stated that it was the policy of the state to reassign disruptive students "to isolated. individually oriented in-school suspension programs rather than to suspend or expel such students from school. "47 Therefore. the state policy is for students to continue to progress relative to classroom assignments and for local systems "to provide individually oriented instruction in essential skills and knowledge areas for which low achievement levels are
16

contributing to the students' adjustment problems. "48 It would appear that the movement in Georgia is to curtail
substantially, if not eliminate, the use of suspension and expul sions from school in all but the most severe and incorrigible cases. The philosophy of the QBE Act seems to be that academic dif ficulties and low achievement are more often the cause of disciplinary problems rather than the converse. In developing policies and particularly in beginning strategic planning, local boards should examine this proposition in determining the type and quality of their disciplinary policies and codes of student conduct.
Discipline of Handicapped Students
Students who have been identified as handicapped and are receiving special education services under the provisions of the Education for All Handicapped Children's Act must be viewed differently by school systems in determining what is appropriate discipline to be administered to these students.
The leading case affecting Georgia is S I L'. TurtinglOn. -lq In the Turlinglon decision. the U.S. Court of i-\ppeals was asked to decide the appropriateness of the expulsion of nine mentallv impaired students from Florida schools for disruptive behavior ranging from sexual acts against other students to insubordination. vandalism. and use of profane language. The parents argued that their children were not subject to expulsion because of their handicapping conditions. The parents insisted that federal law and regulations prevented a school system from expelling their children because expulsion would be a change in the placement of their children requiring prior approval by a placement committee of school officials and the parents themselves. The court of appeals agreed that the expulsion of handicapped children is a change in placement. The court held that before long-term suspension or expulsion may occur. it must first be determined whether the misconduct of the students in issue is a manifestation of the handicapping conditions of the students. The court emphasized that the decision of whether the misbehavior of handicapped children is a manifestation of their handicapping conditions must be determined by a school committee similar to a placement committee which meets and determines whether a causal relationship exists between the disability or handicapping conditions of the student and the particular misconduct. Parents are not required to be present nor agree with the decision. If the disciplinary committee finds that the misbehavior is not a manifestation of the handicap. then the student may be expelled or suspended for longer than ten days.
if the procedures set out in the Goss case are followed. However.
the court declined to permit complete cessation of special educa-
17

tiona I services mandated by federal law during the time the students are suspended or expelled from school.
The effect of S 1 v. Turlington has been to limit long-term suspen
sion or expulsion of handicapped children due to the court's reo quirement that some educational services be continued during the expulsion period. Shortterm suspensions or temporary suspensions not in excess of ten days are permitted and do not require
the same protections for students mandated by S 1 v. Turlin9ton.50.
The use of shortterm suspensions may be an approP.fiate disciplinary technique and will not constitute a change in placement unless cumulative short-term suspensions constitute in reality a long-term suspension or expulsion.
The U.S. Supreme Court has decided to hear an appeal in the
case of Doe v. Maher51 which may modify the effect of the Turlington case as to the requirement that school systems must con
tinue to provide educational services for students who have been expelled. The Supreme Court will review the decision of the court of appeals which held. in part. that when handicapped children are excluded from school for longer than ten days for behavior which is not handicap-related. all educational services may be terminated.
As to handicapped children who are discipline problems. particularly those children who have behavior disorders or are severely emotionally disturbed. the usual procedure is for a placement com mittee to review the appropriateness of the child's current placement and determine whether a more restrictive placement is advisable. The placement committee has the responsibility for deciding what is appropriate discipline for handicaprelated behavior. However. when a child's behavior poses a threat to the safety of other children. such as the sale of illegal drugs to students on campus, then it may be appropriate for school systems to con sider these students for long-term suspension and expulsion and to follow the procedures required by the courts.
Public School Disciplinary Tribunal Act
The General Assembly in 1979 authorized local boards of education to establish by policy or rule the use of disciplinary hearing officers. panels. or tribunals of school officials to impose suspen sion or expulsion in cases involving student misconduct.52 Essentially. the General Assembly allowed local boards to use a hearing officer or a panel or tribunal to conduct hearings in cases where expulsion or suspension for longer than ten school days is proposed. The Act provides for appeals to the local board from decisions of hearing officers or panels or tribunals when long-term suspension or expulsion is imposed.53
18

In 1984, the General Assembly amended the Public School Disciplinary Tribunal Act54 to require local boards to appoint a disciplinary hearing officer, panel, or tribunal of school officials to hold a disciplinary hearing in any of the following cases:
(1) When a student is charged with committing an assault or battery upon any teacher. other school official. or employee:
(2) When a student is charged with an assault or battery upon
another student if. in the discretion of the school principal.
the misconduct could justify the expulsion or long-term suspension of the student: or (3) When a student is charged with intentionally causing substantial damage on the school premises to personal property belonging to a teacher. other school official. employee. or student. if. in the discretion of the school principal. the misconduct could justify the expulsion or long-term suspension of the student. The board is required to establish a policy which mandates that in the event of an assault or battery upon a teacher or other school employee by a student, a complaint will be filed with the school administration and a hearing will be conducted by a hearing officer. panel, or tribunal. The Act defines the type of notice to be given to the student and parents and the due process rights of all of the parties to the proceeding. For an example of a letter to parents. refer to Appendix A. The Act compels a decision to be entered upon the evidence submitted with the right to appeal the decision by either party to the local board of education. The Act specifies that a recording or written record of the hearing be made and the time within which action must be taken or appeals filed. S5 The school administrator. disciplinary hearing otticer. or panel may report the incident to law enforcement agencies and the Act grants immunity from criminal or civil proceedings for reporting the incident. 56 In 1986. the General Assembly excluded from the provisions of this particular Act children in kindergarten through grade threeY The legislative purpose of mandating the use of a hearing officer or tribunal in certain instances seems to have been motivated by a concern of the General Assembly that in certain instances teachers were not protected adequately under existing law from assaults committed by students upon them. The net result of the Act is to compel the use of the disciplinary hearing officer or tribunal for certain kinds of offenses committed by students while permitting boards in other types of offenses to hear the case itself when long-term suspension or expulsion is sought. For example, if a student strikes a teacher, then the case must be heard by a hearing officer or tribunal with the right to appeal to the local board by either the student or teacher. But if that same student is in possession of an illegal substance, then the board may hear the
19

case Itselt, !t the principal or superintendent believes long-term suspension or expulsion is appropriate. , The board should adopt a policy consistent with the mandates of the Act so that it is clear what type of cases are to be heard by a hearing officer or tribunal, how that hearing officer or tribunal is to be selected, and the appeal procedures to be utilized. If a board chooses to use a hearing officer or tribunal in all cases, then board policy should so specify. An example of a policy regarding disciplinary tribunals is provided in Appendix B.
Conduct of Hearings or
Appeals by Local Boards
In student discipline cases when long-term suspension or expulsion is sought, due process requires that the board, tribunal, or hearing officer be impartial and committed to decide the matter only on the basis of evidence presented during the hearing process. For a suggested hearing procedure, refer to Appendix C. If a member of a tribunal or local board cannot act impartially or has in some manner prejudged the facts to be heard, that member should disqualify himself or herself from any involvement in the proceeding. Ordinarily, the tribunal or local board should have the advice of an attorney on questions of law, such as the admissibility of evidence. It is improper normally for an attorney advising the local board or tribunal to also serve in a prosecutoral role. The disciplinary proceeding and its minutes or records are closed to the public and not subject to the Open Meetings Act or the Open Records Act.58
The burden of proof to establish that the student has committed the particular acts of misconduct is upon the administrator presenting the case against the student. The standard of proof is not the same as in a criminal proceeding; a preponderance of the evidence is all that is required to establish the charges. Generally, technical rules of evidence do not apply, and some hearsay evidence may be received. 59 A student should have the right to present evidence on his own behalf and to call witnesses to present testimony in support of the defense. Hearsay evidence is admissible in student disciplinary proceedings in that the strict due process requirements of criminal trials do not apply to student disciplinary processes.60 As one court stated:
Basic fairness and integrity of the fact finding process are the guiding stars. Important as they are, the rights at stake in a school disciplinary hearing may be fairly determined upon the "hearsay" evidence of school administrators charged with the duty of investigating the incidents. We decline to place upon a board of laymen the duty of observing and applying the common law rule of evidence.61
20

Similarly, some courts have held that the protection against self incrimination afforded by the fifth amendment to the Constitution applies only to criminal cases, and a student may be required to testify in a student disciplinary hearing 62 with adverse inferences drawn if the student refuses to testify.63 At the close of the hearing, the local board, tribunal, or hearing officer will deliberate and decide the merits of the case presented in a closed session. The board must exercise its independent judgment and not "rubber stamp" the recommendations of its professional staff.54
The local board or tribunal will impose an appropriate disciplinary measure if the charges are sustained and, on that issue, the hearing body may consider the prior disciplinary record of the student. If a hearing officer or tribunal is used. then the board is required to establish an appeal procedure whereby an appeal must be granted by the local board when the punishment imposed is long-term suspension or expulsion. 65
Any party dissatisfied with the decision of the local board has the right to appeal to the State Board of Education by filing in writing a notice of appeal within thirty days of the decision of the local board.66
aBE and School Climate Management Programs
The QBE Act mandates that the State Board of Education establish a state-wide school climate management program to assist local schools and school systems requesting assistance to develop school climate improvement and management processes which will have the effect of decreasing student suspensions. expulsions. dropouts, and other negative aspects of the total school environment. 67 The Act also requires the State Board. upon the request of a local school system. to produce model codes of behavior and discipline and guidelines for the application and administration of such codes.
It would seem obvious that one of the purposes of the QBE Act is to cause local boards of education to view discipline as an extension of and directly related to the entire instructional program of the school system. The premise upon which the General Assembly based these requirements is that positive gains in student achievement scores and the quality of instruction afforded students within the school system are tied to the type of discipline codes and sanctions for misconduct existing in local school systems. If local boards begin to view discipline as an integral part of their overall institutional program, new methods of discipline must be devised. Discipline viewed as instruction, not punishment. may be an idea whose time has come.
21

Summary
The legal history of student discipline has seen a dramatic shift from the approval of arbitrary and authoritarian discipline prac tices to requiring more enlightened discipline which recognizes fundamental constitutional rights of children. No longer may school officials rely solely on the doctrine of in loco parentis. Students must be seen as persons with fundamental rights not shed at the schoolhouse door. The fourteenth amendment protection of due process of law has been extended to students who are sub ject to stringent penalties for misconduct.
School boards and administrators need to be familiar with reo cent developments in the law, judicial as well as legislative, and revise their policies and procedures to protect students from illegal discipline and school employees from litigation.
22

References
1 393 U.S. 503 (1969). 2 419 U.S. 565 (1975). 3 Board of Education of Cartersville v. Purse, 101 Ga. 422 (1897). 4 Wilkerson v. Rome, 152 Ga. 762 (1921). 5 Leoles v. Landers. 184 Ga. 580 (1937). 61d. at 587. 7 Tinker v. Des. Moines Independent School District. 393 U.S..at 511. 81d. at 506. 9 National School Resource Network. Resource Handbook on
Discipline Codes (1980). 10 Dunn u. Tyler Independent School District. 460 F.2d 137 (5th Cir.
1972). 11 Id. at 145-146. See also Houston LJ. Prosser. 361 F. Supp. 295
(N.D.Ga. 1973); Steuenson u. Wheeler County Board of Educa tion. 306 F. Supp. 97 (S.D.Ga. 1969). 12 Tin/fer C'. Des ,"Yloines Independent School District. 393 U.S. 503: Blackwell C'. fssaquena County Board of Education. 363 F.2d 749 ( 1966). 13 Thomas C'. Board of Education. 607 F.2s 1043 (2d Cir. 1979) cerl. denied 444 U.S. 1081 (1980). 11635 F. Supp. 1440 (D.i"\e. 1986). IS 423 F. Supp. 767 (N.D.Pa. 1976). 16 Resource Handbook on Discipline Codes. supra note 9. at 271. 17 i"kCarthy [, CambronMcCabe. Public School Law: Teachers' and Students' Rights. 204 (2d ed. 1987). 18 419 U.S. 565. 19 Boynton u. Casey, 543 F. Supp. 995 (D.Me. 1982). 20 Dixon c. Alabama State Board of Education, 294 F.2d 299 (5th Cir. 1971). 21 Nash C'. Auburn University, 812 F.2d 655 (11th Cir. 1987). 22 Petrey C'. Flangher. 505 F.Supp. 1087 (E.D.Ky. 1981); Appeal of McClellan, 475 A.2d 867 (Pa. Commw. Ct. 1984). 23 Ingraham v. Wright, 430 U.S. 651 (1977). 24 O.e.G.A. 20-2-730 through 732. 25 O.e.G.A. 20.2-731. 26 O.e.G.A. 20-2-732. 27 Maddox v. Boutwell, 176 Ga. App. 492 (1985). 28 Chrysinger v. Decatur, 3 Ohio App. 3d 286, 445 N.E. 2d 260 (1982) cited in Maddox v. Boutwell at 494. 29 Garcia v. Miera. 817 F.2d 650 (10th Cir. 1987). 30 Jefferson v. Ysleta Independent School District, 817 F.2d 303 (5th Cir. 1987).
23

