Examining the Multiple Trajectories Associated with Dropping Out of High School: A Growth Mixture Model Analysis

Abstract

Historically, students who fail to graduate from secondary school are considered as a single category of school dropouts. However, emerging literature indicates that there may be multiple subgroups of high school dropouts, termed dropout typologies. The purpose of this study was to assess the extent to which different typologies of dropouts were present in a large national dataset, and to estimate the influence of the known covariates of dropping out on each of the subgroups. A growth mixture model was estimated using the ELS:2002 dataset and non-cumulative GPA during the first three semesters of high school. The model identified two main subgroups associated with dropping out which accounted for 24.6% of the sample but contained 91.8% of the dropouts.

Associations of Memory and Executive Functioning With Academic and Adaptive Functioning Among Youth With Perinatal HIV Exposure and/or Infection

“…Those with a history of encephalopathy or another Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) class C (AIDS-defining) diagnosis [6] generally perform more poorly on these measures than those without such history [2,3]. In the general population, children with academic difficulties are at increased risk for dropping out of school [7], which has multiple adverse sequelae that impinge on daily-life competencies in adulthood. A high school diploma conveys some assurance of employability [8], but withdrawal from school can affect skills needed in other aspects of adult life, such as managing finances, understanding health care consent forms, and executing multistep projects, and can increase the likelihood of risk behaviors, such as early sexual initiation, unplanned pregnancy, and substance abuse.…”

Social factors outside of family and school related to student dropout

“…They are usually ghettoised, removed from urban areas, with a high unemployment rate and mostly include people of low educational levels (De Witte, et al, 2013;European Commission, 2014).Social isolation from relatives and neighbours is common, which leads to a lack of monitoring of children's activities by adult community members (Rumberger, 2011). Marginalised groups are often affected by such living conditions which together with language barriers, cultural differences, frequent relocating and exposure to prejudice additionally contribute to a high dropout rate (Bowers & Sprott, 2012;Bynum & Thompson, 1983;Rumberger, 2011). Described communities are usually in economically, institutionally and infrastructurally undeveloped regions with a poor availability of schools which are often remote (De Witte, et al, 2013;Periata & Pastor, 2000;UNICEF 2014).…”

Caractéristiques individuelles, familiales et scolaires des élèves et leurs influences sur les probabilités de décrochage : analyses selon l’âge du décrochage

“…Si l'on ne peut nier l'apport heuristique de ces études, il n'en demeure pas moins que ces typologies n'ont pas reçu de validation empirique. Plus récemment, trois études ont cherché à identifier et à valider statistiquement les typologies des élèves décrocheurs (Bowers et Sprott, 2012 ;Janosz, Le Blanc, Boulerice et Tremblay, 2000), alors que Fortin et al, 2006, ont étudié les élèves à risque de décrochage. Toujours sous un angle empirique, mentionnons l'étude qualitative de Menzer et Hampel (2009) qui distingue les lutteurs, les accablés et les inattendus.…”

“…Toujours sous un angle empirique, mentionnons l'étude qualitative de Menzer et Hampel (2009) qui distingue les lutteurs, les accablés et les inattendus. Malgré des échantillons différents, les typologies obtenues par Janosz et al (2000) et Bowers et Sprott (2012) partagent des similarités qui en renforcent la pertinence. Par exemple, Janosz et al (2000) identifient les discrets (40 % de leur échantillon) sortant silencieusement du système là où ce sont les silencieux (52,7 % de l'échantillon) qui sont identifiés par Bowers et Sprott (2012).…”

“…Malgré des échantillons différents, les typologies obtenues par Janosz et al (2000) et Bowers et Sprott (2012) partagent des similarités qui en renforcent la pertinence. Par exemple, Janosz et al (2000) identifient les discrets (40 % de leur échantillon) sortant silencieusement du système là où ce sont les silencieux (52,7 % de l'échantillon) qui sont identifiés par Bowers et Sprott (2012). D'un intérêt particulier pour nous, il est à noter que Bowers et Sprott (2012) relèvent que certains types de décrocheurs sont plus jeunes, même si c'est seulement de quelques mois.…”