To determine the basis for current equity factors in urban education a review of research studies conducted over the past thirty years on graduation rates and the introduction of certain factors deemed by researchers to provide equity to urban education were examined.  There were over thirty-five research studies on high school graduation rates that suggested a specific factor or factors that would positively impact the success of students on their road toward graduation and entry into post-secondary education.   

The review of research studies is organized chronologically to provide context into possible influences on the researcher.  Therefore, the research study was aligned with the current political initiatives and the perspectives of American society on the importance of graduation and entrance into post-secondary education.  Finally, the discussion of each study reveals the equity factor or factors determined by each researcher. 

The first research study I examined was conducted in 1995 by Jack Frymeir in conjunction with Phi Delta Kappa, the National Association of Secondary School Principals, and the Council of Great City Schools, to study high school graduation rates in large cities and the factors that contributed to students graduating within four years.  This study was supported by a national push, started in 1989, to increase graduation rates to 90 percent by the year 2000 (Frymeir, 1995).  In this study, Frymeir determined four factors that affect school completion, 1. parental involvement 2.  student abilities and attitudes 3.  peer influence and 4.  school curriculum (Frymeir, 1995).  

Frymeir studied schools in Seattle, Nashville, Long Beach, San Diego, Boston, Memphis, Milwaukee, and Toledo, then gathered data on graduating cohorts for a 2-year period.  Frymeir discusses that up to this research study very little data had been gathered about graduation rates in urban schools.  Therefore, gathering the information took two years to speak with principals and see their final approved graduate lists.  He also stated that schools were not following the students as they moved schools.  Each year a new record was created for each student.  His hope was that future researchers would find a way to make a national database with this information and there would be a national study of all urban schools (Frymeir, 1995).  

In addition, Frymeir comments that, “Within some districts, one school may have a dropout rate of less than 5 percent while another school in that same district has a dropout rate of 60 percent.  In every instance in which such discrepancies were identified, it was determined that the discrepancies were actually the result of policies designed to create what might be described as ‘islands of excellence’ within the districts to make a few schools, at least, especially attractive to parents as a way to discourage movement out of the city to the suburbs” (Frymeir, 1995).  

In conclusion, Frymeir states, “What is needed? Four things: commitment, good information, extra resources, and special incentives that will encourage teachers and principals to assume responsibility for the demanding job of working with potential dropouts and stick with it until those students finish school” (Frymeir, 1995). Based on this conclusion, it appears that Frymeir puts the majority of the problem at the school level.  He indicates that schools with proper incentives would be more inclined to help students graduate and that it would be naïve to believe that teachers and principals would want to do this work on their own.  Therefore, the major equity factor determined by this study is the motivation of the school staff to ensure that students graduate.

The next decade of research is heavily influenced by the No Child Left Behind Act of 2001.  Based on the research conducted during the eighties and nineties and the lack of progress seen, NCLB was the national initiative to boost overall performance of all students in the country, but most impacted by this initiative were the urban public schools.  As Frymeir indicated in his study, teachers and administrators needed to be properly incentivized to improve graduation rates and college and career readiness.  Under NCLB accreditation for schools was now determined by how a district performed on their state assessments.  Districts would lose their accreditation if they had too many years without making average yearly progress (AYP).   

Having taught during this time in an urban school, I remember the shift to data and “moving kids” to perform better on their assessments.  This was also the decade of educational programs.  There were also so many programs that were brought into the schools to try to boost the performance of students.  Essentially, these were businesses that were selling a product to districts stating that their product would help to “close the gap.”  The problem was that there were so many of these programs and they were never utilized to their true potential, so they were abandoned after a short time.  Further, the majority of these programs were created by people outside of the urban education system, so they did not have the needs of the urban student in mind. 

One research study that highlights this was conducted by Corinne M. Herlihy and Janet Quint of MDRC (2006).  MDRC is a non-profit and nonpartisan research firm.  In this study they examined four programs to see if they helped overall graduation rates.  The four programs were “Career Academies”, “First Things First,” “Project Graduation Really Achieves Dreams (Project GRAD),” and “Talent Development.”  These programs were implemented in over 2,700 high schools across the country.  The equity factor indicated in these programs focuses solely on the actions of the school staff.  The researchers indicate that “instructional improvement and personalization are the twin pillars of high school reform” (Herlihy and Quint, 2006). They state that the research indicates that extended class periods, special catch-up courses, high quality curricula can improve student achievement.   

