|
|
THE STATE
EDUCATION DEPARTMENT / THE UNIVERSITY
OF THE STATE OF |
|
TO: |
Full Board and EMSC-VESID Committee |
|
FROM: |
Jean C. Stevens |
|
SUBJECT: |
2000 and 2001 Student Cohort Data |
|
DATE: |
February 9, 2006 |
|
STRATEGIC
GOAL: |
Goals 1 and 2 |
|
AUTHORIZATION(S): |
|
SUMMARY
Issue for
Discussion
Are the proposed strategies for improving the graduation rate of high schools and the performance of students with disabilities and limited English proficient students sufficient to address the trends in the 2000 and 2001 student cohort data?
Reason(s) for Consideration
Review of policy.
Proposed
Handling
This question will come before the full Board on February 13, 2006, with discussion continuing at the Regents EMSC-VESID Committee to focus on the 127 high schools with the lowest graduation rates.
Background
Information
In December 2005 and January 2006, the Regents received summary data on the outcomes of students in the 2000 and 2001 cohorts for public high schools statewide as well as data on selected performance indicators for the 127 high schools identified in January 2005 as having graduation rates under 70 percent and being identified as needing improvement or as a School under Registration Review (SURR) under the State accountability system. Staff indicated they would provide additional data analyses relating to these cohorts at the February meeting. The data analyses provided in the attached report include:
· student outcomes (e.g., graduation rate, dropout rate), for the 2000 and 2001 Cohorts for all students, general-education students, students with disabilities, limited English proficient (LEP) students, and by racial/ethnic group and gender;
· data on diplomas awarded; and
· Regents examination performance for the 2000 and 2001 Cohorts.
The data reveal critical trends in high
school graduation and dropout rates for
·
The
fifth year of high school is important for student success. However, only a small percentage of
students remain beyond the fifth year. During the fifth year, most students who
have not graduated transfer to GED programs or drop out of
school.
·
Over 71
percent of 2000 Cohort members received a local or Regents diploma within five
years; 64 percent of 2001 Cohort members received a diploma in four
years.
·
After
four years, the 2001 Cohort dropout rate was about 11 percent; the 2000 Cohort
rate, at the end of five years, was 15.3 percent.
·
For
general-education students, 68 percent of the 2001 Cohort received a local or
Regents diploma in four years; 74.2 percent of the 2000 Cohort earned diplomas
within five years.
·
After
four years, 9.7 percent of general-education students in the 2001 Cohort had
dropped out; after five years, 14.7 percent in the 2000 Cohort had done
so.
·
In the
past 10 years, there has been an increase in the number of general-education
students and students with disabilities who are awarded local or Regents
diplomas, but the rates, particularly for students with disabilities, are still
too low.
·
The
number of LEP students who receive local or Regents diplomas is very low; 43.5
percent of LEP students in the 2000 Cohort had graduated by the end of five
years; over 30 percent had dropped out at that time.
While there are some positive trends in the data, we know there are areas that need urgent attention. The report also provides greater detail on the following strategies for improving the graduation rate of high schools and on strategies for improving the performance of students with disabilities and LEP students:
High
Schools
1. Set targets for high school graduation and measure results.
2. Make local school boards accountable for high school performance.
3. Check teacher qualifications and order changes where necessary.
4. Strengthen teaching.
5. Ensure safety.
6. Engage the public and students.
7. Support the highest performers.
Students
With Disabilities
1. Produce accurate and timely data, set targets for improved outcomes, and increase public awareness of results to leverage change.
2. Refocus monitoring to hold schools accountable for improving instructional practice.
3. Focus technical assistance networks through increased accountability for student performance.
4. Increase the supply of qualified special education teachers and other staff.
5. Expand high quality in-State special education options for students with the most severe disabilities.
Limited English Proficient Students
1. Hold districts and schools accountable for meeting improvement targets in English language acquisition. Raise the level of improvement required over time.
