Many educators and others who are concerned with the dropout problem are advocating policies, which involve a broad range of institutions and agencies. Increasingly, it is being recognized that the issues of drop out and its prevention cannot be separated from issues affecting our total economic and social structure. These issues include poverty, unemployment, gender discrimination, child abuse, drug abuse in the family, and many other factors, which are associated with it Idowu, The general causes of school dropout can be grouped in relation to three different levels: pupils and their families, community and school.
According to Birdeland, Dilulio and Morrison , factors that may cause school dropout in connection with pupils and their families include:. At the community level, the major factors in early school dropout were highlighted by Robin are as follows:. Fallis and Opotow stated that the school could also contribute to dropout by frequent repeating of grades, insufficient pupil integration or poor relationships with teachers and classmates.
The report shows that one out of every five Nigerian children is out of school. With approximately Although it is believed that a significant increase in net enrolment rates was recorded in recent years, it is estimated that about 4. School dropouts according to Chijioke and Ukpong are in various categories. For instance, there are some children who finished primary school, but their parents could not afford to send them to secondary schools.
Even when children enrol in schools, many do not complete the primary cycle. It is common these days in Nigeria to see youths within the age bracket of 15 to 18 years roaming the streets without any concrete thing to do. Often, these youth engage in drug abuse, drunkenness and smoking and other social vices to the detriment of their lives. There are several risk factors that determine the rate at which school children drop out of school.
Among the different risk factors, Karl, Entwistle and Horsey identified the following to top the list:. There are several consequences of dropping out of school. According to Pirog and Magee , some of the consequences of dropping out of school include:. To guide against this, different preventive and intervention strategies can be put in place to guide against student dropping out of School. Some of these measures as noted by Garnier, Stein and Jacobs are:. In addition school-wide strategies and programmes to keep students in school, individual teachers and support staff can help encourage school involvement for students at risk for dropping out.
Some of the roles teachers can play to help students stay in school as stated by Elliot and Voss include:. Adeyemi, C. Early school dropout: Configurations and determinants.
Child Development, 60, Ali, A. Consulting research in education and the social sciences. Enugu: Tashuriwa National Limited. Birdeland, J. Dilulio, J. The silent epidemic: Prepective of high school dropouts.
Washington, D. Chijioke, Y. The effect of dropping out of high school. Criminal Behaviour Criminology, 23 1 : 3. Egbochuku, E. We have worked out on tips to prevent student retention too. Read through the end. This is the first reason why students drop out. The skyrocketing fees increase student debts, pushing those from underprivileged backgrounds suffer further. Further, the Student Enrollment Trends by high-needs Subgroup confirms the drop out rate due to unaffordability. Source: Delaware Department of Education.
Detailed Enrollment and Specialty Enrollment Reports They quit higher education because they are simply not ready for it. Nagging roommates, overloaded with course works could be the next main reasons for students to drop out of high school. Unhappiness could also arise out of the distrust that develops out of the feeling that in spite of paying so much of fees, the institution forgets to keep students happier. The number of communications, orientations, events to make student show up for the course goes futile when most institutions forget to keep up the same effort.
Hopelessness clouds around them when they feel that they are not up to the job ahead. These feelings force students to leave college and return to the comfort of their communities back home.
This is yet another reason why most high school students come to a sticky end these days. Lack of student engagement is the main reason. They feel bypassed when the colleges do not follow Outcome Based Education. Two types of motivation barriers exist—internal and external. Internal would include a less motivational learning environment, whereas external would be lack of peer collaboration online, fear of isolation and the absence of social cues.
Inculcating the habits of success, forming a perfect support system can help here. Figuring out the right course of study for a successful career path can always be of struggle. This could be a winding road rather than a straight line.
It is unfair to commit to a course of study only to discover later that the program is not what they expected. If so, the family might very well direct anger against these others. In order to test the above assumptions, we returned to a large-scale study where parts have previously been reported in a manuscript by Gausel However, none of the measures, and analyses and none of the correlations reported here in this manuscript have been examined or reported elsewhere.
For the sake of clarity, we illustrate how the measures are used across the two manuscripts in Table 1.
