Holding the Torch

PROFILES OF SCHOOL DROPOUTS IN VIRGINIA

    The contributing factors to the problem of school dropout rates are multiple and complex. Last month the Virginia Department of Education  (VDOE) released state-level, division-level and school-level cohort reports that detail outcomes for students who entered the ninth-grade for the first time in 2004 and were scheduled to graduate in the spring of 2008. These reports give us a glimpse of some of the numbers regarding the dropout rates in the state:

    The VDOE data show that students in the cohort who repeated grades, attended multiple schools and who were frequently absent were more likely to drop out:

• 58.8 percent of the students in the cohort who dropped out repeated at least one grade during high school and 37.4 percent repeated their freshman year.
• 42.2 percent of the students who dropped out were ninth and tenth graders aged 17-years old or older.
• 30.5 percent of the dropouts attended two or more high schools before ending their high school careers compared with 14.6 percent of the students in the cohort who graduated.
• 29.4 percent of the dropouts had attendance rates of less than 80 percent during the year before they exited school, compared with 2.1 percent of the students in the cohort who graduated.
• 65.2 percent of dropouts had attendance rates of less than 80 percent during their final year of school compared with 3.8 percent of graduates.

        The reports show that fifty-five percent of the dropouts left school before the eleventh grade; 26.9 percent dropped out during the ninth grade; 28 percent dropped out during their sophomore year; 24.4 percent dropped out during the eleventh grade; and 20.7 percent dropped out as seniors. The dropout rate for Black students (12.6%) and Hispanic students (19.9%) are significantly larger than for white students (6.3%) and the overall dropout rate of 8.7% for all students.  This disparity is alarming and unacceptable.

        The VDOE is beginning to take the steps necessary to account for the status of all students in the State. The real work continues to be the development of policies and procedures that hold school districts accountable for helping to keep all children in school.

EDUCATIONAL DISABLITIES AND CHILDREN IN THE JUVENILE JUSTICE SYSTEM

The Southern Disability Law Center has published an article “Stopping the Schoolhouse to Jailhouse Pipeline by Enforcing Federal Special Education Law” by Jim Comstock-Galagan, Esquire and Rhonda Brownstein, Esquire. This excellent article highlights the alarming relationship between the incidence of emotional and educational disabilities among children involved in the Juvenile Justice System.  The authors cite statistics that illustrate the degree of this correlation:

•  Seventy percent of children in the juvenile justice system have an educational disability — the vast majority is children with Emotional Disturbance (ED) and children with Specific Learning Disabilities.

•  Children with ED fail more courses, earn lower grade point averages, miss more days of school, and are retained more often than other students with disabilities.

•  Children with ED have the worst graduation rate of all disabilities; nationally, only 35% graduate from high school (compared to 76% for all students).

•  Children with ED are more than three times as likely to be arrested before leaving school as other students.

•  Children with ED have alarmingly high drop-out rates and, for those who drop out of school, 73 percent are arrested within five years of leaving school.

•  Children with ED are twice as likely to be living in a correctional facility, halfway house, drug treatment center, or “on the street” after leaving school compared to other students with disabilities.

•  Children with ED are almost twice as likely to become teenage mothers as students with other disabilities.

DO WE HAVE TO CHARGE OUR CHILD WITH A CRIME TO GET HIM SOME HELP?

     I have heard this question asked many times by parents and discussed by social workers and lawyers who practice regularly in the Juvenile Courts. The question illustrates the dilemma that some parents of troubled children have with filing a delinquency petition against a child when the primary goal is to force the implementation of counseling or other services. I suggest that there is no real contradiction between addressing criminal behavior and a therapeutic intervention.  It’s not always one or the other.

     No person should be charged with a crime he or she did not commit. However, on many occasions I have told some of my adolescent clients that they have no more right to commit the crimes of assault or theft against a parent than they do against any other person in the community.  In such cases, the starting point for an effective therapeutic effort is to guarantee a safe home environment.  Putting children on notice that criminal behavior will not be tolerated at home is an essential first step.  Nothing could be more therapeutic than getting this message across loud and clear. Many parents are understandably torn about whether to seek police assistance or file a petition in the Juvenile Court. When a child’s illegal conduct becomes a consistent pattern, there is little doubt that a criminal delinquency petition should be considered.

     When children are charged with crimes in Juvenile Court they are entitled to due process; to representation by counsel; and to a diligent and competent defense – just like an adult. If the juvenile petition is dismissed because of insufficient evidence, the lesson is not that the child “got away with it”, but rather that his parent held him accountable for bad behavior and the justice system works for all people. If convicted, the child should face reasonable consequences and receive support to avoid repeated offenses. In either scenario it is about accountability.  Troubled children are always helped when the adults around them set appropriate boundaries and follow through with appropriate consequences - whether it’s a parent or a judge.