2.
Increase
monitoring to ensure that students are receiving all required time and services
in English and native language instruction. Report results. The Regents will
determine consequences for noncompliance.
3.
Improve the
quality of bilingual and English as a Second Language (ESL) teachers through new
incentives and expanded professional development.
4.
Increase
outreach with the New York City Department of Education to provide better
information to parents on ESL and bilingual programs that can improve their own
levels of reading, writing, and speaking English.
Recommendation
We recommend that the Regents review the attached data analyses and indicate whether the proposed strategies for improving the graduation rate of high schools and for improving the performance of students with disabilities and limited English proficient students are sufficient.
Timetable for
Implementation
The Regents 24-month calendar will include subsequent discussions on the strategies to create a greater sense of urgency in high schools to improve performance for all general education students as well as students with disabilities and limited English proficient students.
An Analysis
of the Cohorts of Students Who First Entered Grade 9 in 2000 and
2001
The Department’s System for Tracking Educational
Performance (STEP) collects individual student records for all students in
grades 9-12 and younger students who take Regents examinations. These data now
allow us to follow the progress of virtually all students who first entered
grade 9 in the 2000-01 and 2001-02 school years. The study of these students’
records represents the most thorough and complete analysis of a cohort of
This study includes students in the 2000 and 2001
Cohorts; that is, students who first enrolled in grade 9 during the 2000-01 or
2001-02 school years (or were ungraded and reached their seventeenth birthday
during those school years) and who were enrolled in a public school in New York
State in at least part of the 2001-02, 2002-03, 2003-04, or 2004-05 school years
and for whom a district submitted a STEP record in August 2005.
This study analyzed data for 210,159 students in
the 2000 Cohort and 214,494 students in the 2001 Cohort who had graduated,
earned an Individualized Education Program (IEP) diploma, dropped out, entered a
GED program, or were still enrolled in a district on June 30, 2005. In addition
to the records selected for the study, another 8,052 records for the 2000 Cohort
and another 11,982 records for the 2001 Cohort reported that a student had left
New York State public schools to transfer out of State, to a nonpublic school,
or to home instruction, or that the student had died. Because these students
were no longer in the pool of possible graduates, these records were removed
from the study. The remaining 25,658 records for the 2000 Cohort and 33,216
records for the 2001 Cohort reported that the student had transferred to another
district at some time between first entering grade 9 and June 30, 2005. These
students were assumed to have duplicate records reported by the district to
which the student transferred and were not included in the study.
Attachment A to this report provides the outcomes
of 2000 and 2001 Cohort members for every district and component high school.
Students were included in the district/school cohort if their last STEP
enrollment record in August 2005 showed that they had been enrolled in the
district or school continuously for five or more months. Students were included
in this study regardless of length of enrollment in any school or
district.
Overall
Conclusions
2000
Cohort
·
For
general-education students and students with disabilities who first entered
grade 9 in 2000-01, or in the case of ungraded students with disabilities who
turned 17 during that year, the graduation rate after five years was 71.3
percent.
·
The
graduation rate varied substantially according to where the students attended
school. Students in
·
The
statewide dropout rate after five years was 15.3 percent. The pattern of dropout
rates among the need/resource capacity categories closely mimicked that of
graduation rates.
·
General-education
students earned diplomas at a significantly higher rate than students with
disabilities (74.2 compared with 48.1 percent, statewide). Another 18.3 percent
of students with disabilities had earned IEP diplomas, indicating that they had
achieved the objectives in their Individualized Education Plans by the end of
the fifth year.
·
Only 43.5
percent of limited English proficient (LEP) students had earned diplomas by the
end of the fifth year. Another 3.5 percent had earned IEP diplomas, indicating
that LEP students were more likely than other students to be placed in programs
leading to IEP diplomas. LEP students were also more likely than other students
to have graduated after five rather than four years. Further, more LEP than
other students were still enrolled at the end of five years.