31 Sharpley v. Hall County Board of Education, 251 Ga. 54 (1983). 32 New Jersey v. T.L.O., 469 U.S. 325 (1985). 33 Zamora v. Pomeroy, 639 F.2d 662 (10th Cir. 1981). 34 State v. D. T. W.. 425 So.2d 1383 (Fla. App. 1983). 35 Bellnier v. Lund. 438 F.Supp. 47 (N.D.NY. 1987). 36 Jones v. Latexo School District. 449 F.Supp. 223 (E.D.Tex. 1980). 37 Doe v. Renfrow. 631 F.2d 91 (7th Cir. 1980).
38 Horton v. Goose Creek Independent School District. 677 F.2d 471
(5th Cir. 1982).
39 State of Georgia v. J. T., 155 Ga. App. 812 (1980). 40 Baker v. Appling County Board of Education, Case No. 1986-25. 41 Wymbs v. Clarke County Board of Education, Case No. 1986-36:
Edward E.v. Effingham County Board of Education. Case No. 1985-5. 42 Dorsey v. Bale. 521 S.W.2d 76 (Ky. App. 1975). 43 Fowler v. Williamson. 448 F.Supp. 497 (W.D.N.e. 1978). 44 Ladson L'. Board of Education. 323 N.Y.S.2d 545 (1971). 45 Linwood c. Board of Education. 463 F.2d 763 (7th Cir. 1972). 46 a.e.G.A. 202-155(b). 471d.
481d.
49 S] c. Turlington. 635 F.2d 342 (5th Cir. 1981) cerl. denied. 454 U.S. 1030 (1981).
50 Board of Education of Peoria v. Illinois State Board of Education. 531 F.Supp. 148 (e.D.111. 1982).
51 Doe l'. Maher. 793 F.2d 1470 (9th Cir. 1985). 52 a.e.G.A. 20-2-750 through 759. 53 a.e.G.A. 20-2-752. 54 a.e.G.A. 20-2-753. 55 a.e.G.A. 20-2-754. 56 a.e.G.A. 20-2-756. 57 a.e.G.A. 20-2-759. 58 a.e.G.A. 20-2.757.
59 Tasby c. Estes. 643 F.2d 1163 (5th Cir. 1981): Boykins c. Board of Education. 492 F.2d 697 (5th Cir. 1974).
60 Boykins v. Board of Education, 492 F.2d 697. 61 Id. at 701.
62 Madera v. Board of Education, 386 F.2d. 778 (2d Cir. 1967). cerl. denied. 390 U.S. 1028.
63 Boynton v. Casey, 543 F.Supp. 995 (D.Me. 1982). 64 Lee v. Macon County Board of Education, 490 F.2d 458 (5th Cir.
1974). 65 a.e.G.A. 20-2.752. 66 a.e.G.A. 20-2-1160. 67 a.e.G.A. 20-2.155.
24

Appendices
25

Appendix A
LETTER TO PARENTS FOR DISCIPLINARY HEARING
(DATE)
Mr. and Mrs. Al Capone, Sr. Mr. Al Capone, Jr. Route 1 Podunk, Georgia
Dear Mr. and Mrs. Capone and AI: You are notified that AI Capone. Jr. will be brought before the
Podunk Board of Education for disciplinary action for reason that Al was found in possession of an illegal substance. specifically marijuana. at Hardtimes Comprehensive High School on the __ day of __ . 19 __ in violation of the Code of Conduct for Students. Section __ . a copy of which is enclosed for your information. A hearing before the board of education will be held in the regular board meeting room located at __ Street in Podunk. Georgia at approximately __ o'clock __ .m. The Board will determine whether AI was in violation of the Code of Conduct and. if so. the appropriate disciplinary action which may include long-term suspension from school or expulsion.
The witnesses who may testify in support of this charge are: f\\r. Paul Principal. principal of the high school. and Ms. Susan Smith. a teacher at the high school. A summary of their expected testimony will reflect that Ms, Smith observed AI showing another student a plastic bag containing a green. leafy substance and when AI noticed Ms, Smith observing him. quickly concealed the bag in his shirt. Ms. Smith escorted AI to the principal's office and Mr. Principal searched AI's shirt pocket and found the bag with the substance which Mr. Principal contends is marijuana. AI told Mr. Principal the bag did not belong to him but he was holding the bag for another student and did not know it contained marijuana.
This will advise you that you and your son have the right to at tend the hearing and present whatever evidence or argument you wish to make to the board of education. You have the right to legal counsel if you so desire and I will provide you with subpoenas to compel the attendance of witnesses if you request them. The hearing will be transcribed by a court reporter.
You may, if you wish, waive a formal hearing on this matter and the board will assume the charge is correct and proceed to determine appropriate disciplinary action. If you expect to contest the charges and will be represented by a lawyer, you must advise me at least twenty-four hours in advance of the hearing date and time
26

so that the board's attorney may be requested to attend the meeting as well. It is the board's policy that its attorney must be present at a hearing if the parents or student are represented by a lawyer and will contest the charges.
If you should have any question with regard to this matter or the details of this letter, please give me a call.
Very truly yours,

Enclosure

Superintendent

27

Appendix B
STUDENT DISCIPLINE HEARINGS POLICY DISCIPLINARY TRIBUNALS
For the purpose of conducting certain student discipline hearings, as defined below, rendering a decision and imposing punishment, the __ Board of Education hereby adopts the following policy:
I.
The superintendent shall convene a hearing in the following cases:
(a) Where a student other than one in kindergarten through third grade has committed an alleged assault or battery upon a teacher, other school official or employee:
(b) Where a student other than one in kindergarten through third grade has committed an alleged assault or battery upon another student and the school principal determines that expulsion or long term suspension may be the appropriate punishment:
(c) Where a student other than one in kindergarten through third grade has intentionally caused substantial damage while on school premises to personal property belonging to a teacher. other school official. employee or student and the school principal determines that expulsion or long term suspension may be the appropriate punishment:
(d) In any other discipline matter when the principal or superintendent determine the offense should be punished by longterm suspension or expulsion. [Optional. to be used only if the board desires all long-term suspension cases be heard by the tribunaL]
II.
The Board of Education, upon the recommendation of the superintendent, shall appoint __ [number] of its professional, certificated employees to serve as members of hearing tribunals. When the principal of a school refers a student to the superintendent for a hearing as described in paragraph I, the superintendent or his staff shall choose three of these members to serve as the hearing tribunal. No member of the hearing tribunal shall be a member of the staff at the school which the student attends. The selection of employees to serve on tribunals shall be in accordance with rules and regulations to be promulgated by the superintendent and his staff.
28

III.
Whenever a principal refers a student discipline matter to the superintendent, the superintendent shall send a letter by certified mail to the student and his or her parents or guardians containing a statement of the time, place and nature of the hearing, a short and plain statement of the matters asserted and charges against the student, including names of any witnesses who may be called to testify at the hearing, a statement setting forth the right of the student to present evidence, cross-examine witnesses and be represented by legal counsel.
IV.
The school principal shall be responsible for presenting evidence in support of the charges against the student and all parties shall be afforded an opportunity to present and respond to evidence and to examine and cross-examine witnesses on any and all issues. The hearing tribunal shall have made a verbatim electronic or writ ten record of the hearing. This record shall be available to all par ties but the cost of transcribing such record shall be borne by the party requesting the transcript.
V.
The hearing tribunal shall render a decision finding whether the student committed the offense and, if so, the appropriate punishment. The decision of the hearing tribunal shall be based solely on the evidence received at the hearing, including any evidence presented by either party relevant to the appropriate punishment to be imposed. The hearing tribunal shall render a decision in writing within ten days of the close of the record and shall furnish a copy of the decision to the student, his or her parents or legal guardians, the principal and the superintendent. The decision of the hearing tribunal shall be final and shall constitute the decision of the board of education unless either party should appeal the decision to the board of education.
VI.
Any party may appeal the decision of the hearing tribunal to the board of education by filing with the superintendent a written notice of appeal within twenty days from the date the decision is rendered. Such notice of appeal shall set forth the decision of the hearing tribunal and the basis of the appeal. Any decision of the hearing tribunal not appealed in this manner shall be final. The superintendent may in his or her discretion suspend the disciplin-
29

ary action imposed by the hearing tribunal pending the outcome of the appeal.
VII.
The board of education shall review the record of the hearing before the hearing tribunal, the decision of the hearing tribunal and the notice of appeal and shall render its decision in writing within ten days from the date it receives the notice of appeal. The decision of the board of education shall be based solely on the record before the hearing tribunal and the board shall not consider any other evidence in ruling on the appeal. The board may find the facts to be different than those found by the hearing tribunal and the board may change the punishment. The decision of the board of education shall be final.
30

Appendix C
SUGGESTED HEARING PROCEDURE FOR LOCAL BOARDS OF EDUCATION
IN STUDENT DISCIPLINE CASES
The following is a suggested outline a local board of education may follow in conducting a student discipline case. The p(ocedures outlined may be used in most cases when a student either does not contest the charges presented against him or is not represented by an attorney. If the parents or student have counsel and the charges are disputed, then it would be advisable for the board to have counsel to advise it in conducting the hearing. These hearing procedures also may be utilized by a hearing officer or tribunal, with appropriate modifications.
CHAIRMAN: THE NEXT ITEM ON THIS AGENDA IS A STUDENT DISCIPLINARY MATTER. STATE LAW REQUIRES THE HEARING TO BE CLOSED. NO ONE MAY BE PRESENT BUT THOSE DIRECTLY INVOLVED IN THE CASE. THEREFORE, I WILL ASK ANYONE NOT CONNECTED WITH THIS HEARING TO LEAVE THE MEETING.
CHAIRMAN: [After those not involved have left.] LADIES AND GENTLEMEN, THE PURPOSE OF THIS HEARING IS TO CONSIDER CHARGES AGAINST [name of student] WHICH HAVE BEEN REFERRED TO THIS BOARD FOR DISCIPLINARY ACTION. THE CHARGES ARE DESCRIBED IN A LETTER DATED [date] ADDRESSED TO THE PARENTS OF THE STUDENT, MR. AND MRS. [name of parents], FROM THE SUPERINTENDENT. EACH MEMBER OF THE BOARD HAS A COpy OF THIS LETTER AND, OF COURSE, THE PARENTS AND STUDENT HAVE BEEN PREVIOUSLY FURNISHED A COpy OF THIS LETTER. BASICALLY, THE CHARGES STATE THAT THE STUDENT ALLEGEDLY [here describe in general terms the charges, such as possession of illegal drugs, specifically, marijuana or quaalude, or some other offense with which the student is charged].
LET THE MINUTES SHOW THAT THE STUDENT [name] AND HIS PARENTS [names] ARE PRESENT. ALSO PRESENT ARE PRINCIPAL [name] AND [names of any other witnesses who will testify against the student and whose names are described in the letter].
CHAIRMAN: MR. AND MRS. [name of parents] AND [name of student], LET ME FIRST ASK IF [name of student] DENIES THAT HE [or she] COMMITTED THE OFFENSE [or offenses] CONTAINED IN THE LETTER YOU RECEIVED FROM THE SUPERINTENDENT? [If the student admits guilt but wishes to offer an explanation or mitigating circumstances as to punishment, then the
31

board chairman may move to the punishment section of the hearing procedures. If the student denies guilt, then the following procedures will apply.]
CHAIRMAN: LET ME INFORM YOU AS TO HOW WE WILL PROCEED IN THIS CASE. THE PRINCIPAL HAS THE BURDEN OF PROOF TO ESTABLISH BY A PREPONDERANCE OF THE EVIDENCE THAT [name of the student] COMMITTED THE OFFENSE lor offenses] DESCRIBED IN THE LETTER YOU HAVE RECEIVED FROM THE SUPERINTENDENT. THE PRINCIPAL WILL PRESENT HIS [or her] WITNESSES FIRST. EITHER ONE OF THE PARENTS OR THE STUDENT MAY ASK RELEVANT QUESTIONS OF EACH OF THE WITNESSES. YOU WILL BE ALLOWED AFTER THE PRINCIPAL HAS CALLED ALL OF HIS [or her] WITNESS TO TESTIFY AND TO CALL ANY WITNESSES YOU MAY CHOOSE FOR THE BOARD TO HEAR. ALSO, WE WILL RECEIVE IN EVIDENCE ANY RELEVANT DOCUMENTS YOU MAY WISH FOR US TO CONS!DER. AN OPPORTUNITY FOR REBUTTAL TESTIMONY WILL BE OFFERED AND IF THE PARENTS OR STUDENT WISH TO MAKE A BRIEF CLOSING STATEMENT. WE WILL RECEIVE THAT STATEMENT AND A STATEMENT FROM THE PRINCIPAL. WE WILL THEN WITHDRAW TO DELIBERATE AND I AFTER WE HAVE COMPLETED OUR DISCUSSIONS WE WILL TAKE OFFICIAL ACTION. IF [name of student] IS FOUND TO HA VE COt"~MITTED THE OFFENSES WITH WHICH HE lor she] IS CHARGED. WE WILL RECEIVE FROM THE PRINCIPAL HIS [or her] DISCIPLINARY RECORD AND RECEIVE FROM YOU ANY EVIDENCE OR STATEMENT YOU MAY WISH TO MAKE CONSIDERING THE APPROPRIATENESS OF PUNISHMENT. DO YOU UNDERSTAND THESE PROCEEDINGS? [At this point. the board chairman may attempt to answer questions or discuss the proceedings with the parents or student before beginning to receive evidence.]
CHAIRMAN: WE WILL ASK THAT ALL WITNESSES WHO ARE EXPECTED TO TESTIFY INCLUDING THE PRINCIPAL. PARENTS AND STUDENT RISE AND BE SWORN BY THE COURT REPORTER. [The court reporter should administer the oath to the witness es.]
CHAIRMAN: IF EITHER THE PRINCIPAL OR THE PARENTS AND STUDENT DESIRE. WE WILL EXCLUDE ALL WITNESSES FROM THE ROOM UNTIL THE WITNESSES ARE CALLED TO TESTIFY. THE PRINCIPAL AND THE PARENTS AND STUDENT ARE ALLOWED TO REMAIN IN THE HEARING ROOM AT ALL TIMES. [Since the principal is the "prosecutor" he or she may remain as well as the superintendent, but other witnesses for the principal and the student's witnesses should be excluded if either side requests that they be excluded. Otherwise, the witnesses may remain.]
CHAIRMAN: THE PRINCIPAL WILL CALL HIS lor her] FIRST WITNESS. [The principal may choose to testify first or call other
32

witnesses who will testify. The board chairman and other members of the board may ask questions they believe appropriate following the testimony of the witness. It probably is acceptable to restrict cross-examination to only one parent or the student, although the board chairman may choose to allow both parents and the student to question the witness if it does not get out of hand. If the parents are represented by counsel, of course only counsel will cross-examine, and the board chairman will need assistance of the board's attorney in ruling on objections or questions of the admissibility of evidence. However, strict rules of evidence are not applicable and some hearsay may be admitted.]
CHAIRMAN: WE WILL NOW ASK MR. AND MRS. [name of parentsj AND [name of studentj TO CALL WITNESSES ON BEHALF OF [name of studentj. [Here the same procedure will follow as during the testimony of the principal's witnesses. The principal is allowed to also question the witnesses as well as members of the board.j
CHAIRMAN: WE WILL ALLOW ANY REBUnAL EVIDENCE TO BE SUBMITTED BY THE PRINCIPAL [At this point. the principal may call himself or herself or other witnesses only in rebuttal to the testimony presented by the parents or student. Similarly. the parents or student may rebut the rebuttal offered by the principal. but the evidence to be received should be stricly limited to rebuttal.j
CHAIRMAN: THE BOARD NOW HAS HEARD ALL OF THE EVIDENCE IN THE MATIER. WE WILL ALLOW A BRIEF CLOSING STATE;'v\ENT TO BE MADE BY THE PARENTS AND THE PRINCIPAL. [It is not necessary to allow closing statements to be made. but if a brief argument or closing statement is desired to be offered by one side. the other side should also have that same opportunity. Since the burden of proof is on the principal, he or she should have the last statement.j
CHAIRMAN: THE BOARD NOW HAS HEARD ALL OF THE EVIDENCE IN THIS MATIER. WE WILL NOW GO INTO EXECUTIVE SESSION FOR THE PURPOSE OF DISCUSSING AMONG OURSELVES THE EVIDENCE WE HAVE HEARD. AFTER WE COMPLETE OUR DISCUSSIONS, WE WILL REOPEN THE HEARING AND TAKE OFFICIAL ACTION. [All witnesses at this time including the parents and student should be excluded. The superintendent, if not a witness may remain. If the superintendent has offered testimony, it is better practice for the superintendent not to be present with the board when the evidence is discussed in that it may be argued on appeal that the opportunity was present for the superintendent to give additional testimony out of the presence of the parents and students. The board will discuss the evidence and take official action following the executive session.]
CHAIRMAN: LADIES AND GENTLEMEN, THE BOARD HAS COMPLETED ITS EXECUTIVE SESSION. I WILL NOW RECEIVE
33