Hundred and twenty nine community participants They were approached individually in parks, cafes, and libraries in a medium-sized city in Norway. On the first page of the questionnaire participants read the information of the study as described above and agreed to partake in the study.
On the same page, we asked the participant to fill in demographics of gender and age. On the third page, participants were presented with standardized items measuring how this drop out could be appraised by the family of the student, and how they would respond to the drop out. When finished, participants were debriefed and thanked.
All items were adopted from Gausel et al. In order to explain anger directed at the pupil and anger directed at others, we specified a latent model using Structural Equation Modeling with AMOS 22 software. Figure 1.
Structural path model of the manipulation on concerns for self-image and social-image and their link to the two angers. Even though there can be good reasons for dropping out of an educational program, a drop out generally violates societal norms e. Probably therefore, our community participants considered dropping out to be moderately wrong regardless of the educational path, and by such, they lend support to Christle et al.
This finding support Gausel and Leach argumentation that a failure to adhere to norms will likely threaten the self-image and the social-image of the individual or group associated with the failure. In line with our hypotheses, we found that participants expected the family to be angrier at the former pupil for dropping out of vocational education than if dropping out of a general education. This is understandable, because expressing anger at the pupil might communicate that the family is disappointed over the decision to drop out of vocational education in an increasingly competitive labor market Grootaers et al.
Moreover, since anger directed at the former pupil was explained by concern for moral self-image, the findings support the arguments of Gausel and Leach that a threat to self-image will likely motivate self-directed anger. Also in line with our hypotheses, we found that participants in the vocational education condition expected the family to be angrier at others for the drop out than did those in the general education condition.
As expected, the motivation to direct anger at others was explained by the concern for loss of respect in the eyes of others i. This finding is in line with Gausel and Leach argument that the threat to the social-image is a motivator of anti-social responses and hostility.
Moreover, this finding bears resemblance to Zahl-Olsen et al. It also lends support to Gausel et al. By such, it appears that the community participants expected reactions similar to those reported in recent research and theorizing on anger and anti-social motivations.
It should be underlined that our study focused on how people in general think a family would respond to a drop out. Naturally, it would be ideal to investigate how actual families of those who drop out would respond to our research questions.
Moreover, as people are good at imagining how others and themselves would feel and do in various situations e. That said, one should be aware of the practical and ethical difficulties to find and locate families with pupils that have dropped out of school. In relation to the practical difficulties of locating them, we can inform that we first tried to contact the two different schools mentioned in our scenario in order to gain information about the drop outs.
However, we were not granted this information and were thus left in the dark in response to locating these families. That said, out of ethical concerns, families of those who drop out might already have been exposed for stigmatizing attitudes and thus have experienced many emotional and practical hardships. One can imagine that if we were to locate them, it might not be welcomed if we were to address them about something they might very well be angry about.
Another limitation rests within the participant pool. We did not check if they had background from a vocational or a general education, and thus, we cannot guarantee that this would not have influenced their perception of drop out from the one or the other educational programs. Moreover, we did not ask for, and therefore could not control for whether their level of education influenced the results in any way.
We do believe that these participants have enough life-experience to be more moderate in their beliefs about the world than younger ones. Hence, we rest assured that the results based on the feedback from our participants can be trusted. Our findings indicate that professional helpers working with drop outs might meet families that, ironically, communicate anger instead of gratitude for the help they are given. Moreover, if the family is angry at the former pupil then the professional helper might see that their anger can be explained by the worry that there is a moral failure within the family since they could not prevent the drop out.
In any way, we think helpers can use our model to better understand how families cope with the social and family-related challenges that a norm violating drop out might represent.
The datasets generated for this study are available on request to the corresponding author. The studies involving human participants were reviewed through the standardized checklist of the Norwegian Centre for Research Data and found not to be subject to notification. NG did the design and analysis and contributed to the interpretation of the data, theoretical framework and write-up, and approved submission. DB contributed to the interpretation of the data, theoretical framework and write-up, and approved submission.
All authors contributed to the article and approved the submitted version. The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.
Aftenposten Google Scholar.
0コメント