·
The
graduation rates for White and Asian students were significantly higher than
those for Black and Hispanic students. Statewide, 83.3 percent of White cohort
members, 75.7 percent of Asians, 52.6 percent of Blacks and 49.4 percent of
Hispanics graduated by the end of five years.
·
Female
students were more likely than male students to have earned Regents or local
diplomas by the end of Year 5; 76.0 percent of females compared with 66.8
percent of males had graduated. More males than females earned their diplomas in
Year 5. The disparity between females and males was greater in
2001
Cohort
·
For
general-education students and students with disabilities who first entered
grade 9 in 2001-02, and ungraded students with disabilities who turned 17 during
that year, the graduation rate after four years was 64.2
percent.
·
After four
years,
·
At the end
of Year 4, 18.4 percent of students statewide were still enrolled and pursuing a
diploma. The percentage of
·
At the end
of Year 4, students with disabilities in districts outside
·
LEP students
were more likely than any other group to remain enrolled after the end of Year
4. In
·
Male
students were substantially less likely than female students to have graduated
in four years; 59.4 percent of males as compared with 69.2 percent of females
graduated by the end of Year 4. The
male-female gap was wider in
Regents
Examination Performance of Students in the 2001 Cohort
·
By June 30,
2005, four years after first entering grade 9, the percentage of cohort members
who had scored 55 or higher ranged from 71.7 in
·
In each
subject area, more than 40 percent of students with disabilities had not taken a
Regents examination by June 30, 2005. The percentage of students with
disabilities scoring 55 or higher on a Regents examination ranged from 37.2
percent in English to 45.8 percent in science. Students with disabilities were
more likely than general-education students to meet the requirements for a local
diploma by scoring 55-64 on a Regents examination.
·
LEP students
showed the strongest performance in mathematics, with 41.1 percent achieving
scores of 65 of higher. The weakest subject area of these students was English;
only 28.5 percent had scored 65 or higher in English. LEP students were more
likely than any other group to use the 55-64 low pass scoring option. The
percentages using the low pass scoring option ranged from 11.2 percent in global
history and
·
The
percentage of graduates who used the 55-64 low pass scoring option ranged from
3.1 percent in science to 5.7 percent in mathematics.
·
Students who
remained enrolled on June 30, 2005 had had some success by that time in meeting
the diploma requirements. Statewide, with the exception of
·
In each
subject area, dropouts in the 2001 Cohort who had taken an exam were more likely
to have scored 55 or higher than to have failed the examination. In each subject
area, a majority of students had not taken the
examination.
Analysis of
Student Outcomes for the 2000 and 2001 Cohorts
Tables 1
through 12 show, for each cohort, the number and percentage of students who had
graduated, earned IEP diplomas, were still enrolled, had transferred to general
education development (GED) programs, or dropped out statewide as of June 30,
2005. Separate tables for each cohort are provided for all students,
general-education students, students with disabilities, LEP students,
racial/ethic groups, and gender.
Tables 1 and
2 provide 2000 and 2001 Cohort outcome data for all students (both general-education students and
students with disabilities) for each
need/resource capacity category. Statewide, by June 30, 2005, five years after
they first entered grade 9, over 71 percent of 2000 Cohort members had received
a Regents or local diploma and 5.7 percent were still enrolled and working
toward a diploma. Statewide, 15.3 percent of students in this cohort had dropped
out.
Table 2
shows that, by June 30, 2005, four years after first entering grade 9, over 64
percent of 2001 Cohort members had received a Regents or local diploma and an
additional 18.4 percent were still enrolled and working toward a diploma.
Statewide, 10.9 percent of students in this cohort had dropped out. Data for the
2000 Cohort show that 15,500 students (10 percent of graduates) earned diplomas
between August 2004 and June 2005. A similar number of fifth-year graduates in
the 2001 Cohort would increase its graduation rate to over 71
percent.