A MOTION ANY BOARD MEMBER MAY WISH TO MAKE. [At this point a motion should be made that the board finds that the student either did or did not commit one or more of the acts upon which he or she was charged. The resolutions should state explicitly which acts the board finds the student did commit and which acts the board finds the student did not commit. The decision of the board as to guilt or innocence is by majority vote of those present; unanimity is not required.]
CHAIRMAN: [If charges have been proven.] WE WILL NOW PROCEED TO HEAR FROM THE PRINCIPAL AND FROM THE PARENTS AND STUDENT AS TO WHAT WOULD BE APPROPRIATE DISCIPLINARY ACTION FOR THE BOARD TO TAKE REGARDING THESE CHARGES. THE BOARD WILL WANT TO HEAR THE KIND OF DISCIPLINE RECORD THE STUDENT HAS, HIS [or her] GRADES, AND ANY OTHER PROBLEMS THE STUDENT MAY HAVE REGARDING HIS [or her] BEHAVIOR. [At this point, it would be appropriate for the principal to relate in general terms the record of the student as to prior offenses, grades, attendance, and any other matter which the principal may deem appropriate. The parents may ask relevant questions of the principal. The board may hear from the parents, the student. and any other witness who may have knowledge of the student's conduct, behavior, and evidence relative to appropriate punishment.]
CHAIRMAN: I WILL NOW RECEIVE A MOTION AS TO THE DISCIPLINARY ACTION THE BOARD WILL IMPOSE IN THIS CASE. [It is permissible if the board desires to discuss the matter first in executive session as was done previously concerning the guilt of the student, and the board chairman may follow the same procedure regarding the exclusion of everyone connected with the case until the board has completed its discussion of punishment.]
CHAIRMAN: I WILL ENTERTAIN A MOTION AS TO THE DISCIPLINE TO BE IMPOSED. [A resolution should be adopted concerning appropriate punishment.]
CHAIRMAN: THE SUPERINTENDENT WILL PREPARE A SUM MARY OF THIS HEARING TOGETHER WITH THE ACTION OF THE BOARD. THE PARENTS AND STUDENT WILL BE INFORMED IN WRITING AS TO THE DECISION OF THE BOARD AND PUNISHMENT IMPOSED TOGETHER WITH THE RIGHT OF THE PARENTS AND STUDENT TO APPEAL THE DECISION OF THE BOARD TO THE STATE BOARD OF EDUCATION BY FILING AN APPEAL WITHIN THIRTY DAYS. WE WILL ASK THE SUPERINTENDENT TO MEET WITH THE PARENTS FOLLOWING THIS HEARING TO DISCUSS THE DISCIPLINARY ACTION IMPOSED BY THIS BOARD AND TO MAKE CERTAIN IT IS QUITE CLEAR TO THE PARENTS AND STUDENT AS TO THE ACTION THE BOARD HAS TAKEN. THE HEARING IS CONCLUDED.
34

APPENDIX J.
SUGGESTED READINGS
A vast amount of research was conducted for this manual. Information and research articles not cited as part of the main text are included in this section.
GEORGIA DROPOUT PROBLEM
Crim, Alonzo A. 1983. "Atlanta's Public's Schools: Moving Forward on a Positive Note." NASSP Bulletin. vol. 67, no. 466 (November) pp. 43-50.
Education USA. 1988. "Georgia Kindergartner Testing Program Draws Criticism." Education USA. vol. 30, no. 30 (March 14) p. 217.
Faircloth, Tom. 1984. "The StoreFront School and Its Tenant." Urban Georgia. vol. 34, no. 1 (JanuaryFebruary) pp. 20-21.
Georgia Department of Education. 1986. "System-wide Alternative Schools and In-School Suspension Centers In Georgia." Atlanta, GA: Georgia Department of Education.
Georgia Department of Education. 1987. Dropout Prevention Programs in Georgia. Atlanta, GA: Georgia Department of Education.
Georgia Department of Education. 1988. "State Strategic Plan: Establishing Georgia as an Educational and Economic Leader By the Year 2001." (Draft) Atlanta, GA: Georgia Department of Education.
Georgia Department of Education. 1988. "Proposal To Initiate and Coordinate Interagency Collaboration and Make Recommendations for Legislation To Adopt the Policy of the Council of Chief State School Officers for Students At Risk." Atlanta, GA: Georgia Department of Education.
Georgia School Boards Association. 1987. Student Discipline. Lawrenceville, GA: Georgia School Boards Association.
Harris, Joe Frank. 1986. "In Georgia ... Quality Basic Education." NASSP Bulletin. vol. 70, no. 491 (September) pp. 36-41.
A-55

WHY STUDENTS DROP OUT
Barro, Stephen M. and Andrew Kolstand. 1987. Who Dropouts Out of High School? Findings from High School and Beyond. Washington, DC: Center for Educational Statistics, Department of Education.
Bell, Doreen. 1987. "Dealing With Dropouts." School and College Product News. vol. 26 (November) pp. 36-42.
Bernick, Michael. 1986. "Illiteracy and Inner-City Unemployment." Phi Delta Kappan. vol. 67, no. 5 (January) pp. 364-367.
Center for Dropout Prevention. n.d. Review of Literature. Miami, FL: School of Education and Allied Professions, University of Miami.
1987. Executive Summary: Final Report. Miami, FL: School of Education and Allied Professions, University of Miami.
Center for Education Statistics. 1987. Who Drops Out of High School? Findings From High School and Beyond. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education, Office of Educational Research and Improvement.
Cummins, Jim. 1986. "Empowering Minority Students: A Framework for Intervention." Harvard Educational Review. vol. 56, no. 1 (February) pp. 18-36.
Eckstrom, Ruth B. 1986. "Who Drops Out of High School and Why? Findings From a National Study." School Dropouts: Patterns and Policies. Gary Natriello (ed.) New York: Teachers College Press. pp. 52-69.
ERIC Clearinghouse on Education Management. 1986. "Preventing Dropouts: The Best of ERIC on Educational Management." Eugene, OR: ERIC Clearinghouse on Educational Management. (ED 268 666).
Fine, Michelle. 1986. "Why Urban Adolescents Drop Into and Out of Public High School." School Dropouts: Patterns and Policies. Gary Natriello (ed.) New York: Teachers College Press. pp. 89-105.
Florida Department of Education. 1984. Final Report: A Study of Florida Secondary School Dropouts. Tallahassee, FL.
A-56

Freeland, Sherry. 1986. "Dropouts Who and Why?" Education USA. vol. 28, no. 19 (January).
Gadwa, Karol and Shirley A. Griggs. 1985. "The School Dropout: Implications for Counselors." The School Counselor. vol. 33, no. 1 (September) pp. 9-17.
Harkins, William. 1986. "Beyond Easy Excellence: High Standards and Fewer Dropouts." NASSP Bulletin. vol. 70, no. 488 (March) pp. 57-62.
Harrington, Steve. 1987. "Children of the Road: Teachers Face New Challenges in Educating Migrant Kids for an Uncertain Future." Instructor. vol. 97, no.4 (November/December). pp. 36-39.
Horn, Miriam. 1987. "The Burgeoning Educational Underclass." U.S. News and World Report. vol. 102, no. 19 (May) pp. 66-67.
Illinois State Board of Education. 1985. "A Profile of Illinois Dropouts." Chicago, ILL: Department of Planning, Research Evaluation and Statistics Section.
LaJoie, Susanne P. 1981. "Three Myths? The OverRepresentation of the Gifted Among Dropouts, Delinquents, and Suicides." Gifted Child Quarterly. vol. 25, no. 3 (Summer) pp. 138-143.
McKay, Emily and Ambrose Lucero. 1984. "Latino Youth Will There Be Jobs?" Nuestro. vol. 8, no. 5 (June-July) pp. 24-28.
Mann, Dale. 1985. "Effective Schools for the Children of the Poor." The Education Digest. vol. 51, no. 1 (September) pp. 24-25.
1986. "Dropout Prevention--Getting Serious About Programs That Work." NASSP Bulletin. vol. 70, no. 489 (April) pp. 66-73.
Martin, David. 1988. "Wake up: The American Dream is fading, and our future is at risk." The American School Board Journal. vol. 175, no. 2 (February) pp. 21-24.
Massachuetts Advocacy Center. 1986. The Way Out: Student Exclusion Practices in Boston Middle Schools. Boston, MA: Massachuetts Advocacy Center.
Matthews, Gary S. 1985. "CAPES: Application of the School Effectiveness Model to an Urban Public High School." The Clearing House. vol. 59, no. 4 (December) pp. 185-192.
A-57

Mizell, M. Hayes. 1987. School Dropouts, Undereducated Youth, and Economic Development in the South. Nashville, TN: Testimony before the Select Committee on Children, Youth, and Families, House of Representatives, Ninety-Ninth Congress. (ED 281 974).
1988. "A Guide for the Implementation of a Student Meriting Special Dropout Prevention Initiatives." Columbia, SC: South Carolina State Board for Technical and Comprehensive Education. (ED 278 931).
1988. "The Identification of School Districts Which Need to Take Extraordinary Initiatives to Prevent the Potential for Increased Dropouts Following the Administration of the 1988 Exit Exam." Columbia, SC: South Carolina State Board for Technical and Comprehensive Education. (ED 278 932).
National Center on Effective Secondary Schools. 1986. "What It Means To Be At Risk." NCESS Newsletter. vol. 1, no. 1 (Fall) pp. 1-10.
National Commission on Excellence in Education. 1983. "A Nation at Risk: The Imperative for Education Reform" American Education. vol. 19, no. 5 (June) pp. 2-17.
Natriello, Gary. 1985. "Uncommon Sense: School Administrators, School Reform, and Potential Dropouts." Report of the National Invitational Working Conference on Holding Power and Dropouts. Dale Mann. New York, N.Y.: Columbia University, Teachers College. (February 13-15) (ED 257 927).
Natriello, Gary, Aaron Pallas, and Edward D. McDill. 1986. "Taking Stock: Renewing Our Research
Agenda on the Causes and Consequences of Dropping Out." School Dropouts: Patterns and Policies. Gary Natriello (ed.) New York: Teachers College Press. pp. 168-178.
New York State Education Department. 1984. Report on Pupils-at-Risk. Albany, NY: Office of Elementary, Secondary, and Continuing Education. (ED 281 895).
Nyangoni, Betty. 1982. "School Dropouts: A Lingering Phenomenon." Washington, DC: Howard University.
Peng, Samuel S. 1983. "High School Dropouts: Descriptive Information from High School and Beyond." National Center for Education Statistics Bulletin. (NCES 83-221B).
A-58

Prophet, Matthew W. 1986. "Forum on Dropouts." Portland, OR: Paper Presented at Forum on Dropouts (September 13). (ED 276 796).
Sagor, Richard. 1986. "Perhaps the Nation Is at Risk After All." NASSP Bulletin. vol. 70, no. 490 (May) pp. 112-118.
Schoolboys of Barbrona. 1970. Letter to a Teacher. New York: Random House.
Solarzano, Lucia. 1986. "The campaign to lure kids back to class." U.S. News and World Report. vol. 100, no. 8 (March 3) pp. 77-78.
Strother, Deborah Burnett. (1986). "Dropping Out." Phi Delta Kappan. vol. 67, no.4 (December) pp. 325-328.
Texas Department of Community Affairs. 1986. Texas School Dropout Survey: A Report to the 69th Legislature State of Texas. Austin, TX.
Trends & Learning. 1985. "Dropouts: Shocking Enough To
Get Our Attention?" vol. 2, no. 9 (April 30) pp. 1-4.
Valverde, Sylvia A. 1987. "A Comparative Study of Hispanic High School Dropouts and Graduates: Why Do Some Leave Early and Some Finish?" Education and Urban Society. vol. 19, no. 3 (May) pp. 320-329.
Webb, Michael B. 1987. Notes Concerninq Dropout Prevention in New York State. (ED 280 907)
ACADEMIC PROGRAMS
Alexander, Lamar. 1987. "National Governor's Association Report on Education Reform." Education Digest. (April) pp. 2-5.
American Education. 1983. "A Nation At Risk: The Imperative for Educational Reform." vol. 19, no. 5 (June) pp. 2-17.
Arons, Elizabeth L. and Basil S. Papadales. 1986. "Successful High School, Successful Enterprise: Learning from Industry." NASSP Bulletin. vol. 70, no. 493 (November) pp. 18-22.
Arnold, Genevieve H. and Vicki Biggers. 1987. "One Community's Response To the Dropout Problem." Phi Delta Kappan. vol. 69, no. 9 (May) pp. 708-709.
Bickel, William E. 1983. "Effective Schools: Knowledge, Dissemination, Inquiry." Educational Researcher. vol. 12, no. 4 (April) pp. 3-4.
A-59

