Learn About: 21st Century | Charter Schools | Homework
Home / Edifier

The EDifier

January 21, 2016

Not a half truth: High school graduation rates never higher

We’ve “lifted high school graduation rates to new highs.”

— President Obama in his 2016 State of the Union speech

Last week President Obama boasted about the on-time high school graduation rate reaching an all-time high during his last State of the Union address. As with most claims the President made that night fact-checkers were ready to determine if data indeed backed up such a claim.  According to Politifact,President Obama only spoke a ‘Half-Truth’ when it came to high school graduation rates.

While Politifact provides valid and fairly solid reasoning for only giving the President a ‘Half-Truth’ rating, they themselves do not provide all the facts either. They did a great job pointing out why the current 82 percent on-time graduation rate cannot simply be compared to on-time graduation estimates prior to 2010. As they rightfully point out states have only been using a common graduation rate calculation in just the past 5 years. Politifact contends that for the President to have been completely truthful he should have stated the current graduation rate is at its highest level in 5 years– when states started using a common calculation for graduation rates. As they point out, prior to that each state had their own way of calculating graduations rates –where some were more accurate than others.

However, there were a number of researchers who developed calculations to estimate on-time graduation rates as well as a number of studies that followed a national sample of students throughout the their high school career. In fact, these rates went as far back as the 1950’s. Yet, none were as accurate as the common calculation currently being used by all 50 states.

But that doesn’t mean estimated graduation rates from years past should just be dismissed. Politifact even points out one such estimate called the Average Freshman Graduation Rate (AFGR) developed by the U.S. Department of Education reached a high of 79 percent in 1970. Which, of course, is lower than the current 82 percent on-time graduation rate. However, Politifact stated “Yet because the current method for calculating rates is only 5 years old, it’s not clear that the 1970 rate, or even the subsequent ones, are comparable to current rates.”

Politifact is absolutely correct to point out this fact. There is a real question as to whether the AFGR or any other estimate is comparable to today’s graduation rate calculations. Yet, they likely didn’t know about Nobel Laureate James Heckman’s  and Paul A. LaFountaine’s  The American High Graduation Rate study that standardized high school graduation rates from 1960 through 2005. The study utilized a number of data points and statistical adjustments to provide a standardized and more accurate measure of the high school graduation rate. Over that time period, only in one year- 1972—did the graduation rate break the 80 percent mark.

It should be noted the AFGR rates closely matched the rates calculated by Heckman and LaFountaine which indicates the AFGR  is an accurate measure of graduation rates. Furthermore, the AFGR rates were also similar to current graduation rate calculations in 2010 through 2012. Taken together, this provides a consistent and accurate measure of on-time high school graduation rates from 1960 through 2014– the most recent year graduation rate data is available.

Since 2014’s 82 percent on-time graduation rate is comparable to years prior to 2010, it is fair to say graduation rates have never been higher. Can we say this with absolute certainly? No, but the same can be said for almost any national indicator whether it is the unemployment rate or the divorce rate, just to name a couple. However, based on the best available evidence the U.S. on-time high school graduation rate has never been higher. As such, the President was completely truthful in stating our high school graduation rates have hit new highs. – Jim Hull

Filed under: Graduation rates,High school — Tags: , , — Jim Hull @ 9:25 am

November 13, 2012

The science of persuasion

One week after a surprisingly decisive re-election by President Obama and the redux on how his campaign did it continues. Big Data or the process of collecting, distilling and making sense of mountains of information has taken center stage, as it’s become clear the Obama team elevated research in a way that’s never been done before in a presidential campaign.

One of the revelations I found most intriguing is the Obama camp’s investment in a so-called “dream team” of behavioral scientists. It’s a clue that the president and his aides understood that identifying would-be supporters was only half the battle— mobilizing them to act was the greater and far more difficult task.

Any school district that has attempted to a pass a construction bond, recruit more volunteers or engage more parents in their child’s education, understands the truth to this claim. So what does the research say about motivating people to take action?

  • Past habits are a powerful predictor of future behaviors. “People want to be congruent with what they have committed to in the past, especially if that commitment is public,” Robert Cialdini, a social psychologist and academician who conferred with the Obama campaign, told the New York Times.
  • Ask for small commitments and build from there. Cialdini, who wrote the national bestseller “Influence: The Psychology of Persuasion,” points to a classic study by two Stanford researchers to illustrate this point. The pair of psychologists found that once people agreed to place a sign in their window about the importance of safe driving, they were more willing to put a huge sign in their front yard urging passersby to “Drive Safely.”
  •  Developing a plan to do something increases the likelihood that it will actually get done. This one is a no-brainer but you’d be surprised how many people leave things to chance. Don’t let them. Ask for details. Offer help. And most importantly, show them the plans you’ve developed. — Naomi Dillon
Filed under: Data,research,science — Tags: , , , , — NDillon @ 2:49 pm

RSS Feed