Low Need
Districts had the highest graduation rate after four (2001 Cohort) and after
five years (2000 Cohort). Over 93 percent of 2000 Cohort members in Low Need
Districts had graduated by June 30, 2005. Their graduation rate was almost 10
percentage points greater than the rate in Average Need Districts (83.9
percent). The graduation rate in Large City Districts (54.7 percent) was only
slightly greater (52.7 percent) and the dropout rate was slightly lower (23.0
compared with 25.6 percent) than those in
Tables 1 and
2 show the relationship between need/resource capacity category and the
percentage of students that earned IEP diplomas. At the end of five years of
high school, a larger percentage (over 3 percent) of cohort members in High Need
(with the exception of
Tables 1 and
2 show that, while many students (18.4 percent statewide) are still enrolled
after the fourth year of high school, few (5.7 percent statewide) remain
enrolled after the fifth year. By June 30 of the fifth year of high school, most
students have either graduated, transferred to GED programs, or dropped out.
More than three-quarters of students who were still enrolled after five years
were enrolled in
Statewide,
at the end of Year 5, 5.7 percent of students were reported as having
transferred to GED programs. We do not know how many of those students have
already earned or will still earn their high school equivalency diplomas. The
Large City Districts transferred substantially more students to GED programs
than any other district category; 14.4 percent of students in Large City
Districts had transferred to GED programs by the end of Year 5. Students in
those districts were twice as likely as students in
Table 1
The Percentage of Students in the 2000 Cohort by Outcomes as of June 30, 2005 after Five Years for Each Need/Resource Capacity Category
|
Needs/Resource
Category |
Cohort
Enroll-ment |
Regents/Local
Diploma |
IEP
diploma |
Still
enrolled |
Trans-ferred
to GED |
Dropped
Out |
|
|
74,114 |
52.7% |
2.1% |
12.2% |
7.4% |
25.6% |
|
Large
City |
8,569 |
54.7% |
3.4% |
4.4% |
14.4% |
23.0% |
|
Urban/Suburban |
16,161 |
68.5% |
3.0% |
4.5% |
7.4% |
16.7% |
|
Rural
High Need |
14,656 |
76.5% |
3.8% |
1.3% |
4.9% |
13.4% |
|
Average |
68,295 |
83.9% |
1.9% |
1.8% |
4.2% |
8.2% |
|
Low
Need |
28,237 |
93.4% |
0.9% |
0.9% |
1.5% |
3.2% |
|
Charter
Schools |
127 |
46.5% |
0.0% |
40.9% |
0.8% |
11.8% |
|
Total
Public |
210,159 |
71.3% |
2.1% |
5.7% |
5.7% |
15.3% |
Table 2
The Percentage of Students in the 2001 Cohort by Outcomes as of June 30, 2005 after Four Years for Each Need/Resource Capacity Category
|
Needs/Resource
Category |
Cohort
Enroll-ment |
Regents/Local
Diploma |
IEP
diploma |
Still
enrolled |
Trans-ferred
to GED |
Dropped
Out |
|
|
73,813 |
43.5% |
1.8% |
34.9% |
4.9% |
15.0% |
|
Large
City |
8,759 |
45.3% |
3.2% |
18.3% |
11.7% |
21.5% |
|
Urban/Suburban |
17,542 |
57.6% |
2.7% |
16.8% |
8.3% |
14.5% |
|
Rural
High Need |
14,537 |
69.9% |
3.5% |
8.1% |
5.6% |
12.9% |
|
Average |
70,163 |
78.1% |
1.6% |
8.9% |
4.1% |
7.3% |
|
Low
Need |
29,515 |
90.0% |
0.6% |
5.2% |
1.5% |
2.7% |
|
Charter
Schools |
165 |
24.2% |
0.0% |
64.8% |
1.8% |
9.1% |
|
Total
Public |
214,494 |
64.2% |
1.8% |
18.4% |
4.8% |
10.9% |
Tables 3 and 4
provide outcomes for general-education students in the 2000 and 2001 Cohorts for
Table 3