Bines, Hazel. 1986. Redefining Remedial Education. Dover, NH: Croom Helm.
Campbell, Chari. 1983. "Successful training for elementary and middle school peer helpers." Elementary School Guidance & Counseling. vol. 8, no. 2 (December) pp. 118-123.
Canning, Judy. 1983. "Peer facilitator projects for elementary and middle schools." Elementary School Guidance & Counseling. vol. 8, no. 2 (December) pp. 124-129.
Collins, Roger L. 1987. "Parent's View of Alternative Public School Programs." Education and Urban Society. vol. 19, no. 3 (May) pp. 290-302.
Committee on Education and Labor. 1987. Increasing Educational Success: The Effective Schools Model. Subcommittee on Elementary, Secondary, and Vocational Education. House of Representatives. 100th Congress. 1st Session. Serial No. 100-K. Washington, DC: Government Printing Office.
Conrath, Jerry. 1986. "Effective Schools Must Focus on Potential Dropouts." NASSP Bulletin. vol. 70, no. 487 (February) pp. 46-50.
Cooper-Haber, Karen and R.P. Bowman. 1985. "The Keenan Project: Comprehensive Group Guidance in High School." The School Counselor. vol. 33, no. 1 (September) pp. 50-56.
Corcoran, Thomas B. 1986. "The Search for Successful Secondary Schools: The First Three Years of the Secondary Schools Recognition Program." Philadelphia, PA: Research for Better Schools, Inc. (ED 275 67 9) .
Davis, S. John and Callie P. Shingleton. 1986. "In Virginia--Model High School Provides Answers in Meeting Needs of Education in State." NASSP Bulletin. vol. 70, no. 488 (March) pp. 93-98.
Dougherty, A. Michael and Barbara Lynn Bryant Taylor. 1983. "Evaluation of peer helper programs." Elementary School Guidance & Counseling. vol. 8, no. 2 (December) pp. 130-136.
Eichinger, Lynn. 1984. "When one program fizzled and another flourished, I discovered what it takes to succeed with alternative education." The American School Board Journal. vol. 171, no. 2 (February) pp. 34-35.
A-60

Furtwengler, Willis J. 1985. "Implementing Strategies for a School Effectiveness Program." Phi Delta Kappan. vol. 67, no. 4 (December) pp. 262-265.
Glenn, Beverly Caffee. 1981. What Works: An Examination of Effective Schools For Poor Black Children. Cambridge, MA: Center For Law and Education.
Gold, Martin and David Mann. 1984. Expelled to a Friendlier Place: A Study of Effective Alternative Schools. Ann Arbor, MI: The University of Michigan Press.
Harkins, William. 1986. "Beyond Easy Excellence: High Standards and Fewer Dropouts." NASSP Bulletin. vol. 70, no. 488. (March) pp. 57-62.
Harris, Ian, Carl Hedman, and Marty Horning. 1983. "Success With High School Dropouts." Educational Leadership. vol. 40, no.6 (March) pp. 35-36.
Honig, Bill. n.d. Caught in the Middle: Educational Reform for Young Adolescents in California Schools. Sacramento, CA: Office of the California Superintendent of Public Instruction.
Interstate Migrant Education Council. 1987. Migrant Education a Consolidated View. Denver, CO: Interstate Migrant Education Council.
Johnson, Harlan R. 1982. "Alternative Schools: A Salvage Operation." The Clearinghouse. vol. 55, no. 7 (March) pp. 317-318.
Keefe, James W. 1986. "Advisement Programs--Improving Teacher-Student Relationships, School Climate." NASSP Bulletin. vol. 70, no. 489 (April) pp. 85-89.
Kircher, David. 1986. "Pupil Improvement Contracts: They Work." American Secondary Education. vol. 15, no. 3 pp. 29-30.
Kleinbard, Peter. 1983. "Alternative Schools: Current Issues." Social Policy. vol. 13, no. 3 (Winter) pp. 46-47.
Lo Guidice, Tom. 1985. "The National Diffusion Network. " The Clearing House. vol. 59, no. 1 (September) pp. 33-34.
Macchiarola, Frank J. 1983. "Urban Schools Can Work: The New York City Case." NASSP Bulletin. vol. 67, no. 466 (November) pp. 51-55.
A-61

Mann, Dale. 1985. "Effective School For The Children of the Poor." The Education Digest. vol. 51, no.1 (September) pp. 24-25.
Murphy, Joseph and Phillip Hallinger. 1985. "Effective High Schools--What Are the Common Characteristics." NASSP Bulletin. vol. 69, no. 477 (January) pp. 18-22.
Myrick Robert D. and Robert P. Bowman. 1983. "Peer helpers and the learning process." Elementary School Guidance & Counseling. vol. 8, no. 2 (December) pp. 111-117.
National Commission on Excellence in Education. 1983. "A Nation at Risk: The Imperative for Education Reform." American Education. vol. 19, no. 5 (June) pp. 2-17.
National Diffusion Network. 1986. Educational Programs That Work. Longmont, CO: Sopris West Incorporated.
Pare, John A. 1983. "Alternative Learning Center: Another Option for Discipline Programs." NASSP Bulletin. vol. 67, no. 462 (April) pp. 61-67.
Phillips, Gary and Tom Rosenberger. 1983. "Breaking the Failure Cycle in an Inner-City High School." NASSP Bulletin. vol. 67, no. 466 (November) pp. 30-55.
Purkey, Stewart C. and Marshall S. Smith. 1985. "District Policy Implications of Effective Schools Research." The Education Digest. vol. 51, no. 1 (September) pp. 18-23.
Rowan, Brian, Steven T. Bossert, and David C. Dwyer. 1983. "Research on Effective Schools: A Cautionary Note." Educational Researcher. vol. 12, no. 4 (April) pp. 24-31.
Thomas, M. Donald and LaVar Sorenson. 1983. "South High School: An Effective Inner-City School." NASSP Bulletin. vol. 67, no. 466 (November) pp. 36-39.
Weber, James M. 1986. The Role of Vocational Education in Decreasing the Dropout Rate. Columbus, OH: Ohio State University, National Center for Research in Vocational Education.
Wehlage, Gary G. 1983. "The Marginal High School Student: Defining the Problem and Searching for Policy." Children and Youth Services Review. vol. 5, no.4 pp. 321-342.
A-62

Yagi, Kan. 1986. "Private Alternative School Programs in Portland Public Schools: 1985-86 Evaluation Report. II Portland, OR: Research and Evaluation Department, Portland Public Schools.
TRUANCY AND DISCIPLINE PROGRAMS
Black, Steve and John J. Welsh. 1985. "This step system of discipline helps kids improve their behavior. II The American School Board Journal. vol. 172, no. 12 (December) pp. 43-44.
Calabrese, Raymond. 1985. liThe Principal and School Discipline: An Alternative. II NASSP Bulletin. vol. 69, no. 484 (November) pp. 98-100.
Children & Teens Today. 1987. "Adolescent Day Treatment Program Reduces Truancy and Aggressive Behavior. II vol. 7, no. 11 (July) p. 4.
Dothan City Schools. (1986). Code of Student Conduct. Dothan, AL: Dothan City Schools.
Dufour, Richard. 1983. "Crackdown on Attendance--The Word Is Out." NASSP Bulletin. vol. 67, no. 464 (September) pp. 133-135.
Edwards, Marvin E. 1985. "This last-ditch plan keeps would-be dropouts in school." The American School Board Journal. vol. 172, no. 8 (August) p. 24.
Gluckman, Ivan B. 1985. "Court Urges Use of Common Sense in Discipline Cases." NASSP Bulletin. vol. 69, no. 479 (March) pp. 33-39.
Gold, Martin and David W. Mann. 1982. "Alternative Schools for Troublesome Secondary Students." The Urban Review. vol. 14, no. 4 pp. 305-316.
Kindsvatter, Richard H. and Mary Levine McLaughlin. 1985. "Discipline Mystique and Discipline Practice. II The Clearing House. vol. 58, no. 9 (May) pp. 403-407.
Kircher, David. (1986). "pupil Improvement Contracts: They Work. II American Secondary Education. vol. 15, no. 3 pp. 29-30.
Pare, John A. 1983. "Alternative Learning Center: Another Option for Discipline Programs." NASSP Bulletin. vol. 67, no. 462 (April) pp. 61-67.
A-63

Quay, Herbert C. and Laurel B. Allen. 1982. IITruants and Dropouts. II Encyclopedia of Educational Research. Fifth Edition. vol. 4 New York, NY: The Free Press. pp. 1958-1962.
Rawlings, Maurice, Jerry R. Hoodenpyle, and Lynn Rossi Scott. (n.d.) IIStudent Hearing Procedures:
Discipline Management. II Hurst, TX: Hurst-Euless-
Bedford Independent School District.
Seng, Magnus. 1986. IIGang Development in Suburban Communities: The Role of the High School. 1I American Secondary Education .. vol. 15, no. 1 pp. 12-16.
Stefanich, Gregory P. and Louise C. Bell. 1985. IIA Dynamic Model for Classroom Discipline. II NASSP Bulletin. vol. 69, no. 479 (March) pp. 19-25.
Stover, Del. 1986. IIA new breed of youth gang is on the prowl and a bigger threat than ever. II The American School Board Journal. vol. 173, no. 8 (August) pp. 19-24, 33.
Thomason, Julia and Joe Pederson. 1984. IIperfect 10: A Discipline Alternative. II The Clearing House. vol. 57, no. 8 (April) pp. 353-355.
United States Department of Justice. 1979. Alternative Education Options. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice, Law Enforcement Assistance Administration. Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention.
Weber, Thomas R. and Charles A. Sloan. 1986. IIHow Does High School Discipline in 1984 Compare to Previous Decades? The Clearing House. vol. 59, no. 7 (March) pp. 326-329.
IN-SCHOOL SUSPENSION PROGRAMS
Chizak, Lawrence. 1984. IIWe use a detention room to keep kid's behavior problems in check. 1I The American School Board Journal. vol. 171, no. 7 (July) pp. 29-30.
Collins, Christopher G. 1985. IIHelping Children with Behavior Problems Through In-School Suspension. 1I Ahaheim, CA: Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the Council for Exceptional Children. 63rd. (April 15-19) (ED 258 352)
A-64

Dorrell, Larry D. 1984. "Allowing Continuous Instruction in the Suspension Program." NASSP Bulletin. vol. 68, no. 468. (January) pp. 123-125.
Fischel, Frank J. 1986. "In-School Suspension Programs--Questions To Consider." NASSP Bulletin. vol. 70, no. 493 (November) pp. 100-102.
Grice, Michael. 1986. Positive Alternatives to School Suspension. Portland OR: Portland Public Schools, Research and Evaluation. (ED 276 794).
Guemelata, Gary F. 1987. "A Detention Program that is Working." American Secondary Education. vol. 15, no. 4 pp. 31-32.
Johnston, Joanne S. 1987. "In-School Suspension from the Student's Perspective." NASSP Bulletin. vol. 71, no. 500 (September) pp. 122-129.
Moles, Oliver. 1982. "Introduction." The Urban Review. vol. 14, no. 4 pp. 241-243.
Short, Paula M. and George W. Noblit. (n.d.) A Study of In-School Suspension Programs in North Carolina Public Schools. University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill.
Streva, Michael A. 1983. The Evolution of Discipline Alternatives to Suspension Programs. New Mexico State University. (ED 233 443).
Weiss, Kathy. 1983. "In-School Suspension--Time to Work, Not Socialize." NASSP Bulletin. vol. 67, no. 464 (September) pp. 132-133.
SCHOOL CLIMATE PROGRAMS
Allan John and Pat Dyck. 1983. "Improving school climate through cross-grade interactions." Elementary School Guidance & Counseling. vol. 18, no. 2 (December) pp. 137-145.
Anderson, Beverly and Allan Odden. 1986. "State Initiatives Can Foster School Improvement. " Phi Delta Kappan. vol. 67, no. 8 (April) pp. 578-588.
Boot, Martha. (1984). "Improvement of School Climate." (ED 240 689).
A-65

Brown, Timothy F. (1984). "Improving School Climate-The Symptom vs. the Problem." NASSP Bulletin. vol. 68, no. 472 (May) pp.3-7.
Committee on Education and Labor. 1987. School Improvement Act of 1987. House of Representatives, 100th Congress, 1st Session Report 100-95. washington, DC: Government Printing Office.
Conrath, Jerry. 1984. "Snatching Victory from the Jaws of Death: How One School Fought the Dropout Blitz." Contemporary Education. vol. 56, no. 1 (Fall) pp. 36-38.
Crandall, David P., Jeffery W. Eiseman, and Karen Seashore Louis. (1986). "Strategic Planning Issues That Bear on the Success of School Improvement Efforts." Educational Administration Ouarterly. vol. 22, no. 3 (Summer) pp. 21-49.
Degener, David. 1983. Improving School Improvement: New Study Shows That Schools Improve Under SIP. San Francisco, CA: Far West Laboratory for Educational Research and Development.
Fuhrman, Susan, Eugene Huddle, and Jane Armstrong. 1986. "Improving Schools: The State Role." Phi Delta Kappan. vol. 67, no. 8 (April) pp. 594-596.
Keefe, James W. 1986. "Advisement Programs--Improving Teacher--Student Relationships, School Climate." NASSP Bulletin. vol. 60, no. 489. (April) pp. 85-90.
Keefe, James W., Edgar A. Kelley, and Stephen K. Miller. 1985. "School Climate: Clear Definition and a Model for A Larger Setting." NASSP Bulletin. vol. 69, no. 484 (November) pp. 70-77.
Kottkamp, Robert B., John A. Mulhern, and Wayne K. Hoy. 1987. "Secondary School Climate: A Revision of the OCDQ." Educational Administration Ouarterly. vol. 23, no. 3 (August) pp. 31-48.
Odden, Allan and Van Dougherty. 1982. State Programs of Schools Improvement: A 50-State Survey. Denver, CO: Education Commission of the States.
Odden, Allen and Beverly Anderson. 1986. "How Successful State Education Improvement Programs Work." Phi Delta Kappan. vol. 67, no. 8 (April) pp. 582-585.
A-66