In two other studies conducted during this decade of NCLB, the researchers explored two other programs.  The first study conducted by Briana Mezuk, Irina Bondarenko, Suzanne Smith, and Eric Tucker (2010), examined the program “Competitive Policy Debate.”  The researchers wanted to study whether participants in the program were more likely to graduate and meet college readiness benchmarks.  In their research study they found that, “debaters were 25% more likely to graduate than comparable students” (Mezuk et al., 2010). The researchers also comment that despite NCLB initiatives and programs there has not been any significant change within the urban education setting (Mezuk et al., 2010).  However, they do point out that although, “These disparities in school-based resources suggest school-based solution to the achievement gap problem...the socioeconomic achievement gap appears to be primarily due to inequities in household resources, indicating that policies that only address inequities in school performance will fail to address this gap” (Mezuk et al., 2010).  

In a study titled, “The relationship between parental involvement and urban secondary school student academic achievement: A meta-analysis” the researcher, W.H. Jeynes wanted to discover the effect of parental involvement on student rates of graduation.  They found that for all demographic groups there was a significant (.5 to .55 standard deviation unit) correlation between high parental involvement and student success in high school (Jeynes, 2007). The question then becomes, “How do we increase parental involvement in high school, a time when many parents tend to lessen their involvement?” 

In another study conducted by Kyle M. McCallumore and Ervin F. Sparapani (2010), the researchers examined the impact of “Freshman Academies,” and found that students that experience success in 9th grade tend to be more likely to graduate in four years (McCallumore & Sparapani, 2010). However, the authors state that, “Reform programs, such as freshman academies, have helped alleviate some of the concerns, but the problems do not just involve the ninth grade.  It is important to consider what can be done before high school begins to better prepare students for new challenges...” (McCallumore & Sparapani, 2010). The researchers from both of the studies conducted during this time pointed to the fact that although these programs demonstrated moderate success, they were not the overall answer to changing the problem of low graduation rates in urban high schools. 

The next period of research was conducted during the years of the Obama administration.  After years under NCLB it became clear that there were unintended consequences of this reform strategy.  Many states lowered their expectations in state tests to achieve AYP.  In addition, teachers were “teaching to the test,” and many subjects like social studies, science, and fine arts were abandoned in urban education systems.  Obama attempted to start a new initiative that would replace NCLB but only succeeded in creating Common Core an initiative to hold all states accountable for teaching all the standards including social studies and science (obamawhitehouse.archives.gov, 2016). 

I remember when my building abandoned our social studies program.  I saw that this was coming and got certified in English Language Arts.  My principal came to me and asked if I would switch to ELA and incorporate social studies where I could.  It was a really difficult time in my career because I saw this as another way that our children were becoming even more disadvantaged.  Their counterparts in suburban schools continued to have all of the subject areas whereas our students were forced into 90-minute blocks of math and ELA.  Then they had an additional math and ELA class.   

With Obama’s new initiative each state had the option of adopting the national Common Core.  Missouri did not adopt but created instead Missouri Learning Standards which were very similar to what we had before.  Other than that, very little changed in how we taught our students and the number of resources available to teach subjects that were not tested regularly on the Missouri Assessment Program (MAP). 

In this section I will examine research studies impacted by the Obama administration during the years 2011-2019.  There are ten research studies during this time that I will highlight.  Most of the research conducted during this time focused again on education programs and their impact on graduation rates, but there was also a new trend to focus on factors outside of the school such as parent support, student mobility, segregation, and societal changes.  I believe that researchers were starting to see that there was no magic program that would change graduation rates, there were issues going on in society that greatly impacted urban high school graduation rates.   

