Staffing, Curriculum and Services, and Collaboration

Whether at-risk students are able to transfer back to regular schools or successfully graduate from alternative schools and programs for students at risk of education failure may depend in part on the quality of the education and services they receive at their alternative schools and programs. Various factors have been identified as beneficial to at-risk students in alternative education environments, including dedicated and well-trained staff, effective curriculum, and a variety of support services provided in collaboration with an array of agencies (Quinn and Rutherford 1998). The final section of the survey questionnaire asked questions pertaining to staffing, curriculum and services, and collaboration of alternative schools and programs with outside agencies.

Staffing

Teachers play an integral role in the nation"s alternative schools and programs. Research suggests that better outcomes are obtained when teachers are well-trained, caring, demanding, highly motivated, and responsive to the special needs of at-risk students (Barr and Parrett 2001). In addition, it has been found that teachers who are involuntarily assigned are less likely to serve students well than those who choose to teach in alternative schools and programs (Barr and Parrett 2001). At the time of this survey, there were no national data on how teachers come to teach at public alternative schools and programs. Some teachers may be hired specifically for a position in alternative education, while others may have experience in regular schools and are then willingly transferred. Still others may be required by their districts to transfer involuntarily to alternative schools and programs. Districts were asked whether their alternative school and program teachers were hired specifically to teach in alternative schools and programs, transferred by choice from a regular school, and/or were involuntarily assigned to teach in an alternative school or program (these response choices were not mutually exclusive).

Results indicate that 86 percent of districts with alternative schools and programs for at-risk students hired teachers specifically to teach in such schools and programs (Table 12). A smaller percentage of districts transferred teachers by choice from a regular school (49 percent), and an even smaller percentage assigned teachers involuntarily to positions in alternative schools and programs (10 percent). There was considerable variation across district characteristics. For instance, large and moderate size districts were more likely than small districts both to hire teachers specifically to teach at an alternative school or program and to transfer teachers voluntarily from regular schools (93 and 89 percent vs. 81 percent, and 83 and 60 percent vs. 31 percent). In addition, large districts were more likely than small ones to assign teachers involuntarily to alternative schools and programs for at-risk students (17 percent vs. 8 percent). By region, districts in the West were more likely than those in the Southeast to hire teachers specifically to teach at an alternative school or program for at risk students (90 percent vs. 81 percent). Districts in the Southeast and West were more likely than those in the Northeast and Central regions to transfer teachers by choice (61 and 56 percent vs. 33 and 40 percent) and also to assign them involuntarily (16 and 14 percent vs. 3 and 5 percent).

Districts with 50 percent or more minority enrollment were more likely than those with 5 percent or less and 6 to 20 percent minority enrollments to transfer teachers by choice (62 percent vs. 37 and 46 percent) and to assign them involuntarily to alternative schools and programs (20 percent vs. 5 and 8 percent). Districts with a low poverty concentration were more likely than those with a high poverty concentration to hire teachers specifically to teach in alternative schools and programs (91 percent vs. 80 percent), but were less likely than districts with moderate and high poverty concentrations to assign teachers involuntarily (3 percent vs. 10 and 15 percent).

Curriculum and services

Findings from the survey show that many districts with alternative schools and programs for at-risk students have policies that require a wide variety of services and practices for alternative education students (Table 13).28 For example, over three quarters of the districts had policies requiring curricula leading toward a regular high school diploma (91 percent), academic counseling (87 percent), a smaller class size than in regular schools (85 percent), remedial instruction (84 percent), opportunity for self-paced instruction (83 percent), crisis/behavioral intervention (79 percent), and career counseling (79 percent). Least commonly required were extended school day or school year (29 percent), security personnel on site (26 percent), and evening or weekend classes (25 percent).

On average, districts required 9.5 of the 16 services asked about in the survey (not shown in tables). About one-fifth (18 percent) of districts required 0 to 6 of the 16 specified services, 52 percent required 7 to 11, and 30 percent required 12 to 16 of the services (Figure 3).