Rothberg, Robert A. 1985. Improving School Climate and Reducing Teacher Isolation. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the National Council of States on Inservice Education, Denver, CO. (ED 270 855).
Stenson, William L. 1985. "School Climate Improvement." School Business Affairs. vol. 51, no. 1 (January) pp. 54-55.
Turner, Richard, Roscoe L. Davidson, and Cile Chavez. 1983. "A Systems Model for NCA Evaluation and School Improvement." North Central Association Ouarterly. vol. 58, no. 1 (Summer) p. 3-12.
SCHOOL-AGE PARENTS
Branch, Alvia, James Riccio, and Janet Quint. 1984. Building Self-Sufficiency in Pregnant and Parenting Teens: The Implementation of Project Redirection. Manpower Demonstration Research Corporation.
Children's Defense Fund. 1985. Preventing Children Having Children. Washington, DC: Children's Defense Fund.
Children and Teens Today. 1987. "Sexism Provides Barrier To Teen Male Sexual Responsibility." vol. 7, no. 11 (July) p. 1-2.
Children Today. 1988. "Teenaged Mothers--17 Years Later." vol. 17, no. 1 (January-February) pp. 2-4.
McCormick, Kathleen. 1985. "AIDS and Herpes Carry weighty Policy Implications For Your Board." American School Board Journal. vol. 172, no. 10 (October) pp. 37-38.
Polit, Denise F. 1987. "Routes to Self-Sufficiency: Teenage Mothers and Employment." Children Today. vol. 16, no. 1 (January-February) pp. 6-11.
Pollock, Andrew M. 1987. "Development of a Program to Reduce Dropout Rates of Pregnant and Parenting Teens. II ERS Spectrum. vol. 5, no. 3 (Summer) pp. 34-40.
Van Newkirk, Jack C. 1988. liThe Crucial Ingredient in This AIDS Education Formula: Community Support. 1I The American School Board Journal. vol. 175, no. 2 (February) pp. 33-34.
A-67

SUBSTANCE ABUSE PROGRAMS
Allen, Tim. 1984. "Drug and Alcohol Abuse Rx for a School School." School Business News. vol. 50, no. 11 (November) pp. 42-44.
Celebreeze, John and Barbara Murphy. 1986. "Chemical Dependency Programs: Are You Part of the Problem or the Solution." American Secondary Education. vol. 15, no. 1 pp. 26-28.
Children & Teens Today. 1987. "Just Say No Campaign May Not Be Enough To Prevent Teenage Drug Use." vol. 7, no. 11 (July) p. 7.
Flood, Deane H. and Ellen R. Morehouse. 1986. "The Principal's Role in Preventing and Reducing Student Substance Abuse." NASSP Bulletin. vol. 7 0, no. 487 (February) pp. 10-15.
Harris, Sarah and Jim Perry. 1987. "Should Students Be Suspended For Using Drugs." NEA Today. vol. 5 (March) p. 31.
Jones, Coryl LaRue and Catherine S. Bell-Bolek. 1986. "Kids and Drugs: Why, When, and What Can We Do About It." Children Today. vol. 15, no. 3 (MayJune) pp. 5-10.
McAndrew, Judith. 1985. "Children of Alcoholics: School Intervention." Childhood Education. vol. 61, no. 5 (May/June) pp. 343-345.
National Clearinghouse for Alcohol Information. 1986. 10 Steps .To Help Your Pre-Teen Say No. Washington, DC: Government Printing Office.
National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism. 1986. Communicating With Youth About Alcohol: Methods, Messages, & Materials. Washington, DC: Government Printing Office. DHHS Publication No. (ADM) 84-1429.
1984. Preventing Alcohol Problems Through a Student Assistance Program. Washington, DC: Government Printing Office. DHHS Publication No. (ADM) 84-1344.
1983. A Growing Concern: How To Provide Services For Children From Alcohol Families. Washington, DC: Government Printing Office. DHHS Publication No. (ADM) 83-1257.
A-68

1981. Guide To Alcohol Programs For Youth. Washington, DC: Government Printing Office. DHHS Publication No. (ADM) 81-437.
Needham, Nancy R. 1987. "Drugs: Schools fight back against and in the process they help students learn self-control." NEA Today. vol. 5 (March) pp. 4-5.
Rubel, Robert J. 1984. A Comprehensive Approach To Drug Prevention. Austin, TX: National Alliance For Safe Schools.
Schall, Jane. 1986. "Alcoholism: When a parent drinks a child struggles." Here's how to help children cope in healthy ways." Instructor. vol. 95, no. 8 (April) pp. 54-57.
Woolf, Norma Bennett. 1986. "Recruit coaches and athletes to help battle drugs." The American School Board Journal. vol. 173, no. 2. (February) p. 36.
PRESCHOOL AND EARLY CHILDHOOD PROGRAMS
Carter, Geraldine. 1984. "A Day Treatment Program for Black Parents and Preschoolers." Children Today. vol. 13, no. 6 (November-December) pp. 19-23.
Children Today 1987. "Establishing Early Intervention Programs." vol. 16, no. 3 (May-June) p. 5.
Collins, Raymond C. and Dennis Deloria. 1983. "Head Start Research: A New Chapter." Children Today. vol. 12, no. 4 (July-August) pp. 15-24.
Fort, Jane. 1983. "Perspectives on Early Education." Children Today. vol. 12, no. 6 (NovemberDecember) pp. 25-29.
Hogg Foundation for Mental Health. 1985. We Can Help Ourselves (WHO): An antivictimization Program For Children in Houston. Austin, TX: The University of Texas.
Jones, H. Lawrence, Bonnie Pollack, and Henry Marockie. 1988. "Full-Day Kindergarten as a Treatment for At-Risk Students: Ohio County Schools." ERS Spectrum. vol. 6, no. 1 (Winter) pp. 3-7.
McCormick, Kathleen. 1986. "If Early Education Isn't on Your Agenda Now, It Could Be--and Soon." The American School Board Journal. (June) pp. 30-34.
A-69

Minnesota Department of Education. 1986. Evaluation Study of Early Childhood Family Education. Minneapolis, MN.
Weikart, David P. 1981. "Effects of Different Curricula in Early Childhood Intervention." Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis. vol. 3, no. 6 (November-December) pp. 25-35.
Zorn, Robert L. 1988. "In designing a preschool program, we went straight to the source: Parents." The American School Board Journal. vol. 175, no. 2 (February) pp. 28-29.
PARENT and FAMILY PROGRAMS
American Medical News. 1985. "MD's projects target gay, lesbian teens." (August) pp. 13-14.
Armstrong, Kay A. and Yvonne L. Fraley. 1985. "What Happens to Families After They Leave the Program?" Children Today. vol. 14, no. 3 (May-June) pp. 17-20.
Beale, Andrew V. 1985. "Toward More Effective Parent Involvement . " The Clearing House. vol. 58, no. 5 (January) pp. 213-215.
Besharov, Douglas J. 1987. "Policy Guidelines for Decision Making in Child Abuse and Neglect." Children Today. vol. 16, no. 6 (November-December) p. 7.
Brassard, Marla R., Ann H. Tyler, and Thomas J. Kehle. 1983. "School Programs to Prevent Intrafamilial Child Sexual Abuse. 1I Child Abuse and Neglect. vol. 7, no. 2 pp. 242-245.
Carter, Geraldine. 1984. IIA Day Treatment Program for Black Parents and Preschoolers. II Children Today.
vol. 13, no. 6 (November-December) pp. 47-58.
Children Today. 1986. IIRunaway Youth: A Profile. II vol. 15, no. 1 (January-February) pp. 4-5.
Clarke-Stewart, K. Alison. 1981. IIParent Education in the 1970's.1I Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis. vol. 3, no. 6 (November-December) pp. 47-58.
Demos, Elene S. 1987. IIEffective Schools: Guiding Parents Through the Maze. II American Secondary Education. vol. 15, no. 4 pp. 25-28.
A-70

Education USA. 1987. "Barriers to Parental Involvement Can Be Overcome." vol. 30, no. 13 (November) p. 94.
1988. "Special Issue: Forging New Directions in Parent Involvement." vol. 30, no. 20 (January).
Epstein, Joyce L. and Henry Jay Becker. 1982. "Teacher's Reported Practices of Parent Involvement: Problems and Possibilities." The Elementary School Journal. vol. 83, no. 2 (November) pp. 103-113.
Gladbach, Randall M. and Virginia R. Wheeler. 1986. "Child Abuse and Neglect: A Curriculum Proposal." The Teacher Educator. vol. 21, no. 3 pp. 9-14.
Heath, Jay A. 1984. "When parents sign contracts, schools and students corne out on top." The American School Journal. vol. 171, no. 1 (January) pp. 36-37.
Herman, Joan L. and Jennie P. Yeh. 1983. "Some Effects of Parent Involvement in Schools. 1I The Urban Review. vol. 15, no. 1 pp. 11-17.
Konet, Richard J. 1986. IIDeveloping a Suicide Intervention Program in Your School. 1I NASSP Bulletin. vol. 70, no. 487 (February) pp. 51-54.
Leming, James S. 1985. IISchool Curriculum and Social Development in Early Adolescence. 1I Childhood Education. vol. 61, no. 4 (March/April) pp. 257-262.
Luty, Carl. 1985. "Suicidal Students: A Nation Mourns, Schools Respond." NEA Today. vol. 3 (January/February) pp. 4-5.
McAndrew, Judith A. 1985. "Children of Alcoholics: School Intervention." Childhood Education. (vol. 61, no. 5) (May/June) pp. 343-345.
McLaughlin, Milbrey Wallin. 1987. IIInvolving LowIncome Parents in the Schools: A Role for Policy." Phi Delta Kappan. vol. 69, no. 2 (October) pp. 156-160.
Maloy, Robert and Harvey Scrioner. 1985. "Parent Involvement and the Enabling of School Reform." Contemporary Education. vol. 56, no. 3 (Spring) pp. 163-167.
A-71

Manning, M. Lee. 1983. "The Involved Father." The Clearinghouse. vol. 57, no. 1 (September) pp. 17-19.
Marockie, Henry and H. Lawrence Jones. 1987. "Reducing Dropout Rates Through Horne-School Communication." Education and Urban Society. vol. 19, no. 2 (February) pp. 200-205.
Maurer, Kenneth H. 1985. "A seven-course strategy to entice parents to school." The American School Board Journal. vol. 172, no. 4 (April) p. 36.
Rogers, Joy J. 1988. "Ask these key questions when you review child abuse reporting policies." The American School Board Journal. vol. 175, no. 1 (January) pp. 33-34.
Rondon, Nayda. 1986. "KID-ABILITY: Taking Action on Child Abuse." Children Today. vol. 15, no. 4 (July-August) pp. 22-25.
Ross, Charlotte P. and A. Russell Lee M.D. n.d. "Suicide in Youth and What You Can Do About It: A Guide for School Personnel." Washington, DC: Youth Suicide National Center.
n.d. "Suicide in Youth and What You Can Do About It: A Guide for Students." Washington, DC: Youth Suicide National Center.
Sattes, Beth D. 1985. Parent Involvement: A Review of the Literature. Charleston, WV: Appalachia Educational Laboratory.
Toepfer, Conrad F. Jr. 1986. "Suicide in Middle Level Schools: Implications for Principals." NASSP Bulletin. vol. 70, no. 487 (February) pp. 55-60.
Weddle, Charles D. and Phillip M. Wishon. 1986. "Children of Alcoholics: What We Should Know; How We Can Help." Children Today. vol. 15, no. 1 (January-February) pp. 8-12.
SCHOOL/BUSINESS PARTNERSHIPS
Children Today. 1986. "Business and Schools." vol. 15, no. 1 (January-February) pp. 5-6.
DeRose, Lorrie. 1984. "Adopt-A-School School-Business Partnerships Create a Mutual Benefit for All." School Business Affairs. vol. 50, no. 4 (April) pp. 59-60.
A-72

Evans, Paula M. and Robert A. Shaw. 1986. "SchoolCollege Collaboration: How Does It Work? What Are the Benefits?" NASSP Bulletin. vol. 70, no. 488 (March) pp. 84-89.
Goodlad, John I. 1987. "Schools and Universities Can-and Must--Work Together." Principal. vol. 67, no. 1 (September) pp. 9-15.
Hazlett, J. Stephen. 1986. "School-University Partnerships." Contemporary Education. vol. 57, no. 4 (Summer) pp. 192-193.
Hooston, Paul D. and Judith Ferguson. 1986. "Running Schools as a Business: Massacre or Mutuality." NASSP Bulletin. vol. 70, no. 490 (May) pp. 12-21.
Lee, Sylvia, Shirley Bryant, Nancy Noonan, and Elizabeth Plionis. 1987. Keeping Youth in School: A PublicPrivate Collaboration." Children Today. vol. 16, no. 4 (July-August) pp. 15-20.
Mann, Dale. 1984. "It's up to you to steer those school/business partnerships." The American School Board Journal. vol. 171, no. 10 (October) pp. 20-23 .
. 1986. "Building School-Business Coalitions ----=Th;-a-t Pay Long-Range Dividends." NASSP Bulletin.
vol. 70, no. 490 (May) pp. 1-5 .
.... . 1986. "High School Principals and School-
- - - -B:u-siness Coalitions." The Education Digest. vol. 52, no. 2 (October) pp. 24-27.
1987. "Business Involvement and Public School Improvement: Part II." Phi Delta Kappan. vol. 69, no. 3 (November) pp. 228-232.
Moore, Ella C. 1986. "Bridging the Gap Between Schools and Businesses." NASSP Bulletin. vol. 70, no. 490 (May) pp. 24-25.
NASSP Bulletin. 1983. "Private Sector Initiatives In Education." vol. 67, no. 462 (April) pp. 1-51.
Phillipo, John R. 1983. "Industry and the Public Schools--A Partnership That Can Work." American Education. vol. 19, no. 9 (November)
Powell, Bob. 1986. "Volunteers in the Schools: A Positive Approach to Schooling." NASSP Bulletin. vol. 70, no. 494 (December) pp. 32-34.
A-73