The first set of studies that I will examine are those that focused on programs and initiatives that sought to change how curriculum was taught.  The first study was conducted by Lydia Bartlett, Lori Kupczynski, and Glenda Holland (2011).  In their study they wanted to explore the impact of the “School Within a School,” model on graduation rates (Bartlett et al., 2011). The researchers studied one urban high school in Texas and found that the “School Within a School” model positively impacted graduation rates at the school.  It is interesting to note that in their introduction they mention, “To an unprecedented degree, this is the era of big business in educational entrepreneurship” (Bartlett et al., 2011). In a study conducted by Mac Iver and Messel (2012) in Baltimore Public Schools they wanted to learn why graduation rates in Baltimore Public Schools were lower than many schools in the suburbs.  The researchers found that students who had low attendance rates in 9th grade graduated at much lower rates than their peers with higher attendance rates (Mac Iver and Messel, 2012).  They suggest that intervention at the 9th grade year would help to increase graduation rates.  They also found a predictor in 8th grade students who had lower math and reading scores on standardized tests (Mac Iver and Messel, 2012). When examined in conjunction the researchers felt that the majority of intervention still needed to be implemented in 9th grade.  

In another study by Mark Brandon Greene (2013), they explored the impact relationships with staff made on graduation rates.  They interviewed ten African American males to determine what factors supported them on their path to graduation.  Greene found that although there were significant similarities between each of the participants socioeconomic status and family background the biggest difference was whether they had formed a supportive relationship with teachers or counselors at their school (Greene, 2013). Greene’s study found that, “critical supportive relationships with teachers and counselors allowed some African American male students to successfully recover from slow starts in their 9th and 10th grade years, while similar African American male students failed to make the supportive connections with school staff and were unsuccessful in reaching graduation” (Greene, 2013). Greene also mentions that the intersection of race and gender has a significant impact on graduation rates but does not explore the reasons behind why some African American male students did not make supportive relationships.   

Another study conducted during the same year examined how transcendental meditation impacted graduation rates.  Robert D. Colbert studied the impact of the “Quiet Time/Transcendental Meditation” program at an urban high school.  Colbert’s hypothesis was that training in a stress reduction program would positively impact overall graduation rates (Colbert, 2013).  They found that, “Overall the percentage of graduating meditating students was 87.1% and the percentage of graduating non-meditating students was 66.7%” (Colbert, 2013). These results indicate that meditation, if it is the only factor contributing to graduation, is successful.   

I remember a program that came to my school during the 2008-2009 school year called “Restorative Justice in Schools.”  I had a class of about 27 students, and we were instructed to sit in a circle and then go around the circle and answer fairly personal questions.  The leader of the circle came from the program and my role was to keep the students engaged during the process. After “circle time” students were lead through a guided meditation.  Needless to say, it was a stressful moment for me every day.  I also did not see the benefit to my students since they struggled to be that vulnerable around their peers, as most middle schoolers are.   

A study that came out two years later by Ernestina M. Briones, Don Jones, and Linda Challoo (2015), explored how the use of multiple programs impacted graduation rates in urban school districts in Texas.  The programs they studied were, “AVID, Communities in Schools (CIS), Diplomas Now and Gear Up” (Briones et al., 2015). AVID stands for Advancement Via Individual Determination.  The researchers found that when there were multiple programs used there was a significant impact on graduation rates at that particular school.  They did note that, “There are many contributing factors in determining whether an urban high school with intervention programs will likely obtain higher graduation rates.  Some contributing factors may include socioeconomic status of the students' family, the parents’ marital status, the student’s discipline and legal record” (Briones et al., 2015). We used AVID extensively at my school.  I remember thinking that AVID had many great qualities, but the program was out of the building within a couple of years.   

That same year researchers Jennifer Freeman and Brandi Simonsen (2015) examined the impact of intervention programs, in general, on graduation rates.  What they found was that “Despite research highlighting the need to address multiple risk factors and the need for early intervention, the bulk of current empirical research is focused on single-component, individual, or small group interventions delivered at the high school level” (Freeman & Simonsen, 2015). In their literature review the researchers highlight the fact that whether there is one or multiple intervention programs the results are basically the same, graduation rates do not change significantly across all urban schools.  

The next research study is by Vaughn Denton (2017).  Denton explored the impact of “Trust” on graduation rates in urban high schools.  They wanted to see if the relationship between the principal and the teachers impacted graduation rates.  Denton found that although not the major predictor of graduation rates there was a small correlation between teacher trust in their principal and graduation rates at particular schools.  Denton does note that SES demographic indicators also impacted whether teachers trusted their principals.  In schools with populations with low SES there was significantly less trust in the principal.  I feel this aspect of the study would need further research in order to truly determine what the relationship was.   

