Quality & Quantity

, Volume 47, Issue 5, pp 2425–2446

Dropout in secondary education: an application of a multilevel discrete-time hazard model accounting for school changes

  • Carl Lamote
  • Jan Van Damme
  • Wim Van Den Noortgate
  • Sara Speybroeck
  • Tinneke Boonen
  • Jerissa de Bilde
Article

Abstract

For several decades, researchers have focused on dropout in search for an explanation and prevention of this phenomenon. However, past research is characterized by methodological shortcomings. Most of this research was conducted without considering the hierarchical structure of educational data and ignored the longitudinal path towards dropout. Moreover, research that did take into account these shortcomings, did not correct for student mobility between schools, despite the strong correlation with dropout (South et al. 2007). In this study, we attempt to address these shortcoming by implementing a multilevel discrete-time hazard model and exploring the effect of different school classifications on the school effects. Partially analogous to Grady and Beretvas (2010) we compare models with estimated school effects based on the first and on the last school attended and compare these models with multiple membership models and cross-classified models. The results of this comparison indicate that ignoring student mobility can have strong implications on the predictors of dropout. Not only do models which take into account this mobility yield better model fits, models ignoring this mobility tend to miss the effect of school level variables. With respect to the conclusions on dropout research, our models provide evidence for the often cited student characteristics predicting dropout and indicate stronger school effects than generally assumed.

Keywords

Discrete-time hazard analysis Cross-classifications Multiple membership Dropout Secondary education Methodology of longitudinal research 

Abbreviations

DIC

Deviance Information Criterion

LOSO

‘Longitudinaal Onderzoek in het Secundair Onderwijs’ or ‘Longitudinal research in secondary education’