Reinhartsen, Bette. 1986 "Adopt-a-School Program Enhances Curriculum." NASSP Bulletin. vol. 70, no. 490 (May) pp. 16-17.
Roberts, A. Wayne. 1985. "Partnerships in Education: An Executive Summary." School Business Affairs. vol. 51, no. 1 (January) pp. 21-21.
Saks, Judith Brody. 1987. liThe Progress of Partnerships. II The American School Board Journal. vol. 174, no. 4 (April) pp. A2-A3.
Strelec, John P. and Carlene Murphey. 1986. "Needs Assessments Help Businesses in Adopt-A-School Programs. II NASSP Bulletin. vol. 70, no. 490 (May) pp. 19-21.
Woodside, William. 1986. "Business in Education--Is There Life After Partnerships. II NASSP Bulletin. vol. 70, no. 490 (May) pp. 6-11.'
Wynne, George E. 1986. "School-Business Partnerships --A Shortcut to Effectiveness." NASSP Bulletin. vol. 70, no. 491 (September) pp. 94-98.
Youngs, Bettie. 1983. "18 Reasons Why Leaders in Business and Education Should Work Together. II NASSP Bulletin. vol. 67, no. 466 (November) pp. 74-77.
Zakariya, Sally Banks. 1988. "A few of the farsighted begin to seek new arguments for supporting schools. II The American School Board Journal. vol. 175, no. 2 (February) pp. 22-25.
MULTIFACETED PROGRAMS
Appalachian Regional Commission. 1987. Dropout Prevention In Appalachian: Lessons for the Nation. Washington, DC: Appalachian Regional Commission.
Augustin, James, Ann Benisch, Jan Novak, and Keith Ruzicka. 1981. "Assessing the Need For Dropout Prevention. II Staying In ... A Dropout Prevention Handbook K-12. Madison, WI: Wisconsin Vocational Studies Center, University of Wisconsin.
Augustin, James, Roger Klumb, Jan Novak, and Keith Ruzicka. 1981. "Evaluating Dropout Prevention Efforts. II Staying In ... A Dropout Prevention Handbook K-12. Madison, WI: Wisconsin Vocational Studies Center, University of Wisconsin.
A-74

California Assembly Office of Research. Dropping Out, Losing Out: The High Cost for California. Sacramento, CA.
Center for Dropout Prevention. 1987. Selected Dropout Prevention Research. Miami, FL: University of Miami.
Council of Chief State School Officers. 1987. Elements of A Model State Statute To Provide Educational Entitlements For At-Risk Students. Washington, DC: Council of Chief State School Officers.
Dougherty, Barbara and Roger Klumb. 1981. "Establishing Staff Roles and Staffing Patterns in Dropout Prevention." Staying In ... A Dropout Prevention Handbook K-12. Madison, WI: Wisconsin Vocational Studies Center, University of Wisconsin.
Edison-Swift, Susan, Jan Novak, Eleanor Wong, and Connie Gee. 1981. "Utilizing Resources and Facilities." Staying In ... A Dropout Prevention Handbook K-12. Madison, WI: Wisconsin Vocational Studies Center, University of Wisconsin.
Education Commission of the States. n.d. Strategies For Financing State Dropout Programs. Denver, CO: Education Commission of the States.
Fortenberry, Robert N. and Barbara L. White. 1987. "Districts Grapple with Dropout Problem." The School Administrator. vol. 44, no. 3 (March) pp. 11-15.
Maurer, Robert E. 1982. "Dropout Prevention: An Intervention Model For Today's High Schools." Phi Delta Kappan. vol. 63, no. 7 (March) pp.470-471.
Mizell, M. Hayes. 1986. "Considerations Preliminary to the Development of Dropout Prevention Policies and Programs." ERS Spectrum. vol. 4, no. 4 pp. 21-27.
1986. "Resources for the Development of Dropout Prevention Policies and Programs." Columbia, SC: Youth Employment Coordinating Council.
Myrick, Robert D. and Robert P. Bowman. 1983. "Peer Helpers and the Learning Process." Elementary School Guidance and Counseling. (December) pp. 111-117 .
A-75

North Carolina Department of Public Instruction. 1986. Joining Hands: The Report of the Model Programs for Dropout Prevention. Raleigh, NC: Dropout Prevention Section, Division of Support Programs.
Office of Educational Research and Improvement. 1986. Educational Programs That Work: A Collection of Proven Exemplary Educational Programs and Practices. 12th Edition. Washington, DC: National Diffusion Network. (ED 266 134).
Payne, Janice. 1987. liMy Experience With the Peer Mentor Program. II Children Today. vol. 16, no. 4 (July-August) pp. 15-20.
Portland Public Schools. 1986. "School Leaver Prevention and Recovery. II Portland, OR: Management Information Service. (ED 274 731).
Quinones, Nathan. 1987. "Dropout Prevention: The New York City Success." ERS Spectrum. vol. 5, no. 3 (Summer) pp. 41-46.
Seegrist, Ruth. 1986. "Job-training academies steer inner-city kids to a bright future. 1I The American School Board Journal. vol. 173, no. 6 (June) pp. 38 -39.
Smith, Jackie. 1987. IIReflection of a Peer Mentor. II Children Today. vol. 16, no. 4 (July-August) pp. 15-20.
Uhrmacher, P. Bruce. 1985. IIUse this step-by-step approach to reduce the student dropout rate." The American School Board Journal. vol. 172, no. 4 (April) pp. 40-41.
Wacker, Gabrielle B. Jan Novak, and Barbara Dougherty. 1981. "Utilizing Resources and Facilities. II Staying In ... A Dropout Prevention Handbook K-12. Madison, WI: Wisconsin Vocational Studies Center, University of Wisconsin.
Weidman, John C. and Robert R. Friedmann. 1984. liThe School-to-Work Transition for High School Dropouts. II The Urban Review. vol. 16, no. 1 pp. 25-42.
Wichess, Samuel F. 1984. IIJobs for America's Graduates: A Youth Employment Program that Means Business. 1I The Clearing House. vol. 57, no. 5 (January) pp. 1 97 - 2 0 0 .
A-76

APPENDIX K.
INSTRUMENT FOR EVALUATING LOCAL DROPOUT PREVENTION PROGRAMS
Directions: Twenty (20) criteria for evaluating critical components of dropout prevention programs are listed below. Each is preceded by a line. For each criterion, enter a rating on the line using the following scale:
5 Outstanding 4 Good 3 Fair 2 Marginal 1 Poor
o Information not available
NA Not Applicable
After rating each of the 20 criteria, sum the ratings, and divide this total by 20 to derive the average rating for the project's status. A rating of three or less indicates a definite need for more work designing, implementing, and/or conducting the program.
I. PROGRAM DESIGN
Program Goals and Objectives: The program has written goals and objectives which are consistent with the intent of the agency funding dropout prevention programs.
Student Eligibility: Written student eligibility criteria specify the data or documentation required to determine the eligibility of a student and are structured to select students at highest risk of dropping out of school.
Student Admission Procedures: Written admission procedures specify all steps from identification to actual enrollment into the program and are consistently implemented with all students.
II. PROGRAM DELIVERY
Facilities: Facilities used by the students are safe, clean, in good repair, and are appropriate for the type of program.
Curriculum: The special needs of students at risk of dropping out are incorporated into the program curriculum.
Program Characteristics: The duration, intensity, and location of the program are appropriate.
Teaching Strategies: Teaching approaches and techniques are adjusted to accommodate high risk students and their individual learning styles.
Target Population: The program is appropriate for the identified target population.
A-77

II. PROGRAM DELIVERY (Continued)
Student Services: Appropriate student services are planned for and provided to students in the program.
Oualifications of Personnel: Program staff are qualified by credentials and experience for the positions to which they are assigned.
Proqram Materials: Materials to support the program are appropriate, accessible, and available when needed.
Program Organization: The program is organized to ensure coordination within and across services and programs for the students.
Staff Development: Staff involved in the dropout prevention program participate regularly in staff development activities.
III. PROGRAM MANAGEMENT
Program Evaluation: The program evaluation addresses:
demographic and academic descriptions of students served student attainment of program objectives (changed behavior, better academic performance, graduation, better attendance) student dropout rate (annual rate) longitudinal analyses of district dropout rates (cohort) case studies of successes and failures follow-up studies of program participants satisfaction of program staff and participants with the program, and other outcome measures appropriate for the program.
Data Collection and Analysis: Methods are systematic and appropriate for the types of information required.
Indicators of Success: Results indicate that the program is accomplishing its stated objectives.
Program Costs: Costs for the program are summarized annually for the program by function.
Coordination with Other Agencies: Program staff meet routinely with staff from law enforcement, social services, or other local agencies to coordinate activities.
Parent, Community and Business Interrelationship: Parents and representatives of business and the community are involved in and are thoroughly familiar with the program.
Administration: The project is appropriately administered by a director or manager who is qualified to manage the program.
A-78

APPENDIX L.

INDEX OF GEORGIA DROPOUT PREVENTION AND RECOVERY PROGRAMS BY DISTRICT

PAGE

Atlanta City Schools

761 Adopt-A-Student 761 Project ADEPT 761 Rich's Academy

8-21 8-48 8-18

Calhoun County Schools

619 In School Suspension

8-81

Carrollton City Schools

766 School Climate Management

8-95

Chatham County Schools

625 Oatland Island Alternative School 625 Pre-First

8-77 8-30

Clarke County Schools

629 JTPA 629 Teen Parent Program

8-60 8-53

Cobb County Schools

633 Coordinated Vocational Academic

Education

8-56

633 MACAD 8- 3 7

633 Oakwood High School

8-10

633 Remedial Education Program

8-11

Colquitt County Schools

635 Reassignment Center 635 Student Assistance Program

8-79 . 8-38

Columbia County Schools

636 Saturday School

8-84

Coweta County Schools

638 East Newnan School 638 Jobs for Georgia's Graduates

8-92 . 8-58

Dade County Schools 641 CVAE................................... 8-55

A-79

Dalton City Schools
772 School Climate Improvement Project 772 Stay in School Task Force 772 Teen Able
Dawson County Schools
642 Jobs for Georgia Graduates
Douglas County Schools
648 Related Vocational Instruction
Dublin City Schools
774 Dropout Prevention
Fulton County Schools
660 Substance Use Prevention & Education Resource (SUPER)
Gainsville City Schools
776 The Northlake Network
Glynn County Schools
663 Glynn County OP-ED Program
Grady County Schools
665 Business/School Partnership 665 Parental Involvement
Gwinnett County Schools
667 Gwinnett 7th Class Program
Heard County Schools
674 Chapter I 67 4 F am i 1Y Li vi n g 674 JTPA 674 Parenting-After-School 674 Reading/Math Lab 674 Trade and Industrial Education
Houston County Schools
676 Early Childhood Preventive Curriculum
676 Remedial Summer School (Elementary)
A-80

8-94 8-23 8-49
8-59
8-64
8-6
8-39
8-74
8-57
8-90 8-43
8-8
8-12 8- 51 8-61 8-52 8-17 8-65
8-27 8-31

Irwin County Schools
677 Irwin County In School Support Program
Laurens County Schools
687 Adult Basic Education Program 687 Dropout Prevention/Peer Tutors 687 EL CARE (Drop out Drop in
Learning, Caring, Sharing) 687 Teen Parenting Program
Lincoln County Schools
690 School Climate
McDuffie County Schools
697 P.A.S.S.--Partnership and Student Student Success
Macon County Schools
694 Self Improvement Lab (SIL)
Murray County Schools
705 ADDITIONS 705 P .A. S. S. (Parents Assisting
Students Successfully) 705 Stay in School Program
Pulaski County Schools
716 Vocational Summer School
Richmond County Schools
721 Adult Education 721 Alcohol and Drug Awareness
& Prevention Program 721 Elementary Resource Counseling
Program 721 Mathematics Basic Skill Labs 721 Migrant Education Program 721 Peer Tutoring Component of Counseling
Program 721 Richmond County Alternative Center 721 Seeds of Greatness 721 Special Instructional Assistance 721 Take Home Computer 721 The Innovative Demonstration
School of Excellence 721 Volunteer Program
A-81

8-85
8-70 8-13 8-14 8-50
8-91
8-29
8-78
8-41 8-45 8-24
8-66
8-71 8-36 8-28 8-9 8-42 8-16 8-88 8-19 8-33 8-34 8-15 8-46

Rome City Schools

785 Curriculum and Remedial Programs

8-26

785 Drop out Prevention

8-7

785 In School Suspension

8-87

785 JTPA Summer Program

8-62

785 SKIP................................... 8-32

Seminole County Schools

725 In School Suspension

8-80

Spalding County Schools

726 Future Stock's Stay in School Program .. 8-22

Taylor County Schools

733 Crisis Intervention Program

8-82

Turner County Schools

742 Adult Basic Education/Adult Secondary Education
742 Alternative School 742 Related Vocational Instruction

8-69 8-83 8-63

Walker County Schools

746 Vocational/Academic Preparation (VAP) .. 8-67

Walton County Schools

747 SPARKS Student Partners Aiming for Recognition, Knowledge, and Success .... 8-75

Waycross City Schools

794 Children at Risk Committee

8-73

Whitfield County Schools

755 In School Probation Program 755 School Climate Improvement

8-86 8-93

State-Wide Program

Champs-Explore

8-44

A-82

REFERENCES
Academy for Educational Development. (1986). "Dropout Prevention." Urban Principals Network News. (Autumn) p. 2 (ED 281 931).
Adams, Don. (1981). "Effective School Business Partnership." School Business Affairs. vol. 51, no. 1 (January) pp. 18-20.
ALL-STAR Program Brochure. (n.d.). San Antonio Tx: The Center for Educational Development.
American Association of School Administrators. (1988). Tips for Improving School Climate. Arlington, VA: American Association of School Administrators.
American School Board Journal. (1987). "Bonus Report: Partners In Education." vol. 174, no. 4 (April) pp. A1-A11.
Archer, Edith L. and Judith H. Dresden. (1987). "A New Kind of Dropout: The Effect of Minimum Competency Testing on High School Graduation In Texas." Education and Urban Society. vol. 19, no. 3 (May) pp. 269-279.
Armstrong, Kay A. and Yvonne L. Fraley. (1985). "What Happens To Families After They Leave the Program." Children Today. vol. 14, no. 3 (May/June) pp. 17-20.
Barber, Larry, and Mary C. McClellan. (1987). "Looking at America's Dropouts: Who Are They?" Phi Delta Kappan. vol. 69, no. 4, (December) pp. 264-267.
Bartosh, Fred, Jr., and John Barilla. (1985). "Discipline--Still Number One On the Administrator's List Of Problems." NASSP Bulletin. vol. 69, no. 479, (March) pp. 6-10.
Batesky, James A. (1986). "Twelve Tips for Better Discipline." Contemporary Education. vol. 57, no. 2 (August) pp. 98-99.
Batsche, Catherine. (1984). Indicators of Effective Programming for School to Work Transition Skills Among Dropouts. Normal, IL: Illnois State University. (ED 246 235).
Beck, Lisa, and Joseph A. Muia. (1980). "A Portrait of a Tragedy: Research Findings on the Dropout." The High School Journal. vol. 64, no. 2 (November) pp. 65-72.
R-1