The next group of research studies discussed focuses on the connections between factors outside of the school building and their impact on graduation rates.   The first study conducted by Jeffrey L. Jordan, Genti Kostandini and Elton Mykerezi (2012) examined the connections between urban and rural school systems and their graduation rates.  The researchers found that when family factors like, SES, presence of biological parents, and maternal attributes are considered there are no significant differences between urban and rural graduation rates (Jordan et al., 2012). These researchers tried to correct biases against the urban education system by discussing the impact of low SES on a student’s overall ability to participate in school.  They point out equity factors like financial needs within the family, the job market in their area is limited to careers that do not require high levels of education, and whether a GED is considered graduating.   

This study seems pivotal because they explore the factor of community job market on graduation.  In a lot of urban areas there are a majority of low paying jobs available.  For example, down the street from my school there is a Family Dollar which employs a large number of parents who have students at my school. My specific school location is surrounded by a majority low-income jobs, buildings that sit vacant, restaurants that cater to the community population, and fast-food restaurants.  The conclusion could be made based on the research study that my students cannot see in their own communities a future for themselves outside of those options. 

In a research study from 2013, Richard J. Murnane examined graduation rates between the years 1970-2010 across the country and determined that the most beneficial way to increase equity among urban school districts was to increase, “the variety of high school options for students, including ones that provide significant experiences in workplace settings and clear connections between the skills students are asked to master and access to jobs that make use of these skills” (Murnane, 2013). This equity factor is very similar to how high schools in St. Louis were created.  SLPS has a high number of magnet high schools that offer job training for students.  Over the years the number of magnet schools has increased and is now decreasing.  However, many parents still see the magnet school program as the best option for their children.   

A monumental study of 50 urban school districts was conducted in 2015 by the Center on Reinventing Public Education (CRPE) with the lead researcher Michael DeArmond.  This study found four themes, “Inequity in public education, though widespread, is not inevitable, but performance in most cities is still flat. Poor and minority students still face staggering academic inequities, and the picture is especially bleak for black students” (DeArmond et al., 2015).  

Based on these themes the researchers offered up places among the 50 cities that were able to correct some of the inequities.  For example, they point out that in cities like Memphis and Chicago Black students participate in advanced courses and the SAT at high rates and in Baton Rouge, where Black students are not suspended at higher rates than white students (DeArmond et al., 2015). The authors suggest that city leaders take a closer look at the education system in their city to determine what the major issues are and then look at this report to find examples of cities that have been able to correct that inequity.  It is interesting to see specifically how certain cities are able to provide at least aspects of equity within their system.   

Another study by Kristy Cooper (2016) took a look at the experiences of students during their time in high school and determine if too many negative experiences impacted their decision to not graduate.  Cooper argues that the accumulation of negative experiences in urban high schools is what ultimately decides whether a student will want to stay in school.  These negative experiences could be found in interactions with staff, peer relationships, and rigor of the curriculum.  The fact that many urban students have more negative experiences in high school leads to lower graduation rates (Cooper, 2016). 

A study by Bryan, Farmer-Hinton, Rawls and Woods (2017) examines the connection between social capital and college entrance.  The researchers define social capital as the network that any of us have as we move through society.  They argue that the network developed by students attending Caucasian dominant schools in upper-middle class communities has more connections that facilitate entrance into post-secondary programs primarily college (Bryan et al., 2017). The researchers found that having college-expectations and talking about college with school staff had an impact on whether a student attended college (Bryan et al., 2017) They found that staff who specifically discuss and create a “college culture” in their buildings had higher rates of students attending college within 2 years of graduating high school. 

The next study, conducted by Richard O. Welsh (2018), examines the impact of student mobility and segregation on graduation rates.  The author points to the landmark case of Brown v Board and that even though schools were desegregated over the past sixty years there has been a “persistent resegregation” of our urban schools (Welsh, 2018). The author hypothesizes that student mobility among schools may be linked to school segregation.  They state, “The resegregation of American schools coupled with the growth of school choice policies nationwide make it important to learn more about the relationship between educational inequality, student mobility, and school segregation” (Welsh, 2018). Welsh examines how school choice and student mobility are directly linked to societal and community factors that have nothing to do with school.   In this study Welsh found that schools with highly segregated populations had higher rates of mobility and were less resourced (Welsh, 2018).   

This study rings so true to what I experienced at my school.  We have many “new” students each year and a low number of students that return.  We are also one of the only neighborhood schools left in the district at the middle school level.  We have been historically under-resourced and have a large minority population.   

