Many States Moving toward Using A Definition That Follows Students over Time; Education’s Guidance Regarding NCLBA Requirements Is Limited

A majority of states used or planned to use a graduation rate definition  based on the group of students entering high school who graduate on time,  referred to as the cohort definition. A Majority of States Used or Planned to Use a Definition That Follows Students over Time

According to state plans, 12 states used a definition that followed a group  of students over time from when they entered high school until they left— referred to as the cohort definition. Figure 4 shows the definitions each state used as April 2005 and planned  to use by school year 2007-08. Education’s approach has been to provide such information  on a case-by-case basis rather than to all states. Another state planned to count such students as graduates  without requesting approval to do so. Several Factors Affected the Accuracy of Graduation Rates, and Data Quality Remains a Key Challenge

State, school district, and school officials and experts we interviewed  reported several factors that affect the accuracy of data used to calculate  graduation rates, especially student mobility. Data Inaccuracies May Affect Schools’ Meeting State Graduation Rate Goals

We analyzed data from one state to estimate the effect of errors of various  sizes in reporting dropouts on school graduation rates and found that such  errors could raise or lower a school’s graduation rate substantially. Education Has Taken Some Steps to Help States with Data Issues, but Data Accuracy Remains a Key Challenge

Education has taken steps to help states address data collection issues. For these states, Education reported that it was  unable to meaningfully examine the reliability of data used to calculate the  graduation rate because such definitions of such rates had not been in  place for a sufficient number of years necessary to determine whether the  rate would produce consistent results. Department officials said that the guide it is developing is planned to  address these issues. Few Interventions Have Been Rigorously Evaluated, and Education Has Done Little to Evaluate and Disseminate Existing Research

While states and school districts have implemented numerous  interventions designed to increase high school graduation rates, few of  these programs have been rigorously evaluated, and Education has done  little to evaluate and disseminate existing research. Recommendations for Executive Action

To assist states in improving their definitions of high school graduation  rates and enhancing the consistency of these rates, we recommend that  the Secretary of Education make information available to all states on  modifications available to account for students in special programs and  students with disabilities in their graduation rate calculations. This assessment could include specific criteria that  demonstrate that states’ data systems can produce accurate data. We analyzed the plans states were required to  submit to Education to identify the graduation rate definitions states used  and graduation rate indicators set by states, reviewed updates to plans  submitted through July 2005 and reviewed letters from Education to states  regarding its decisions about state plans and updates. To identify interventions with the potential to increase graduation rates,  we used a “snowballing” approach. We  also visited schools that had implemented 13 other interventions that  experts and research showed promise in affecting factors that may  improve grad rates. 1, no. What Can  We Do?
Why GAO Did This Study

About one third of students entering high school do not graduate and face limited job prospects. The No Child Left Behind Act (NCLBA) requires states to use graduation rates to measure how well students are being educated. To assess the accuracy of states' graduation rates and to review programs that may increase these rates, GAO was asked to examine (1) the graduation rate definitions states use and how the Department of Education (Education) helped states meet legal requirements,(2) the factors that affect the accuracy of graduation rates and Education's role in ensuring accurate data, and (3) interventions with the potential to increase graduation rates and how Education enhanced and disseminated knowledge of intervention research.

What GAO Found

As of July 2005, 12 states used a graduation rate definition--referred to as the cohort definition--that tracks students from when they enter high school to when they leave, and by school year 2007-08 a majority plan to use this definition. Thirty-two states used a definition based primarily on the number of dropouts over a 4-year period and graduates. The remaining states used other definitions. Because the cohort definition is more precise, most states not using it planned to do so when their data systems can track students over time, a capability many states do not have. Education has assisted states primarily on a case-by-case basis, but it has not provided guidance to all states on ways to account for selected students, such as for students with disabilities, thus creating less consistency among states in how graduation rates are calculated. The primary factor affecting the accuracy of graduation rates was student mobility. Students who come and go make it difficult to keep accurate records. Another factor was whether states verified student data, with fewer than half of the states conducting audits of data used to calculate graduation rates. Data inaccuracies can substantially raise or lower a school's graduation rate. Education has taken steps to help states address data accuracy issues. However, Education officials said that they could not assess state systems until they had been in place for a while. Data accuracy is critical, particularly since Education is using state data to calculate graduation rate estimates to provide consistency across states. Many interventions are used to raise graduation rates, but few are rigorously evaluated. GAO identified five that had been rigorously evaluated and showed potential for improving graduation rates, such as Project GRAD. In visits to six states, GAO visited three schools that were using such interventions. Other schools GAO visited were using interventions considered by experts and officials to show promise and focused on issues such as self esteem and literacy at various grades. Education has not acted on GAO's 2002 recommendation that it evaluate intervention research, a recommendation the agency agreed with, and has done little to disseminate such research.