1. Preventing Youth Delinquency Identifying School Risk & Protective Factors Preventing Youth Delinquency Identifying School Risk & Protective Factors Christine A. Christle 2004

2. School to Prison Pipeline Suspension School Failure Dropout Delinquency

3. The Co $ t of Incarceration Penn State or The State Pen Penn State or The State Pen It’s your money!

4. Risk Factors - Delinquency Life Domains Individual Individual Family Family School School Community Community Peer Relations Peer Relations School Weak academics Low school involvement Truancy Suspension Expulsion Dropout

5. Weak Academics & Poverty Exposure to print material Exposure to print material Low SES - 40 hrs Low SES - 40 hrs High SES - 1000 hrs High SES - 1000 hrs Vocabulary skills Vocabulary skills Following directions Following directions

6. Failure Cycle Cognitive deficits lead to poor academic performance Cognitive deficits lead to poor academic performance Poor academic performance is a strong risk factor for delinquency Poor academic performance is a strong risk factor for delinquency

7. Weak Academics & Behavior Low school achievement predicts delinquency Low school achievement predicts delinquency 20% of students with EBD are arrested while in school 20% of students with EBD are arrested while in school 58% are arrested 5 years after school 58% are arrested 5 years after school 70-87% of incarcerated youth have LD or EBD 70-87% of incarcerated youth have LD or EBD

8. School Factors 3 Studies in Kentucky 747 Elementary Schools 747 Elementary Schools 161 Middle Schools 161 Middle Schools 196 High Schools 196 High Schools

9. Elementary School Study Stage 1 Stage 1 Correlation analysis of school characteristics & academic achievement Correlation analysis of school characteristics & academic achievement Stage 2 Stage 2 Regression analysis Regression analysis Stage 3 Stage 3 Qualitative analysis of climate in 3 HPHA & 3 HPLA schools Qualitative analysis of climate in 3 HPHA & 3 HPLA schools

11. Research Questions 1. What specific school characteristics are related to academic achievement? 2. What characteristics separate HPHA schools from HPLA schools?

12. Results Stages 1 & 2 School Characteristics Related to Academic Achievement Correlation Poverty: % of students in FRLP - 34% Poverty: % of students in FRLP - 34% Attendance rate: + 26% Attendance rate: + 26%Regression Together (FRLP % & ATT) 42% Together (FRLP % & ATT) 42%

13. Results Stage 3 Case Studies - HPHA vs HPLA Smaller schools Smaller schools Better building conditions Better building conditions More adult/student interactions More adult/student interactions More positive interactions More positive interactions Higher staff morale & collegiality Higher staff morale & collegiality Higher level of student task engagement Higher level of student task engagement More money per student More money per student More family involvement More family involvement

14. Suspension Most common disciplinary consequence in schools Most common disciplinary consequence in schools Disproportionately used Disproportionately used Ethnicity, SES, gender, academic competence Ethnicity, SES, gender, academic competence Most at Middle School level Most at Middle School level Poor academic skill - strong predictor of school exclusion Poor academic skill - strong predictor of school exclusion

15. Suspension Rates increasing Rates increasing US: steady increase over last 25 years US: steady increase over last 25 years Kentucky: Kentucky: 00-0168,523 01-0274,054 02-0376,886 Most are repeat offenders Most are repeat offenders

16. Middle School Study Stage 1 Stage 1 Correlation analysis of school characteristics & suspension Correlation analysis of school characteristics & suspension Stage 2 Stage 2 Comparison analysis of 20 HSS & 20 LSS Comparison analysis of 20 HSS & 20 LSS Stage 3 Stage 3 Qualitative analysis of climate in 4 HSS & 4 LSS Qualitative analysis of climate in 4 HSS & 4 LSS

18. Research Questions 1. What specific school characteristics are related to suspension rate? 2. What characteristics separate high-suspending schools from low-suspending schools?

19. Results Stage 1 & 2 Characteristics Differentially Related 20 HSS  Number of board violations Number of board violations Dropout rate Dropout rate Low SES Low SES Law violations Law violations $tudent $pending $tudent $pending 20 LSS  Attendance rate Academic test scores Ethnic background C/W

20. - HSS and LSS Difference - Suspension Suspension Rate 1 1

21. HSS and LSS Difference - Ethnicity Percent Caucasian Students

22. HSS and LSS Difference - Poverty Percent FRLP Enrollment - 1

23. Results Stage 3 Case Studies - LSS vs HSS Administrative Leadership Administrative Leadership More support for staff More support for staff Proactive discipline philosophy Proactive discipline philosophy Teacher & Staff Behaviors Teacher & Staff Behaviors More positive interactions More positive interactions Active teaching style Active teaching style

24. Results Stage 3 Case Studies - LSS vs HSS Student Behaviors More positive interactions More engagement in class Structure & Programming Better building condition More ambiance School-wide focus More school connections

25. Dropout Low SES youth 2.4 X more likely to drop out Low SES youth 2.4 X more likely to drop out Suspended youth 3 X more likely to drop out & become delinquent Suspended youth 3 X more likely to drop out & become delinquent Over 80% of prison inmates are dropouts Over 80% of prison inmates are dropouts 1/2 of heads of households on welfare are dropouts 1/2 of heads of households on welfare are dropouts

26. High School Study Stage 1 Stage 1 Correlation analysis of school characteristics & dropout Correlation analysis of school characteristics & dropout Stage 2 Stage 2 Comparison analysis of 20 HDOS & 20 LDOS Comparison analysis of 20 HDOS & 20 LDOS Stage 3 Stage 3 Qualitative analysis of climate in 4 HDOS & 4 LDOS Qualitative analysis of climate in 4 HDOS & 4 LDOS

28. Research Questions 1. What specific school characteristics are related to dropout rate? 2. What characteristics separate high-dropout schools from low- dropout schools?

29. Current Study School Variables Enrollment Enrollment FRLP % FRLP % # Rule violations # Rule violations # Law violations # Law violations Suspension rate Suspension rate Retention rate Retention rate Expulsion rate Expulsion rate Ethnic background Attendance rate Academic achievement scores % of students with disabilities

30. Results: Pending

31. Lessons Learned Thus Far Resilience Meaningful Participation Meaningful Participation Students help develop dress code, lunch menus Students help develop dress code, lunch menus High Expectations High Expectations All students & staff (PRIDE program) All students & staff (PRIDE program) Caring Adult Relationships Caring Adult Relationships All staff involved with students in clubs, activities All staff involved with students in clubs, activities

32. BIG IDEA ! SCHOOL STAFF KNOW Problems Problems Solutions Solutions ASK THEM!

33. Dilemma How can we transform this research into practice?

34. Thank You Christine A. Christle University of Kentucky The National Center on Education, Disability, and Juvenile Justice