Becker, Henry Jay, and Epstein, Joyce L. (1982). "Parent Involvement: A Survey of Teacher Practices." The Elementary School Journal. vol. 83, no. 2 (November) pp. 85-102.
Bell, Louise C. and Gregory P. Stefanich. (1984). "Building Effective Discipline Using the Cascade Model." The Clearing House. vol. 58, no. 3 (November) pp. 134-137.
Boissy, Leo W. (1987). Success in School Through Home Intervention; 1986-87 End-of-Year Report. Wheeling, WV; Ohio County Schools.
Burke, Michael A. (1986). "School-Business Partnerships; Trojan Horse or Manna From Heaven?" NASSP Bulletin. vol. 70, no. 493 (November) pp. 45-49.
Burns, James A. (1985). "Discipline; Why Does It Continue To Be A Problem? Solution Is In Changing School Culture." NASSP Bulletin. vol. 69, no. 479 (March) pp. 1-5.
Cahill, Michele. (1986). "Pregnancy Prevention and Dropout." Urban Principals Network News. (Autumn) p. 13. (ED 281 931).
Cardenas, Jose A. (1988). "Formulating a Plan for Dropout Prevention." TDRA Newsletter. vol. 15, no. 3 (March) pp. 1-3.
Center for Research on Elementary & Middle Schools. (1987). "Research Identifies Effective Programs for Students At-Risk of School Failure." (December) pp. 1-7.
Children & Teens Today. (1986). "School-Based Clinic Achieves Dramatic Decrease In Teen Pregnancies." vol. 6, no. 12 (August) pp. 2-4.
Chobot, Richard B., and Antoine Garibaldi. (1982). "In-School Alternative to Suspension; A Description of Ten School District Programs." The Urban Review. vol. 14, no. 4 pp. 317-336.
Cipollene, Anthony. (1986). Research, Program, and Policy Trends in Dropout Prevention; A National Perspective. Cambridge, MA; Education Matters, Inc.
Cohen, Allan Y. (1985). "Drug Treatment in School and Alternative School Settings." Treatment Services for Adolescent Substance Abusers. Alfred S. Friedman and George M. Beschner (eds.) Washington, DC; GPO DHBS Publication No. (85-1342).
R-2

Collins, Christopher G. (1985). "In-School Suspension." Anaheim, CA: Paper presented at the 63rd Annual Meeting of the Council for Exceptional Children. (April 15-19) 1985. (ED 258 353).
Committee for Economic Development. (1987). Children in Need: Investment Strategies for the Educationally Disadvantaged. Washington, DC: Committee for Economic Development, Research and Policy Committee.
Committee on Education and Labor. (1986a). Oversight Hearing on Successful Education Programs Relating to Illiteracy, Bilingual Education and Dropout Prevention. Hearing before the Subcommittee on Elementary, Secondary, and Vocational Education of the Committee on Education and Labor, House of Representatives, Ninety-ninth Congress, First Session. Serial No. 99-78. Washington, DC: Government Printing Office.
(1986b). H.R. 3042, The Dropout Prevention and Reentry Act. Hearings before the Subcommittee on Elementary, Secondary, and Vocational Education of the Committee on Education and Labor, House of Representatives, Ninety-ninth Congress, Second Session. Serial No. 99-119. Washington, DC: Government Printing Office.
Comprehensive Competencies Program Brochure. (1987). Washington DC: Remediation and Training Institute.
Cox, J. Lamarr, Judy A. Holley, R. Hayman Kite, and Wanda Y. Durham. (1985). Study of High School Dropouts in Appalachia. Washington, DC: Appalachian Regional Commission, Center for Educational Studies.
Dalton Public Schools. (n. d. ). Analyzing School Climate. Dalton, GA: Dalton Public Schools.
De Pauw, Julie. (1987). Keeping Children in School: Springfield's Districtwide Prevention and Intervention Program for At-risk Students. Eugene, OR: Oregon School Study Council.
Detroit Public Schools. (1986). "Dropout in Detroit: The Superintendent's View." Urban Principals Network News. (Autumn) pp. 3-4. (ED 281 931).
DiSciullo, Mario. (1984). "In-School Suspension: An Alternative to Unsupervised Out-of-School Suspension." The Clearing House. vol. 57, no. 7 (March) pp. 328-330.
R-3

Doss, David A., and Perry J. Sailor. (1987). IICounting Dropouts, It's Enough to Make You Want to Quit Too!.11 Washington, DC: Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association. (Publication No. 86.39).

Earle, Janice, Virginia Roach, and Katherine Fraser. (1987). Female Dropouts: A New Perspective. Alexandria, VA: National Association of State Boards of Education.

Edison-Swift, Susan and Jan Novak. (1981). IIIdentifying Approaches for Dropout Prevention.

1I

Stay In ... A Dropout Prevention Handbook K-12.

Madison, WI: Wisconsin Vocational Studies Center.

Education Commission of the States. (1985). Reconnecting Youth: The Next Stage of Reform Denver, CO: Education Commission of the States.

Education USA. (1986). IIDropouts Who and Why?1I vol. 28, no. 19 (January) pp. 137-148.

(1988). IISpecial Issue: Forging New Directions In Parent Involvement. 1I vol. 30, no. 20 (January).

Family Support Center Program Brochure. (n.d.) Upper Darby, PA.

Florida Department of Education. (1986). Dropout Prevention Manual for Developing Comprehensive Plans. Tallahassee: Florida Department of Education.

Foley, Eileen. (1983). IIAlternative Schools: New Findings ll Social Policy. vol. 13, no. 3 (Winter) pp. 44-45.

Fraley, Yvonne L. (1984). liThe Family Support Center: Early Intervention for High Risk Parents and Children. II Perspective on Child Maltreatment in the Mid '80's. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. DHHS Publication No. (OHDS 84-30338).

Friedman, Alfred S. (1985). 1I0verv iew of Selected Adolescent Substance Abuse Treatment Programs. 1I Treatment Services for Adolescent Substance Abusers. Alfred S. Friedman and George M. Beschner (eds.) Washington, DC: Government Printing Office. DHHS Publication No. (85-1342) pp. 66-79.

R-4

Garibaldi, Antoine M. (1979). In-School Alternatives to Suspension: Conference Report. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.
Gaus, Skip and Brother Gilbert Henderson. (1985). IIS upportive Life Skills Program For Court Committed Adolescent Substance Abusers." Treatment Services for Adolescent Substance Abusers. Alfred S. Friedman and George M. Beschner (eds.) washington, DC: Government Printing Office. DHHS Publication No. (85-1342).
Georgia Department of Education. (n. d. ) "Georgia Training Centers." (brochure) Atlanta, GA: Georgia Department of Education.
Georgia School Boards Association. (1987). Student Discipline. Lawrenceville, GA: Georgia School Boards Association.
Goodstadt, Michael S. (1987). "School-Based Drug Education: What is Wrong?1I The Education Digest. vol. 52, no.6 (February) pp. 44-47.
Gottfredson, Gary D. (1984). Assessing School Climate in Prevention Program Planning, Development, and Evaluation. Toronto, Canada: Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Psychological Association. (ED 250 804).
Gottfredson, Gary D., and John H. Hollifield. (1988). IIHow to Diagnose School Climate: Pinpointing Problems, Planning Change." NASSP Bulletin. vol. 72, no. 506 (March) pp. 63-70.
Green, Karen Reed, and Andrea Baker. (1986). Promising Practices for High-Risk Youth in the Northwest Region: Initial Search. Portland, OR: "Northwest Regional Educational Lab.
Hahn, Andrew. (1987). "Reaching Out to America's Dropouts: What To Do?" Phi Delta Kappan. vol. 69, no. 4 (December) pp. 256-263.
Hahn, Andrew, Jacqueline Danzberger, Bernard Lefkowitz. (1987). Dropouts in America: Enough Is Known for Action. Washington, DC: Institute for Educational Leadership.
Hamilton, Stephen. (1986). IIRaising Standards and Reducing Dropout Rates." School Dropouts: Patterns and Policies. Gary Natriello (ed.) New York: Teachers College Press. pp. 148-167.
R-5

Hanson, James L., and Douglas L. Hoeft. (1983). "One School District Fights the Battle of Truancy with Some Success." Phi Delta Kappan. vol. 62, no. 6 (February) pp. 436-437.
Hargroves, Jeannette S. (1987). "The Boston Compact: Facing the Challenge of School Dropouts." Education and Urban Society. vol. 19, no. 3 (May) pp. 303-310.
Hess, G. Alfred, Emily Wells, Carol Prindel, Paul Liffman, and Beatrice Kaplan. (1987). "Where's Room 185? How Schools Can Reduce Their Dropout Problem." Education and Urban Society. vol. 19, no. 3 (May) pp. 330-355.
Hester, Gerald L. (1986). "Elements of Successful Partnership In Spokane." NASSP Bulletin. vol. 70, no. 490 (May) pp. 22-25.
Hogan, Dan, and Karen Roth. (1984). Positive Organizational Climate: The Key to Quality Circles. ERIC Clearinghouse (ED 248 572).
Hopkins, Willard, and Kay Crain. (1985). School Climate: The Key to an Effective School. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the National Association of Secondary School Principals, New Orleans, LA. (ED 256 078).
Ingram, Judith K. (1982). So You Want To Start an Alternative School! A How-To-Do-It Manual. Marquette, MI: Marquette Area Public Schools. (ED 287 635).
Institute for Educational Leadership. (1986). School Dropouts: Everybody's Problem. Washington, DC: Institute for Educational Leadership.
Justiz, Manuel J., and Marilyn C. Kameen. (1986). "School-Business Partnerships: Working To Defuse the Dropout Time Bomb." NASSP Bulletin. vol. 70, no. 494 (December) pp. 103-108.
(1987). "Business Offers a Hand to Education. " Phi Delta Kappan. vol. 68, no. 5 (January) pp. 379-383.
Kolberg, Richard J. (1986). "Employment, the Private Sector, and At-Risk Youth." The ANNALS of The American Academy of Political and Social Science. vol. 23, no.3 (August) pp. 31-48.
R-6

Kusnetz, Stanley. (1985). "An Overview of Selected Adolescent Substance Abuse Treatment Programs." Treatment Services for Adolescent Substance Abusers. Alfred S. Friedman and George M. Beschner (eds.) washington, DC: Government Printing Office. DHHS Publication No. (85-1342).
La Rue, Patricia E. and Virginia R. Miller. (1988). "Helping Teen Parents Stay In School." ERS Spectrum. vol. 6, no. 1 (Winter) pp. 25-28.
Leatt, Desmond J. (1987). In-School Suspension Programs for At-Risk Students. Eugene, OR: Oregon School Study Council. (ED 282 279).
LeCompte, Margaret D. (1987). "The Cultural Context of Dropping Out: Why Remedial Programs Fail to Solve the Problem." Education and Urban Society. vol. 19, no. 3 (May) pp. 232-249.
Levin, James, James Nolan, and Nancy Hoffman. (1985). "A Strategy for Classroom Resolution of Chronic Discipline Problems." NASSP Bulletin. vol. 69, no. 479 (March) pp. 11-18.
Licata, Vincent F. (1987). Creating a Positive School Climate at the Junior High Level. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the Michigan Association of Middle School Educators, Birmingham, MI. (ED 280 143).
MacCarry, Bert. (1987). "Opening a Door to Reading: A Very Special Program Designed to Introduce Disadvantaged Preschoolers to the Joys of Learning." Teaching K-8. vol. 17, no. 8 (May) pp. 51-56.
McCormick, Kathleen. (1984). "These Tried-and-True Alliances Have Paid Off for Public Schools." The American School Board Journal. vol. 173, no.6 (June) pp. 369-370.
MCDill, Edward, Gary Natriello, and Aaron Pallas. (1985). "Raising Standards and Retaining Students: The Impact of Reform Recommendations on Potential Dropouts." Review of Educational Research. vol. 55, no. 4 (Winter), pp. 415-433.
(1986). "A Population at Risk: Potential Consequences of Tougher School Standards for Student Dropouts." American Journal of Education Research. vol. 94, no. 2 (February), pp. 135-181.
R-7

McDaniel, Thomas R. (1986). "School Discipline in Perspective." The Clearing House. vol. 59, no. 8 (April) pp. 369-370.
Mann, Dale. (1985). Report of the National Invitational Working Conference on Holding Power and Dropouts. New York, N.Y.: Columbia University, Teachers College. (February 13-15, 1985) (ED 257 927). (1986). "Dropout Prevention--Getting Serious About Programs That Work." NASSP Bulletin. vol. 70, no. 489 (April), pp. 66-73.
(1987a). "Can We Help Dropouts? Thinking About the Undoable." School Drooouts: Patterns and Policies. Gary Natriello (ed.) New York: Teachers College Press. pp. 3-19.
(l987b). "Business Involvement and Public School Improvement, Part I." Phi Delta Kappan. vol. 69, no. 2 (October), pp. 123-128.
Mizell, M. Hayes. (1979). "Designing and Implementing Effective In-School Alternatives To Suspension." In-School Alternatives to Suspension: Conference Report. Antoine M. Garibaldi (ed.) Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office. pp. 133-150.
Moran, Mary E. (1983). "Improving Schools Through Private Sector Partnerships." American Education. vol. 19, no. 1 (January/February) pp. 5-8.
Morely, Raymond E. and Helen I. Clay. (1985). Alternative Schools and Programs, Iowa: Reaching Out To Help People 1985-86 Directory. Des Moines, IA: Iowa State Department of Public Instruction. (ED 264 648).
Morris, Robert C. and Joseph C. Elliott. (1985). "Understanding Alternatives for Classroom Discipline. " The Clearing House. vol. 58, no. 9 (May) pp. 408-412.
Morrow, George. (1987). "Standardizing Practice in the Analysis of School Dropouts." School Dropouts: Patterns and Policies. Gary Natriello, (ed.) New York, NY: Teachers College Press. pp. 38-51.
Murphy, Joseph and Phillip Hallinger. (1985). "Effective High Schools--What Are the Common Characteristics." NASSP Bulletin. vol. 69, no. 477 (January) pp. 18-22.
R-8