The final study in this section is very similar to the one conducted by CRPE in 2015.  This study from 2019, conducted by Marcus Winters and the Manhattan Institute, focuses on the variation of school quality within a district and then compares that variation against other cities.  The study examined the impact of student mobility on school quality.  Parents in some cities feel like the school they enroll in does not matter because the quality of the schools does not vary much; however, in other cities the variation is quite vast leaving parents with little choice but to seek out better quality schools.  Winters states, “The variation in the quality of a city’s schools has important implications for parents seeking access to an appropriate school for their child, and it speaks directly to whether a city is providing equitable access to educational quality for residents” (Winters, 2019). Winters found that on average schools that are more concentrated with low SES and non-white students there was a “larger variation in quality” (Winters, 2019). This study seems to correlate with the previous study that also suggested the same conclusions.

This section will focus on research happening during and directly after the COVID-19 Pandemic.  No matter who you are in this world you were impacted by the COVID-19 Pandemic.  The world of education was truly hit the hardest and the inequities that were already present became even more apparent.  As an educator, I was terrified about the loss my students would experience as they tried to learn from home.  We were a district that was lucky enough to provide technology to our students, but years of having no technology available made the transfer to virtual very difficult.  It is beyond the scope of this paper to discuss all the impacts of the pandemic on education, but it should be noted that the education system is still recovering in some respects and experiencing growing pains in others.    

The first research study that I will discuss explores graduation rates in Mexico.  This study was conducted in 2020 by Andrew Dustan.  Dustan found that like the United States many Mexican students leave school to help support their families.  Given that the current economic state in Mexico is tenuous, many of the students go into illegal activities to support the family (Dustan, 2020). Based on prior research I have completed in this area it is very true that many Mexican students leave school prior to graduation because the family simply needs the support of the older children to maintain their living expenditures.  One or two family members are not able to provide enough financially to support all of the other members of the family.   

The Mexican government has made high school compulsory, but as of this research study there were still very low graduation rates in urban areas.  Dustan studies whether conditional cash transfers (CCT) would help support more students graduating from high school.  The program in Mexico is called, Prepa Sí, pays students monthly for being enrolled in a public high school (Dustan, 2020). The study finds that even with the cash transfers to students there is no significant impact on graduation rates.  This could be due to the amount that was offered.  Even at the highest-grade point average a student could only earn about $65 a month (Dustan, 2020). 

In the United States we tried something like this during the pandemic with EBT cards for students that attended school right after we returned to in-person.  If that program continued it would be interesting to see the impact.  My experience has shown that parents of students that do not attend school face being called into court and getting fines each time their student drops below a certain attendance percentage.   

Another study involving Mexican immigrant students was conducted in the same year in the United States.  In this study the researchers, Bryant G. Valencia, Juvenal Caporale, and Andrea J. Romero (2020), studied 16 Mexican descent youth from low-income backgrounds and discussed why they felt “pushed” out of high school (Valencia et al., 2020). During the interviews the researchers discovered that many of the 16 students felt that the schools did not care if they graduated or not, that they were blamed for not making academic progress, and family stressors (Valencia et al., 2020). The researchers go into the fact that the students not only felt that the school did not care if they graduated, that they felt discrimination from the school staff toward them and their ability to succeed academically (Valencia et al., 2020).  One goal of this study that seems to speak to a more equitable notion of why urban students struggle to graduate was stated by the authors as, “One goal of this study is to debunk deficit models about youth who leave school by examining their understanding of how contextual factors influenced their academic experiences” (Valencia et al., 2020).   

Another study during this period comes from Julia Duncheon (2020).  In this study Duncheon researched the impact of Early College High Schools (ECHS) had on graduation rates and entrance into post-secondary programs at urban high schools in Texas.  They state that exposure to college courses during high school increased the likelihood of students graduating and entering college.  Ultimately, Duncheon (2020) concluded that more socialization on college campuses would lead to an even larger increase of students completing their college coursework. A study similar to Duncheon comes from Edmunds, Unlu, Furey, Glennie and Arshavsky out of North Carolina (2020).  In their study they also examined the impact of ECHS on graduation rates and completion of post-secondary studies.  The researchers found that students who were exposed to ECHS were more likely to complete their degrees within six years of graduating high school (Edmunds et al., 2020). 