The Percentage of General-Education Students in the 2000 Cohort by Outcomes as of June 30, 2005 After Five Years for Total Public, New York City, and Rest of State
|
Needs/Resource
Category |
Cohort
Enroll-ment |
Regents/Local
Diploma |
IEP
diploma |
%
Still enrolled |
Trans-ferred
to GED |
Dropped
Out |
|
|
68,496 |
55.1% |
0.0% |
12.1% |
7.6% |
25.2% |
|
Rest
of State |
117,880 |
85.3% |
0.0% |
1.6% |
4.4% |
8.7% |
|
Total
Public |
186,376 |
74.2% |
0.0% |
5.5% |
5.6% |
14.7% |
Table 4
The Percentage of General-Education Students in the 2001 Cohort by Outcomes as of June 30, 2005 After Four Years for Total Public, New York City, and Rest of State
|
Needs/Resource
Category |
Cohort
Enroll-ment |
Regents/Local
Diploma |
IEP
diploma |
%
Still enrolled |
Trans-ferred
to GED |
Dropped
Out |
|
|
66,416 |
46.4% |
0.0% |
35.2% |
4.9% |
13.5% |
|
Rest
of State |
121,376 |
79.8% |
0.0% |
8.2% |
4.3% |
7.7% |
|
Total
Public |
187,792 |
68.0% |
0.0% |
17.7% |
4.5% |
9.7% |
Students
with disabilities were 7.6 percent of the New York City 2000 Cohort and 13.4
percent of the Rest of State 2000 Cohort (Tables 5 and 6). This small percentage
in
After five
years, in Rest of State districts, students with disabilities were much less
likely than general-education students to have graduated (56.0 compared with
85.3 percent). They were almost twice as likely as other students to have
dropped out (16.4 compared with 8.7 percent) and were more likely to have
transferred to GED programs (6.7 compared with 4.4 percent). Students with
disabilities in
Table 5
The Percentage of Students with Disabilities in the 2000 Cohort by Outcomes as of June 30, 2005 After Five Years for Total Public, New York City, and Rest of State
|
Needs/Resource
Category |
Cohort
Enroll-ment |
Regents/Local
Diploma |
IEP
diploma |
%
Still enrolled |
Trans-ferred
to GED |
Dropped
Out |
|
|
5,618 |
22.7% |
27.1% |
13.6% |
5.4% |
31.2% |
|
Rest
of State |
18,165 |
56.0% |
15.6% |
5.3% |
6.7% |
16.4% |
|
Total
Public |
23,783 |
48.1% |
18.3% |
7.3% |
6.4% |
19.9% |
Table 6
The Percentage of Students with Disabilities in the 2001 Cohort by Outcomes as of June 30, 2005 After Four Years for Total Public, New York City, and Rest of State
|
Needs/Resource
Category |
Cohort
Enroll-ment |
Regents/Local
Diploma |
IEP
diploma |
%
Still enrolled |
Trans-ferred
to GED |
Dropped
Out |
|
|
7,397 |
16.8% |
17.7% |
32.0% |
4.6% |
28.9% |
|
Rest
of State |
19,305 |
45.1% |
13.2% |
19.3% |
7.4% |
15.0% |
|
Total
Public |
26,702 |
37.3% |
14.4% |
22.8% |
6.6% |
18.9% |
Tables 7 and
8 show the outcomes of LEP students (both general-education students and students with
disabilities) in the 2000
and 2001 Cohorts. Comparing their graduation rates with that of all students
(Tables 1 and 2) shows that LEP students were less likely to earn diplomas after
four and after five years. Fewer than 30 percent had graduated after four years
compared with 64.2 percent for all students, a difference of almost 35
percentage points. The graduation rate had increased to 43.5 percent after five
years. Because LEP students were more likely than other students to graduate in
Year 5, the gap narrowed to 28 percentage points after five years. In addition,
a larger percentage of LEP students remained enrolled at the end of Year 5. LEP
students transferred to GED programs at about the same rate as other students.