Large districts were more likely than small ones to require 10 of the 16 services listed in the survey (smaller class size, crisis/behavioral intervention, social work services, peer mediation, extended school day/year, evening weekend classes, curricula leading towards regular diploma, vocational or skills training, opportunity to take classes elsewhere, and security personnel on site).

Districts with more than 50 percent minority enrollment were more likely than those with 6 to 20 percent minority enrollment to require social work services (66 percent vs. 47 percent). Districts with more than 50 percent and 21 to 50 percent minority enrollments were more likely than districts with 5 percent or less and 6 to 20 percent minority enrollments to require security personnel on site (44 and 33 percent vs. 16 and 18 percent). Districts with a high poverty concentration were more likely than those with a low concentration to require security personnel on site (30 percent vs. 20 percent).

Collaboration with Other Agencies

Alternative schools and programs for students at risk of education failure often collaborate with agencies, centers, or departments outside of the public school system. These partnerships make available to students an array of social and psychological support services that might not otherwise be available. The survey asked districts with alternative schools and programs if they collaborated with 12 types of agencies, such as mental health organizations, job placement centers, crisis intervention centers, and drug and/or alcohol clinics.

The most widely reported type of collaboration was with the juvenile justice system (84 percent) (Table 14). Seventy-five percent of districts with alternative schools and programs for at-risk students reported collaboration with community mental health agencies, 70 percent collaborated with police or sheriff's departments, and 69 percent collaborated with child protective services. Of the services asked about, collaboration with parks and recreation departments was least commonly cited by districts (23 percent).

On average, districts collaborated with 6.9 of the 12 different agencies listed (not shown in tables).  Figure 4 shows the distribution of districts that reported collaboration with 0 to 4, 5 to 8, and 9 to 12 agencies. Twenty-eight percent of districts collaborated with 0 to 4 agencies, 34 percent of districts collaborated with 5 to 8 agencies, and the remainder (38 percent) collaborated with 9 to 12 agencies in providing services to alternative education students.

The results viewed across district characteristics reveal several noteworthy patterns. For instance, urban districts tended to have a higher percentage of collaboration with agencies than suburban and rural districts for 5 of the 12 types of collaboration: community organizations (76 percent vs. 56 and 55 percent), drug and/or alcohol clinics (73 percent vs. 59 and 56 percent), family organizations or associations (73 percent vs. 53 and 47 percent), family planning/child care/child placement agencies (63 percent vs. 39 and 48 percent), and parks and recreations departments (42 percent vs. 21 and 20 percent). Additional differences were found between urban and suburban districts; urban districts were more likely than suburban ones to collaborate with child protective services (78 percent vs. 61 percent), job placement centers29 (54 percent vs. 35 percent), and health and human services agencies or hospitals (76 percent vs. 56 percent).

Differences were also evident by district enrollment size. For example, of the 12 agencies that districts with alternative schools and programs were asked about, large districts were more likely than small and moderate-size ones to collaborate with 8 of them, including community mental health agencies (88 percent vs. 70 and 77 percent), community organizations (75 percent vs. 49 and 62 percent), crisis intervention centers (62 percent vs. 43 and 46 percent), drug and/or alcohol clinics (74 percent vs. 55 and 59 percent), family organizations or associations (72 percent vs. 44 and 55 percent), family planning/child care/child placement agencies (59 percent vs. 43 and 44 percent), the juvenile justice system (92 percent vs. 82 and 83 percent), and police or sheriff"s departments (79 percent vs. 67 and 71 percent).

Collaboration between districts and police or sheriff's departments was higher in districts with 21 to 50 percent and more than 50 percent minority enrollments than in districts with 5 percent or less of minority students (75 and 76 percent vs. 60 percent). Similarly, districts with moderate and high poverty concentrations collaborated with a police or sheriff's department more frequently than districts with a low poverty concentration (73 and 74 percent vs. 58 percent).

Top