Another study on ECHS by Song, Zeiser, Atchinson, and Brodziak de los Reyes (2021) examined the impact of Early College High Schools on long-term success of urban students.  They wanted to determine if exposure to early college experiences in high school indicated higher rates of college degree attainment. The researchers found that early college students were more likely to enroll in two- and four-year colleges and to also attain a degree within six years of graduating high school (Song et al., 2021). 

In a study conducted by Mireles-Rios, Rios, and Reyes (2020) they studied the impact of school truancy on high school graduation.  The researchers found several reasons why students run into attendance issues such as mental health and trauma, transportation, physical health, helping the family financially, relationships with staff, fear of deportation, and standardized tests (Mireles-Rios et al., 2020).  The researchers suggest a three-tier system that best supports students including: home visits, leadership that understands the community of the school, parental efficacy, focused mentoring programs, fix transportation issues, truancy courts, and interagency housing and case management (Mireles-Rios et al., 2020). These factors would then help students to boost their attendance and mitigate students leaving school.   

A study conducted by Glennie, Ottem, and Lauff (2021) examined the impact of earning an industry certification while in high school on post-secondary degree attainment.  The researchers found that students who earned the certification were more likely to attain some kind of post-secondary degree such as an associate degree (Glennie et al., 2021). The state of Florida enacted the Career and Professional Education Act (CAPE), wherein schools receive funding to support students who want to earn their industry certificate in high school.  The research shows that this act has helped to increase graduation rates and entrance into post-secondary programs (Glennie et al., 2021). 

In a study by Lustick (2021) titled “’Restorative Justice’ or restoring order? Restorative school discipline practices in urban public schools” discusses the impact of restorative practices in discipline and its impact on student success in high school.  Lustick found that using “restorative practices” did not change the status quo in the buildings that were being studied.  This seems odd because in my experience using restorative practices can prevent students from going into in-school suspension or out-of-school suspension.  However, in this study those responsible for conducting the restorative practices essentially established rapport, but did not repair the harm (Lustick, 2021). This meant that students were kept out of classrooms but were never encouraged to correct the mistake made to cause them to leave the classroom.  At this point we can start to see that researchers are starting to focus on not just what is going on in the school, but also what is happening in the communities that prevent students from graduating.  It is not that they do not have the appropriate skill sets, it is that societal factors get in the way. 

The next study by Daniel L. Duke and Bryan A. Vangronigen (2021), examines the differences between small and large city school systems and the struggle for educational equity. The researchers believe that the issues with graduation rates in the larger urban areas can also be found in the smaller cities.  They state that it is common knowledge that poverty impacts academic success, and that poverty exists in the smaller cities as well.  They point out that one of the equity factors that could support students in both areas is if there were higher rates of teacher retention and higher quality principals in each of the schools (Duke & Vangronigen, 2021).  I wonder why the researchers pointed out that poverty plays a large role in academic achievement but then point to teacher retention and quality leadership as the equity factor.   

A final research study that contributes to this discussion comes from June Moore titled African American Males’ Views on the Role Their Teachers Played in Their College Matriculation.  This dissertation was presented to the faculty of the Cook School of Intercultural Studies at Biola University in March 2021 (Moore, 2021).  I feel that the overall strength of this study can be found in the discussion of the participants and their experiences with their teachers.  As I read, I kept thinking to myself that this would be an excellent study for pre-service or first year teachers to read to help them gain insight into how their attitudes and behaviors impact their students.  Many participants noted that their teachers did not demonstrate a belief in them as a student or their ability to matriculate to post-secondary education.  I have heard repeatedly from my students about teachers that made them feel less than and I get the feeling that no matter what I say to them it will not erase that experience they had with that teacher.  So much about whether a student is successful in education is whether they believe they can be successful.  If a teacher shakes a student’s confidence in themselves, it is difficult to regain that confidence.  If teachers read this study maybe they would better understand that concept.    

The question is now “Where do we go from here?”  The landscape of modern urban education systems was dramatically changed by the pandemic.  The number of opportunities for our students is changing and the direction they can go with their education is also changing.  From what I currently see in my district educational leaders are seeking input from the community more than ever before, incorporating a more social justice approach as they work with families and trying to explore the best next steps for urban education during this pivotal time.   