Statewide, by the end of Year 5, 5.8 percent of LEP students had transferred to
GED programs, compared with 5.7 percent of all students.
LEP students
in Rest of State districts were less likely than students with disabilities to
earn diplomas in four years, but were equally likely to have earned a diploma
after five years.
Table 7
The Percentage of LEP Students in the 2000 Cohort by Outcomes as of June 30, 2005 after Five Years for Total Public, New York City, and Rest of State
|
Needs/Resource
Category |
Cohort
Enroll-ment |
Regents/Local
Diploma |
IEP
diploma |
%
Still enrolled |
Trans-ferred
to GED |
Dropped
Out |
|
|
9,584 |
40.2% |
4.1% |
15.9% |
5.1% |
34.8% |
|
Rest
of State |
2,426 |
56.7% |
1.3% |
11.1% |
8.7% |
22.2% |
|
Total
Public |
12,010 |
43.5% |
3.5% |
14.9% |
5.8% |
32.3% |
Table 8
The Percentage of LEP Students in the 2001 Cohort by Outcomes as of June 30, 2005 After Four Years for Total Public, New York City, and Rest of State
|
Needs/Resource
Category |
Cohort
Enroll-ment |
Regents/Local
Diploma |
IEP
diploma |
%
Still enrolled |
Trans-ferred
to GED |
Dropped
Out |
|
|
9,755 |
25.8% |
3.6% |
44.7% |
3.2% |
22.6% |
|
Rest
of State |
2,899 |
42.4% |
1.1% |
30.4% |
6.9% |
19.2% |
|
Total
Public |
12,654 |
29.6% |
3.1% |
41.4% |
4.0% |
21.8% |
Tables 9 and 10
provide graduation rates by racial/ethnic group for
A small majority of
both cohorts were White. Statewide, 57.3 percent of the 2000 Cohort were White
as were 57.1 percent of the 2001 Cohort.
In contrast, White students were a minority in
Table 9
The Percentage of 2000 Cohort Members in Each Racial/Ethnic Group by Outcomes as of June 30, 2005 After Five Years for Total Public, New York City, and Rest of State
|
Needs/Resource
Category |
Cohort
Enroll-ment |
Regents/Local
Diploma |
IEP
diploma |
%
Still enrolled |
Trans-ferred
to GED |
Dropped
Out |
|
|
| |||||
|
American
Indian/Alaskan Native |
262 |
36.3% |
1.5% |
14.9% |
7.6% |
39.7% |
|
Asian/Pacific
Islander |
10,172 |
70.0% |
0.8% |
7.2% |
4.1% |
17.9% |
|
Black |
26,238 |
46.7% |
2.4% |
15.4% |
7.8% |
27.7% |
|
Hispanic |
25,405 |
44.0% |
2.6% |
14.2% |
8.2% |
31.0% |
|
White |
12,037 |
69.8% |
1.2% |
5.6% |
7.5% |
16.0% |
|
Rest
of State |
| |||||
|
American
Indian/Alaskan Native |
567 |
65.3% |
4.4% |
2.3% |
10.1% |
18.0% |
|
Asian/Pacific
Islander |
3,999 |
90.2% |
0.7% |
1.9% |
2.2% |
5.1% |
|
Black |
13,978 |
63.7% |
3.8% |
5.4% |
9.4% |
17.7% |
|
Hispanic |
9,077 |
64.6% |
2.5% |
6.6% |
8.4% |
17.9% |
|
White |
108,424 |
84.8% |
1.9% |
1.3% |
3.9% |
8.1% |
|
Total
Public |
| |||||
|
American
Indian/Alaskan Native |
829 |
56.1% |
3.5% |
6.3% |
9.3% |
24.8% |
|
Asian/Pacific
Islander |
14,171 |
75.7% |
0.7% |
5.7% |
3.6% |
14.3% |
|
Black |
40,216 |
52.6% |
2.9% |
11.9% |
8.4% |
24.2% |
|
Hispanic |
34,482 |
49.4% |
2.5% |
12.2% |