MCMC

Markov Chain Monte Carlo

MDTH

Multilevel discrete-time hazard analysis

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Alexander K., Entwisle D., Kabbani N.: The dropout process in life course perspective: early risk factors at home and school. Teach. Coll. Rec. 103, 760–822 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Allison P.: Discrete-time methods for the analysis of event histories. Sociol. Methodol. 13, 61–98 (1982)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Barber J.S., Murphy S.A., Axinn W.G., Maples J.: Discrete-time multilevel hazard analysis. Sociol. Methodol. 30, 201–235 (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bowers A.: Grades and graduation: a longitudinal risk perspective to identify student dropouts. J. Educ. Res. 103, 191–207 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Browne W.J., Goldstein H., Rasbash J.: Multiple membership multiple classification (MMMC) models. Stat. Model. 1, 103–124 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Croninger R.G., Lee V.E.: Social capital and dropping out of high school: benefits to at-risk students of teachers’ support and guidance. Teach. Coll. Rec. 103, 548–581 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. De Fraine, B.: Cognitieve en niet-cognitieve effecten van prestatiegericht klimaat, gemeen-schapsgericht klimaat en groepssamenstelling in klassen en scholen. Verkenning met het multiniveaumodel (Cognitive and non-cognitive effects of academic climate, communitarian climate and group composition of classes and schools. Explorations with multilevel models). Dissertation, K.U.Leuven, Belgium (2003)Google Scholar
  8. Finn J.: Withdrawing from school. Rev. Educ. Res. 59, 117–142 (1989)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Fielding A.: Teaching groups as foci for evaluating performance in cost-effectiveness of gce advanced level provision: some practical methodological innovations. Sch. Eff. Sch. Improv. 13, 225–246 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Fielding A., Goldstein H.: Cross-Classified and Multiple Membership Structures in Multilevel Models: An Introduction and Review. University of Birmingham, Department for University Skills, Birmingham (2006)Google Scholar
  11. Fredricks J.A., Blumenfeld P.C., Paris A.H.: School engagement: potential of the concept, state of the evidence. Rev. Educ. Res. 74, 59–109 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Gesthuizen M., De Graaf P.M., Kraaykamp G.: The changing family background of the low-educated in the Netherlands, socio-economic, cultural, and socio-demographic resources. Eur. Sociol. Rev. 21, 441–452 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Goldschmidt P., Wang J.: When can schools affect dropout behavior? A longitudinal multilevel analysis. Am. Educ. Res. J. 36, 715–738 (1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Goldstein H.: Methods in school effectiveness research. Sch. Eff. Sch. Improv. 8, 369–395 (1997)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Goldstein H.: Multilevel Statistical Models. Arnold Publishers, London (2011)Google Scholar
  16. Goldstein H., Burgess S., McConnell B.: Modelling the effect of pupil mobility on school differences in educational achievement. J. R. Stat. Soc. 170, 941–954 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Goldstein H., Sammons P.: The influence of secondary and junior schools on sixteen year examination performance: a cross-classified multilevel analysis. Sch. Eff. Sch. Improv. 8, 219–230 (1997)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Grady M.W., Beretvas S.N.: Incorporating student mobility in achievement growth modeling: a cross-classified multiple membership growth curve model. Multivar. Behav. Res. 45, 393–419 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Hickman G., Bartholomew M., Mathwig J., Heinrich R.: Differential developmental pathways of high school dropouts and graduates. J. Educ. Res. 102, 3–14 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Jimerson S., Anderson G., Whipple A.: Winning the battle and losing the war: examining the relation between grade retention and dropping out of high school. Psychol. Sch. 39, 441–457 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Kleinbaum D.G., Klein M.: Survival Analysis. A Self-Learning Text. Springer, New York (2005)Google Scholar
  22. Leckie G.: The complexity of school and neighbourhood effects and movements of pupils on school differences in models of educational achievement. J. R. Stat. Soc. A Stat. 172, 537–554 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Lee V., Burkam D.: Dropping out of high school: the role of school organization and structure. Am. Educ. Res. J. 40, 353–393 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Luo W., Kwok 0.: The impacts of ignoring a crossed factor in analyzing cross-classified data. Multivar. Behav. Res. 44, 182–212 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Luyten H., Bosker R., Dekkers H., Derks A.: Dropout in the lower tracks of dutch secondary education: predictor variables and variation among schools. Sch. Eff. Sch. Improv. 14, 373–411 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Marks G.: Do schools matter for early school leaving? Individual and school influences in Australia. Sch. Eff. Sch. Improv. 18, 429–450 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Opdenakker M.C., Van Damme J.: Differences between secondary schools: study about school context, group composition, school practice, and school effects with special attention to public and catholic schools and types of schools. Sch. Eff. Sch. Improv. 17, 87–117 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Pampel F.C.: Logistic Regression: A Primer. Sage University Papers Series on Quantitative Applications in the Social Sciences, pp. 07–132. Sage, Thousand Oaks (2000)Google Scholar
  29. Pustjens H., Van de gaer E., Van Damme J., Onghena P.: Curriculum choice and success in the first two grades of secondary education: students, classes, or schools?. Sch. Eff. Sch. Improv. 19, 155–182 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Rasbash, J., Steele, F., Browne, W., Goldstein, H.: A user’s guide to mlwin, v2.10 [Computer software manual]. University of Bristol (2009)Google Scholar
  31. Raudenbush S.W.: A crossed random effects model for unbalanced data with applications in cross-sectional and longitudinal research. J. Educ. Stat. 18, 321–349 (1993)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Raudenbush S.W., Bryk A.S.: Hierarchical Linear Models: Applications and Data Analysis Methods. Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks (2002)Google Scholar
  33. Ream R.K., Rumberger R.W.: Student engagement, peer social capital, and school dropout among Mexican American and non-Latino White students. Sociol. Educ. 81, 109–139 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Roderick M.: Grade retention and school dropout: investigating the association. Am. Educ. Res. J. 31, 729–759 (1994)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Rumberger R.: Dropping out of middle school: a multilevel analysis of students and schools. Am. Educ. Res. J. 32, 583–625 (1995)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Rumberger, R.: Why students drop out of school and what can be done. In: Dropouts in America: How severe is the problem? What do we know about intervention and prevention? Harvard University, Cambridge (2001)Google Scholar
  37. Rumberger R., Thomas S.: The distribution of dropout and turnover rates among urban and suburban high schools. Sociol. Educ. 73, 39–67 (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Singer J., Willett J.: Modeling the days of our lives: using survival analysis when designing and analyzing longitudinal studies of duration and the timing of events. Psychol. Bull. 110, 268–290 (1991)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Singer J., Willett J.: Applied Longitudinal Data Analysis: Modeling Change and Event Occurrence. Oxford University Press, Oxford (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Snijders T., Bosker R.: Multilevel Analysis. An Introduction to Basic and Advanced Multilevel Modeling. Sage Publications, London (1999)Google Scholar
  41. Solga H.: Stigmatization by negative selection. Explaining less-educated people’s decreasing employment opportunities. Eur. Sociol. Rev. 18, 159–178 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. South S., Haynie D., Bose S.: Student mobility and school dropout. Soc. Sci. Res. 36, 68–94 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Spiegelhalter D., Best N., Carlin B., van der Linde A.: Bayesian measures of model complexity and fit. J. R. Stat. Soc. B Methodol. 64, 583–639 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Teitler J.O., Weiss C.C.: Effects of neighborhood and school environments of transitions to first sexual intercourse. Sociol. Educ. 73, 112–132 (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Van Damme J., De Fraine B., Van Landeghem G., Opdenakker M.C., Onghena P.: A new study on educational effectiveness in secondary schools in Flanders: an introduction. Sch. Eff. Sch. Improv. 13, 383–397 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Van Damme, J., De Troy, A., Meyer, J., Minnaert, A., Lorent, G., Opdenakker, M.-C., Verduyckt, P.: Succesvol doorstromen in de aanvangsjaren van het secundair onderwijs (Successful passing through the first years in secondary education). Acco, Leuven (1997)Google Scholar
  47. Verhofstadt E., De Witte H., Omey E.: Higher educated workers: better jobs but less satisfied?. Int. J. Manpow. 28, 135–151 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  • Carl Lamote
    • 1
  • Jan Van Damme
    • 1
  • Wim Van Den Noortgate
    • 2
  • Sara Speybroeck
    • 1
  • Tinneke Boonen
    • 1
  • Jerissa de Bilde
    • 1
  1. 1.Centre for Educational Effectiveness and EvaluationThe Education and Training Research Group, K. U. LeuvenLeuvenBelgium
  2. 2.Methodology of Educational Sciences Research Group, K. U. LeuvenLeuvenBelgium

Personalised recommendations