Myers, John W. (1985). Involving Parents in Middle Level Education. Columbus, OH: National Middle School Association. (ED 260 515).
National Alliance of Business. (1986). Youth 2000: A Call To Action. Washington, DC: National Alliance of Business.
National Committee for Citizens in Education. (1987). Dropout Prevention: A Book of Sources. Columbia, MD: NCCE (ISBN-0-934460-30-2).
National Diffusion Network. (1982). Technoloqv Programs That Work. Chelmsford, MA: Northeast Regional Exchange.
National Governor's Association. (1987). Task Force on School Dropouts. Washington DC: National Governor's Association.
National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism. (1983). Prevention Plus: Involving Schools, Parents, and the Community in Alcohol and Drug Education. Washington DC: Government Printing Office. DHHS Publication No. (ADM) 83-1256.
National School Safety Center. (1986). Increasing Student Attendance. Sacramento, CA: National School Safety Center. (ED 273 045).
(1987). "Alternative Schools For Disruptive Youth." (Draft) Malibu CA: Pepperdine University.
Naylor, Michele. (1987). "Reducing the Dropout Rate Through Career and Vocational Education: Overview." ERIC Digest No. 63. Columbus, OH: Eric Clearinghouse on Adult, Career, and Vocational Education. (ED 282 094).
Neill, Shirley Boes. (1979). Keeping Students in School: Problems and Solutions. Sacramento, CA: Education News Service.
New Horizons Program Brochure. (1987). Des Moines, IA.
Novak, Jan and Barbara Dougherty. (1981). "Dropout Prevention: An Overview." Stay In ... A Dropout Prevention Handbook K-12. Madison, WI: Wisconsin Vocational Studies Center, University of Wisconsin.
O'Connor, Patrick. (1985). Dropout Prevention Programs That Work. Eugene, OR: Oregon School Study Council. (ED 275 065).
R-9

Orr, Margaret Terry. (1987). What To Do About Youth Dropouts. New York, NY: Structured Employment/Economic Development Corporation.
Ottenburg, Donald J. (1985). "The Day Treatment Center: An Alternative For Adolescent Substance Abusers." Treatment Services for Adolescent Substance Abusers. Alfred S. Friedman and George M. Beschner (eds.) Washington DC: Government Printing Office. DHHS Publication No. (85-1342). pp. 195-203.
Pallas, Aaron M. (1987). School Dropouts in the United States. Washington, DC: Center for Educational Statistics.
Patterson, Francene. (1985). "In-School Suspension Rehabilitates Offenders." NASSP Bulletin. vol. 69, no. 479 (March) pp. 97-99.
Peck, Nancy, Ann Marie Law, and Roger C. Miles. (1987). Dropout Prevention: What We Have Learned. Ann Arbor, MI: Educational Resources Information Center.
Pena, M. Roel. (1985). "Increased Attendance with a Computerized Truant Officer." School Business Affairs. vol. 51, no. 4 (April) pp. 59-60.
Pena, M. Roel. (1985b). "Increased Attendance with a Computerized Truant Officer." School Business Affairs. vol. 51, no. 10. (October) pp. 40-41.
Peninsula Academies Program Brochure. (1987). Stanford, CA: Peninsula Academies.
Pennsylvania Department of Education. (1984). Discipline: Policies and Guidelines. Philadelphia, PA: Pennsylvania Department of Education.
Purkey, Stewart C. and Marshall S. Smith. (1983). "Effective Schools: A Review." The Elementary School Journal. vol. 83, no. 4 (March) pp. 427-452.
Purvis, Johnny and Rex Leonard. (1985). "Strategies for Preventing Behavioral Incidents in the Nation's Secondary Schools." The Clearing House. vol. 58, no. 8 (April) pp. 349-353.
Raby, Marilyn E. (1984). "Peninsula Academies." The Clearing House. vol. 58, no. 4 (December) pp. 171-173.
R-I0

Rich, Dorothy. (1985). The Forgotten Factor in School Success: The Family A Policymaker's Guide. Washington DC: The Home and School Institute Inc.
Robbins, Jeffery, Stephen Mills, and William Clark. (1981). "Alternative Programs: Sometimes They Work, Sometimes They Don't." NASSP Bulletin. vol. 65, no. 44 (May) pp. 48-56.
Rogers, Werner. (1987). "A Message From Werner Rogers, State Superintendent of Schools." Georgia Alert. vol. 16, no. 2 (May) p. 2.
Rousseve, Ronald J. (1985). "Unwed Adolescents with Babies: A Grim American Reality." The School Counselor. vol. 33, no. 2 (November) pp. 85-87.
Ruffin, Santee C. Jr. (1983). School-Business Partnerships: Why Not? Reston, VA: National Association of Secondary School Principals.
(1984). "School-Business Partnerships: Laying the Foundation for Successful Programs." School Business Affairs. vol. 50, no. 2 (February) pp. 14-40.
Rumberger, Russell. (1981). Why Kids Drop Out of High School. Los Angeles, CA: Stanford University. Institute for Research on Educational Finance and Governance.
(1987). "High School Dropouts: A Review of Issues and Evidence." Review of Educational Research. vol. 57, no. 2 (Summer) pp. 101-121.
Ruzicka, Keith and Susan Edison-Swift. (1981). "Involving Parents In Dropout Prevention." Stay In ... A Dropout Prevention Handbook K-12. Madison, WI: Wisconsin Vocational Studies Center.
Ruzicka, Keith, Jan Novak and Ann Benisch. (1981) . "Focusing on the Individual." Stay In ... A Dropout Prevention Handbook K-12. Madison, WI: Wisconsin Vocational Studies Center.
Sauer, Roger and Dennis Chamberlain. (1985). "Follow these six steps, and learn to manage student behavior." The American School Board Journal. vol. 172, no. 1 (January) pp. 42-46.
Schall, Jane and Mary Harbaugh. (1985). "Teaching Children About AIDS." Instructor. vol. 92, no. 2 pp. 26-28.
R-l1

Schweinhart, Lawrence J. and David P. Weikart. (1985). "Evidence That Good Early Childhood Programs Work." Phi Delta Kappan. vol. 66, no. 8 (April) pp. 545-552.
Schweinhart, Lawrence J., John R. Berreueta-Clement, Steven W. Barnett, Ann S. Epstein, and David P. Weikart. (1985). Phi Delta Kappan. vol. 66, no. 8 (April) pp.548-553.
Select Committee on Children, Youth, and Families. (1984). Teen Parents and Their Children: Issues and Programs. Hearings, U.S. House of Representatives Representatives, Ninety-Eighth Congress, First Session. Washington, DC: Government Printing Office.
(1986). Teen Pregnancy: What Is Being Done? A State-By-State Look. A Report of the Select Committee on Children, Youth and Families, U.S. House of Representatives, Ninety-Ninth Congress, First Session. Washington, DC: Government Printing Office.
Select Committee on Narcotics Abuse and Control. (1986). Drugs and Dropouts: A Report of the Select Committee on Narcotics Abuse and Control. U.S. House of Representatives, Ninety-Ninth Congress, 2nd Session Washington, DC: Government Printing Office.
(1987). 1987 Update on Drugs and Dropouts: A Report of the Committee on Narcotics Abuse and Control. U.S. House of Representatives, NinetyNinth Congress, Washington, DC: Government Printing Office.
Shapiro, Don. (1985). "Many Doorways: A Comprehensive Approach To Intervention and Treatment of Youthful Drug Users." Treatment Services for Adolescent Substance Abusers. Alfred S. Friedman and George M. Beschner (eds.) Washington, DC: Government Printing Office. DHHS Publication No. (85-1342) pp. 164-177.
Sherraden, Micha~l W. (1986). "School Dropouts in Perspective." The Educational Forum. vol. 51, no. 1 (Fall) pp. 15-31.
Short, Paula M. and George W. Noblit. (1985). "Missing the Mark in In-School Suspension: An Evaluation and Proposal. " NASSP Bulletin. voL 69, no. 484 (November) pp. 112-116.
R-12

Shrigley, Robert L. (1985). "Curbing Student Disruption .In the Classroom--Teachers Need Intervention Skills." NASSP Bulletin. vol. 69, no. 479 (March) pp. 26-38.
Sipe, Cynthia, Jean B. Grossman, and Julita A. Milliner. (1987). Summer Training and Education Program (STEP): Report on the 1986 Experience. Philadelphia, PA: Public/Private Ventures.
South Carolina Department of Education. (1987). Dropout Prevention Taskforce Report. Columbia, SC.
Stainbeck, George H., Frank E. Barham, and William C. Stainbeck. (1986). "Practical Methods for Preventing Disruptive Behaviors in the Classroom." American Secondary Education. vol. 15, no. 3 pp. 8-10.
Steinberg, Laurence, Patricia Blinde and Kenyon S. Chan. (1984). "Dropping Out Among Language Minority Youth." Review of Educational Research. vol. 54, no. 1 (Spring) pp. 113-132.
Stessman, C.W. (1984). "In-School Suspension: Make It a Place to Grow Not Just Plant." The Clearing House. vol. 58, no. 1 (September) pp. 28-31.
(1985). "In-School Suspension: Make It a Place to Grow Not Just Plant." NASSP Bulletin. vol. 69, no. 478 (February) pp. 86-88.
Summerlin, Kristin L. (1987). "Rewriting a Scary Tale: Keeping Students in School." Georgia Alert. vol. 16, no. 2 (May) pp.3-4.
Swick, Kevin J. (1985). A Proactive Approach to Discipline: Six Professional Development Modules for Educators. Washington, DC: National Education Association.
TAP'-ONE Brochure. (1987). TAP-ONE: Truants Alternative Program On Needs Early. Chicago, IL: Chicago Public Schools, Bureau of S~hool Attendance.
Tenneco Partnerships in Education Program Brochure. (1987) Houston, TX: Tenneco Inc.
Texas Education Agency. (1988). Information Manual of Alt.ernatives Guiding Educational Success. Austin, TX: Texas Education Agency.
Thiel, Kathleen K. (1985). "Reentry Program for Dropouts in Adult Settings: Overview." ERIC Digest No. 45. Columbus, OH: ERIC Clearinghouse on Adult, Career, and Vocational Education. (ED 259 215).
R-13

Thomas, M. Angele, David A. Sabatino, and Rosemary C. sarri. (1982). Alternative Programs for Disruptive Youth. Reston, VA: The Council for Exceptional Children.
u.s. Department of Education. (1987). What Works: Schools That Work: Educating Disadvantaged Children. Washington DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.
(1986a). What Works: Research About Teaching and Learning. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education.
(1986b). What Works: Schools Without Drugs. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.
U.s. General Accounting Office. (1986). School propoutS: The Extent and Nature of the Problem. Washington, DC: Government Printing Office. (GAO!HRD-SS-166BR) .
. (1987). School Dropouts: Survey of Local Programs. -,.,-----~-,..,,-- Washington, DC: Government Printing
Office. (GAO/HRD-87-108).
Van Den Heuvel, Dennis. (1986). Children At Risk: A Resource and Planning Guide. Madison, WI: Wisconsin Department of Public Instruction. Bulletin No. 6514.
Ventura-Merkel, Catherine and Marc Freedman. (1988) . "Helping At-Risk Youth Through Intergenerational Programming." Children Today. vol. 17, no. 1 (January-February) pp. 10-13.
Wasicsko, M. Mark and Steven M. Ross. (1982). "How to Create Discipline Problems." The Clearing House. voL 56, no. 4 (December) pp. 149-152.
Webb, MichaelB. (1987). "Notes Concerning Dropout Prevention in New York State." (ED 280 907).
Weber, Thomas R. and Charles A. Sloan. -(1986). "How Does High School Discipline in 1984 Compare to; Previous Dec~des?' The Clearing House. vol. 59, no. 7 (March) p.p. 326-329.
Wehlage, Gary G. (1983). "Effective Programs for the Marginal High School Student.'" Bloomington, ID: Phi Delta Kappa Educational Foundation.
R-14

(1986). "At-Risk Students and the Need For High School Reform." Education. vol. 107, no. 1 (Fall) pp. 18-28.

Wehl,age, Gary G. and Robert A. Rutter. (1987). " , "Dropping Out: How Much Do Schools Contributet,o the Problem." School Dropouts: Patterns and Policies. Gary Natriello (ed.) New York, NY: Tea~hers College Press. pp. 70-88.

Wehlage, Gary G., Robert A. Rutter, and Anne Turnbaugh.

(1987). "A Program Model For At-Risk High School

Students." Educational Leadership. vol. 44, no. 6

(March) pp. 70-73.

'

Werner, Lucielle. (1986). "Early Prevention of School Failure l?rogram Brochure." Peotone, IL.

Wilcox, Ray T. (1983). "Discipline Made Gentle." The Clearing House. vol. 57, no. 1 (January) pp . 197 - 2 00 .

Williams, Junious. (1979) . "In-School AlternativesT.q SU$pension: Why Bother?" Antoine M.Garibaldi (ed.) In-School Alternatives to Suspension: Conference Repo'rt. Washington, DC: U. S. Governme,nt Printihg Office. pp. 1-22.

Williams, Patricia A. (1986). "Toward A Definition of
School Dropout." Washington, DC: National Center For State and Local Policy DevelQP~ent ~nd Education, Office of Educational ,Research and
Improvement.

Williams, Silvia Brooks . . (1987). "A Comparative Study
of Black Dropouts and Black High School Graduates in an Urban Public School System." Education an~ Urban Society. vol. 19, no. 3 (May) pp.3:I:l.:...319'.

Williamson, Gloria. (1985). "Awareness is Your Best - ' Weapon Against Sexually Transmitted Diseases." The
American School BOgrd Journal; vol. 172, no. :lQ 'pp. 36-37.

Wu, Shi-Chqng, William Pink, Robert Crain, and Oliver 'MoleS. (1982). "Student Suspension: A Critical Reapp'raisal. " The Urban Review. vol. 14, no. 4
pp ~ . ,2 45 c: 303 :

wyoming Department of Education. (1987). Children At-
Risk: ,'. Roadblocks to Achieving Potential IEliminat'ing the, Barriers. Cheyenne, ''WY: Wyoming Department of Education,

R-15