8.3% |
27.6% |
|
White |
120,461 |
83.3% |
1.8% |
1.7% |
4.3% |
8.9% |
Table 10
The Percentage of 2001 Cohort Members in Each Racial/Ethnic Group by Outcomes as of June 30, 2005 After Four Years for Total Public, New York City, and Rest of State
|
Needs/Resource
Category |
Cohort
Enroll-ment |
Regents/Local
Diploma |
IEP
diploma |
%
Still enrolled |
Trans-ferred
to GED |
Dropped
Out |
|
|
| |||||
|
American
Indian/Alaskan Native |
235 |
39.6% |
2.1% |
40.0% |
4.7% |
13.6% |
|
Asian/Pacific
Islander |
10,199 |
60.1% |
0.5% |
26.9% |
2.8% |
9.7% |
|
Black |
25,657 |
37.5% |
2.1% |
40.0% |
5.1% |
15.3% |
|
Hispanic |
25,589 |
34.5% |
2.1% |
39.0% |
5.4% |
19.1% |
|
White |
12,133 |
61.2% |
1.4% |
22.0% |
5.1% |
10.3% |
|
Rest
of State |
| |||||
|
American
Indian/Alaskan Native |
628 |
56.1% |
3.2% |
13.2% |
8.4% |
19.1% |
|
Asian/Pacific
Islander |
4,258 |
85.9% |
0.6% |
7.6% |
1.5% |
4.4% |
|
Black |
15,365 |
53.0% |
3.1% |
20.4% |
8.2% |
15.3% |
|
Hispanic |
10,176 |
53.9% |
1.8% |
21.0% |
7.1% |
16.2% |
|
White |
110,254 |
79.8% |
1.7% |
7.2% |
4.1% |
7.2% |
|
Total
Public |
| |||||
|
American
Indian/Alaskan Native |
863 |
51.6% |
2.9% |
20.5% |
7.4% |
17.6% |
|
Asian/Pacific
Islander |
14,457 |
67.7% |
0.6% |
21.2% |
2.4% |
8.2% |
|
Black |
41,022 |
43.3% |
2.5% |
32.6% |
6.3% |
15.3% |
|
Hispanic |
35,765 |
40.0% |
2.0% |
33.9% |
5.9% |
18.3% |
|
White |
122,387 |
77.9% |
1.7% |
8.7% |
4.2% |
7.5% |
Table 12
shows that in
Table 11
The Percentage of 2000 Female and Male Cohort Members by Outcomes
as of June 30, 2005 After Five Years for Total Public,
|
Needs/Resource
Category |
Cohort
Enroll-ment |
Regents/Local
Diploma |
IEP
diploma |
%
Still enrolled |
Trans-ferred
to GED |
Dropped
Out |
|
|
| |||||
|
Female
|
36,130 |
60.1% |
1.7% |
9.8% |
6.0% |
22.4% |
|
Male |
37,984 |
45.6% |
2.4% |
14.6% |
8.7% |
28.7% |
|
Rest
of State |
| |||||
|
Female
|
66,234 |
84.7% |
1.6% |
1.6% |
3.7% |
8.3% |
|
Male |
69,811 |
78.3% |
2.5% |
2.5% |
5.7% |
11.0% |
|
Total
Public |
| |||||
|
Female
|
102,364 |
76.0% |
1.6% |
4.5% |
4.5% |
13.3% |
|
Male |
107,795 |
66.8% |
2.5% |
6.8% |
6.8% |
17.2% |
Table 12
The Percentage of 2001 Female and Male Cohort Members by Outcomes
as of June 30, 2005 After Four Years for Total Public,
|
Needs/Resource
Category |
Cohort
Enroll-ment |
Regents/Local
Diploma |
IEP
diploma |
%
Still enrolled |
Trans-ferred
to GED |
Dropped
Out |
|
|
| |||||
|
Female
|
36,500 |
49.8% |
1.4% |
31.9% |
3.9% |
12.9% |
|
Male |
37,313 |
37.3% |
2.1% |
37.7% |
5.9% |
17.0% |
|
Rest
of State |
| |||||
|
Female
|
68,980 |
79.4% |
1.5% |
7.6% |
3.8% |
7.7% |
|
Male |
71,701 |
70.9% |
2.2% |
11.7% |
5.6% |
9.6% |
|
Total
Public |
| |||||
|
Female
|
105,480 |
69.2% |
1.5% |
16.0% |
3.8% |
9.5% |
|
Male |
109,014 |
59.4% |
2.2% |
20.6% |
5.7% |
12.1% |
Data on Total Graduates and
