An Opposing View on Raising the Dropout Age

The Boston Private Industry Council (PIC) has been a leading business advocate for dropout prevention and recovery for many years.  MBAE is proud to have been an ally of the PIC on this and other issues and we have deep respect for their expertise and opinions.  So, when Kathy Hamilton, an expert on this topic, took issue with our skepticism about the value of raising the dropout age, we were pleased to give her the opportunity to present an opposing view. 

On March 14, Linda Noonan raised the question as to whether the recently filed Dropout Prevention and Recovery Act (S.2173) would have an impact on the dropout rate—specifically whether raising the legal dropout age, one of the bill’s provisions, would be a useful approach.  Since then, the Education Committee has reported out a House bill, the Dropout Prevention Act (H.1964), which also calls for raising the legal dropout age.

In my role as organizer of the Boston Youth Transitions Task Force, I have seen a coalition of 40 partners move toward including an increase in the legal dropout age as part of the effort.  We all agree on the primary importance of addressing the dropout crisis.  The game has changed dramatically in the labor market:  dropouts can no longer find self-sustaining employment. The consequences now include lifetime poverty for the dropout and a heavy burden for the taxpayer.  We agree on the nature of supports and services necessary to put struggling students back on a path to success.   We may disagree on the efficacy of raising the age.  When we started this work, Task Force members questioned the value of raising the dropout age, focusing instead on implementing outreach to dropouts, early interventions and supporting more alternative education options, starting with credit recovery.

Together, we helped lower Boston’s annual dropout number from 1,800 to 1,200, a reduction of a third.  At the same time, the Department of Elementary and Secondary Education and other urban districts worked together using similar strategies to lower the state dropout number from 11,436 in 2007 to 7,899 in 2011.

We have made substantial progress without raising the age, but we have come to feel a sense of urgency.  Progress on lowering the dropout rate has slowed in the last year and our considerable gains are insufficient.  7,899 is far too many, given how stark the consequences have grown.  We cannot afford to be complacent based on recent success.  We need push ourselves to keep faltering 16- and 17- year olds in our sights, rather let them quietly slip off the rolls.  Raising the legal dropout age sends a strong message to teenagers in language that they will understand.  The game has changed and it ought to be against the law for a minor to destroy his or her economic future without taking pause.  It’s time for us to refresh our moves, and have the debate on whether enforcement or engagement is the strategy for keeping students in school.

By raising the age, we will create a manageable crisis that we can address as a community, unlike the unmanageable crisis that our young dropouts face alone every day.  Our dropout outreach and recovery project in Boston created this kind of crisis, bringing back hundreds of dropouts to the district each year.  We found that, with a collaborative approach and some creative programming, we were able to help most of them return to school and help many to graduate.  When we started that project , some of our partners discouraged us, saying that the system was not ready.  Our experience showed us otherwise.  The one thing we have learned is that sometimes we have to start before we feel ready.

Stakeholders at the state and local levels have been starting similar experiments, which makes us think that now is a good time to make the change.  Many are already thinking about the issue and acting on it.  Furthermore, both the House and the Senate bills raise the age in phases, to give the state and its districts some time to prepare.  The significant groundwork already laid in Boston and other cities is a platform on which to build.

The game has changed for students:  the consequences of dropping out are more punishing than ever.  The Commonwealth is changing its game plan, with most districts starting progressive initiatives to keep students in school.  At the national level, the dynamic is changing, too.  States like New Hampshire have substantially decreased their dropout numbers as they raised the age and strategically increased student supports.  Today, only 18 states still have a legal dropout age of 16, and 11 of them have bills pending to increase it.  Both President Obama and Governor Patrick have weighed in to say it’s time.  Raising the dropout age is not the answer, but will push us to find the answers, together.

Kathy Hamilton, Youth Transitions, Boston Private Industry Council