|
|
High School Redirection is an alternative high school program for youth considered at risk of dropping out. The program emphasizes basic skills development (with a particular focus on reading skills) and offers limited extra-curricular activities. The schools operate in economically disadvantaged areas and serve students who have dropped out in the past, who are teen parents, who have poor test scores, or who are over-age for their grade. To foster a sense of community, the schools are small and teachers are encouraged to act as mentors as well as instructors.
Two studies of High School Redirection met the What Works Clearinghouse (WWC) evidence standards and one study met WWC evidence standards with reservations. The three randomized controlled trials included more than 1,600 students in Stockton, California; Wichita, Kansas; and Cincinnati, Ohio. 1
The WWC considers the extent of evidence for High School Redirection to be medium to large for staying in school, for progressing in school, and for completing school.
High School Redirection was found to have mixed effects on staying in school, potentially positive effects on progressing in school, and no discernible effects on completing school.
| Staying in school | Progressing in school | Completing school | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Rating of effectiveness | Mixed effects | Potentially positive effects | No discernible effects |
| Improvement index2 | Average: +6 percentile points Range: -5 to +20 percentile points |
Average: +4 percentile points Range: -3 to +10 percentile points |
Average: +4 percentile points Range: -1 to +8 percentile points |
The High School Redirection study that this intervention report summarizes was prepared by staff of Mathematica Policy Research, Inc. (MPR). The principal investigator for the WWC dropout prevention review is an MPR staff member and was the lead author of the High School Redirection study. For this reason, the study was rated by staff members from Caliber, an ICF International Company, who also prepared the intervention report. The report was then reviewed by MPR staff members, as well as members of the WWC Technical Review Team and external peer reviewers.
|Institute of Education Sciences