Ninth-Grade Retention
It is not
possible to compare the graduation rates reported in the section above with
previous cohort graduation rates because the new data system includes students
for whom data were not previously collected. However, it is possible to compare
the total number of graduates each year for a decade. This number includes all
those students who graduated during an academic year, not just the number from
one cohort; for example, the total number of students graduating in 2004-05 may
include students who entered 9th grade in 2001-02 and in prior years. Table 13
shows an increase in the number of graduates each year except 2004-05, with a
larger increase between 2002-03 and 2003-04, yet high school enrollment has not
increased a comparable amount.
Table
13
|
Year |
Number of
Students Earning Regents or Local Diplomas |
Number of
Students Earning IEP Diplomas |
|
1995-96 |
136,754 |
|
|
1996-97 |
138,990 |
3,965 |
|
1997-98 |
139,531 |
4,248 |
|
1998-99 |
140,365 |
4,194 |
|
1999-00 |
141,896 |
5,553 |
|
2000-01 |
141,884 |
5,425 |
|
2001-02 |
143,070 |
4,438 |
|
2002-03 |
143,818 |
5,001 |
|
2003-04 |
153,202 |
5,462 |
|
2004-05 |
153,008 |
5,666 |
Figures 1
and 2 show the total number of high school diplomas awarded and the number of
those diplomas that were Regents diplomas for general-education students and
students with disabilities. The percentage of general-education students earning
Regents diplomas increased from 41 to 60 percent between 1995-96 and 2003-04.
The percentage of students with disabilities earning Regents diplomas increased
from 8 to 24 percent between that time period. Note that in those years, to earn
a Regents diploma, students needed to complete the required course work and
score 65 or higher on eight Regents examinations. Beginning in 2004-05, students
needed to complete the coursework and score 65 or higher Regents examinations in
the five required areas.
Figure
1
General-Education
Students: Total Number of Diplomas Awarded
and
Number of Regents Diplomas Awarded
1996-97
to 2004-05 School Years
Figure
2
Students
with Disabilities: Total Number of Diplomas Awarded
and
Number of Regents Diplomas Awarded
1996-97
to 2004-05 School Years
An indication of readiness for high school is the number of students held back in grade 9 each year. A review of those data submitted by school districts shows that since the fall of 1998 fewer students have been held back in 9th grade each year (Table 14).
Table 14
Percentage of Public School Ninth Grade Students Who Repeat the Grade
Fall 1995 to Fall 2003
|
|
FALL
1995 |
FALL
1996 |
FALL
1997 |
FALL
1998 |
FALL
1999 |
FALL
2000 |
FALL
2001 |
FALL
2002 |
FALL
2003 |
NYC |
28.3 |
32.2 |
34.8 |
35.3 |
35.7 |
29.4 |
27.2 |
25.7 |
27.0 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
16.0 |