A study that explores these ideas is the “Report on the Condition of Education 2022” created by the Institute of Education Sciences and the National Center for Education Statistics with Veronique Irwin and Josue De La Rosa as lead researchers.  This study examined all schools in the nation and focused on the impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic on how schools are doing in multiple factors.  The study indicates that since this data started to be collected nationally in 2010, the nation saw the biggest change in graduation rates during the 2020-2021 school year (Irwin & De La Rosa, 2022).  There was a 5.3% increase in students dropping out of school as compared to rates in 2010 (Irwin & De La Rosa, 2022). In addition, of the graduates in 2020 there was also a dramatic decrease in the number of students that enrolled in post-secondary programs to about 63% (Irwin & De La Rosa, 2022). In the study they also point out that across the country there was a significant decrease in assessment scores from the previous decade of growth in sciences and math (Irwin & De La Rosa, 2022). Based on these national trends it explains how many urban school systems would struggle with building back to pre-pandemic levels.  In addition, it could be concluded from this data that this is a perfect time to re-examine the factors that we as educators need to focus on as we provide equitable opportunities for all students.   

In a recent study conducted in Mexico by Hoyos, Attanasio and Meghir (2024) they found that offering financial scholarships to students from low SES families did not have a very large impact on high school graduation rates.  The researchers studied the program PROBEMS that was enacted in 2007.  They wanted to see if parents who could not afford to send their children to school would be more likely to allow them to attend if they had a scholarship.  Many students did use the program, but the researchers found that those who benefitted from the program were not the intended families.  Families that kept their students home to help support the family continued to do so even with the offer of a scholarship due to such tremendous financial hardship (Hoyos et al., 2024). 

In a study from (2023) by Jabbari and Johnson they examined the impact of high rates of in-school suspensions on math achievement and college entrance.  Due to high teacher/student ratios in many urban schools there is also a higher rate of in-school suspensions.  When the researchers began to study the impact, they found that students that experienced a high number of in-school suspensions had lower math achievement and lower rates of attending college, while students that did not experience this type of discipline had higher rates.  This would indicate that placing students in exclusionary types of settings greatly impacts their ability to learn and graduate (Jabbari and Johnson, 2023). 

In a study titled, “A multisite randomized study of an online learning approach to high school credit recovery: Effects on student experiences and proximal outcomes” authors Rickels, Clements, Brodziak de los Reys, Lachowicz, Lin, and Heppen (2024) examine effects of taking an online credit recovery class versus and traditional teacher-lead class.  The researchers found that there was no significant difference between the two types of credit recovery.  Meaning students still learned about the same amount and performed about the same (Rickels et al., 2024).  This would indicate that online credit recovery options might be a valuable option for students that struggle to attend school. 

The final study in this literature review comes from Kate Barrington (2023).  In this study, Barrington surveyed high school students that dropped out for various reasons.  They indicated that, “Getting held back a grade, needing to work to support the family, using drugs, becoming pregnant, joining a gang, missed too many days of school and couldn’t keep up,” as the main reasons for dropping out (Barrington, 2023).  Barrington offers many ways to improve graduation rates and improve overall equity within urban education, “Identify and keep track of early warning signs when students are struggling, keep track of attendance, improve teachers’ responsibility, raise the bar for academic success, create and foster positive relationships with teachers and staff, and adjust disciplinary practices as needed” (Barrington, 2023). It does seem that previous research would support each of these suggestions but based on the previous years of lower graduation rates there seems to be the need for additional strategies to help support urban students as they work toward graduation.

The research conducted over the past thirty years provides us with a list of factors that are believed to prepare students for graduation and moving into post-secondary work.  In the 1990s the main factor was staff (teachers and administration) attitudes toward student ability to succeed.  During the early 2000s the focus shifted to packaged programs that would boost curriculum and teacher effectiveness.  In the Obama era the focus split into two groups, one being packaged programs that will boost student success and the other on societal factors such as student mobility that impact student success.  The last section of the research I explored was conducted during the post-pandemic era.  During this time researchers are going back and forth as to what the next step should be in urban education reform.  The results are inconclusive mostly because the urban education system is in a period of change.  Students having so much access to technology now will have a tremendous impact on equity.  Based on the information gathered in the literature review, a set of equity factors can be determined to guide further research in urban education equity.