NAUDL : National Association for Urban Debate Leagues

ADDRESSING THE LOWEST PERFORMING HIGH SCHOOLS:
Urban Debate as a Pathway to College and Career Readiness

I. Executive Summary

  • Dr. Briana Mezuk conducted research in conjunction with the University of Michigan, the Chicago Consortium on School Research, and Chicago Public Schools, evaluating the effects of participation in urban debate on key academic variables: graduation rates, college readiness, and secondary literacy.
  • Debate participation improved graduation rates:
    • The overall rate of high school graduation for Chicago students in the research sample is 55 percent.
    • Urban debaters in Chicago schools graduated at a rate of 77 percent.
    • African-American males in Chicago schools graduate at a rate of about 45 percent.
    • African American males who participated in the Chicago Debate League were almost 70 percent more likely to graduate than their non-debater peers.
  • Debate participation improved college readiness:
    • Urban debate students increased their GPA by 0.20 (20 percent of a letter grade).
    • African American male urban debaters increased their GPA by 0.5 (50 percent of a letter grade).
    • Urban debate students were 50 percent more likely to reach the ACT English benchmark than non-debater students.
    • African American male urban debaters were twice as likely to reach the ACT English benchmark as non-debater students.
  • Debate participation improved secondary literacy:
    • African American males who participated in urban debate were 70 percent more likely to reach the ACT benchmark in Reading than non-debater counterparts.

Real student improvement requires rigorous and focused effort to ensure that students attending our nation’s lowest-performing schools receive the opportunities to learn that all young people deserve. To raise the bar overall and close learning gaps, educational activity must be organized around clear, evidence-based, internally benchmarked college and career-ready standards. Teachers, parents, school administrators, district leaders, and policymakers need to know what works to ensure that investments of scarce dollars pay expected dividends for students. The productivity of teaching and learning revolves around teacher effectiveness, which is bolstered by targeted teacher-run interventions that serve the students who benefit from support most.

An emerging body of literature suggests the effectiveness of Urban Debate Leagues (UDLs) as one such intervention. UDLs provide access for students to participate in academic policy debate, primarily in schools with high populations of low-income students and students of color. By extending learning time and fostering academic skill, curiosity, and engagement amongst urban students in the lowest-performing schools, UDLs improve graduation rates, enhance adolescent literacy and writing, and increase the odds of post-secondary success.

Education practitioners and policy makers familiar with the evidence take seriously the notion that expanding access to UDLs is one proven, innovative approach to secure real student improvement. Educators and decision-makers have the evidence necessary to move forward with the following: (1) broaden access to academically rigorous programs that extend learning opportunities throughout the school year, week, and day; (2) support co-curricular programs that focus on secondary literacy skills and incorporate complex reading materials into instructional time; (3) implement programs that prepare and motivate students to excel at school-based learning; and (4) invest in innovative programmatic approaches backed by empirical evidence. Broadening participation in academic debate for as many urban students as possible is a proven approach to realize these objectives.

II. Policy Background

Urban school systems face well-documented challenges that deserve the attention of federal, state, and local policymakers. The schools that serve the most densely populated cities1 contain a disproportionately high number of lower-income2 students and students of color.3 Students attending these low performing schools consistently perform far below the national averages in key academic achievement measurements: dropout rates,4 college readiness5 (including secondary literacy and writing),6 and college completion.7 The schools most affected by these challenges represent a small fraction of the total number of school districts in America,8 yet they educate about a quarter of American students,9 including 40 percent of the nation’s minority students and 30 percent of low-income students.10

An emerging body of published and forthcoming research points to Urban Debate Leagues (UDLs) as an effective solution to urban education challenges. UDLs are policy debate programs specifically geared to urban students. Research examining the academic achievement of students in the Chicago Public Schools who participated in urban debate, using records of students from a ten year period, found that those students who participated in urban debate dropped out of high school at substantially lower rates, raised their GPAs, and exhibited significant changes in their secondary literacy skills as measured by ACT results.11 The study also included an investigation of the outcomes for a specific, oft-neglected subgroup, African American males, and found that for these traditionally underperforming students, urban debate participation creates even more dramatic effect sizes in terms of their graduation rates, GPAs, and performance on both the ACT English and ACT Reading tests.

Urban Debate Leagues train and enable students to participate in competitive policy debate. Teacher-coaches supervise student-directed projects, including research for debate arguments, public speaking in time-pressured competitive settings, and argumentative advocacy. The National Association for Urban Debate Leagues (NAUDL) builds, strengthens, expands and connects UDLs. The NAUDL organizes UDLs as partnerships between urban school systems and local private leaders. Following the NAUDL best practices approach, UDLs have already been established in many of the most populous urban school districts,12 and in most of the school systems with the highest number of critically low-performing schools.13 The NAUDL continues to bring the UDL approach to scale in cities around the country, aiming to facilitate participation in organized debate activities for as many urban students as possible.14

UDLs deserve the attention of educators grappling with setting state-wide and national strategies for improving school completion. Identifying innovative solutions demonstrated to improve outcomes in the lowest performing schools in urban districts is a national priority because the challenges facing these schools will not remain isolated. As immigration increases and American cities struggle to compete in the global economy, educators who have never before taught in settings with these structural challenges will need to embrace approaches that help secure academic success.15

The challenges that urban debate participation helps address – dropout rates, college readiness, and secondary literacy – have economic repercussions with significance for the national economy. Those who drop out face increased chances of serving jail time,16 requiring public assistance,17 and being jobless.18 These conditions can foster a negative feedback loop, increasing the likelihood that an entire urban area will face economic stagnation.19 Secondary literacy and college readiness are also critical for college completion. While a high school diploma provides economic benefits, a college diploma provides both greater opportunities to the individual and beneficial implications for the national economy. College educated students are better able to thrive in an increasingly competitive knowledge-based job market, boosting the overall labor force.20 These competitive jobs bring higher salaries, which means greater tax revenues and potential for reinvestment in education and other priorities.21 Successful efforts to change flagging achievement numbers in districts with the highest concentrations of low performing schools22 can have real effects on national progress.23

III. Dropout Rates

The most basic educational goal is to ensure that students complete secondary education. Advances in college readiness and even higher-level workplace readiness cannot meaningfully proceed if the nation struggles to graduate a significant portion of its students. The findings from Dr. Mezuk’s study indicate that participation in urban debate dramatically changes the outcomes for at-risk students. Further research has reinforced these findings.

A. Summary of Findings

  • The overall rate of graduation for Chicago students in the sample is 55 percent.
  • Urban debaters in Chicago schools graduated at a rate of 77 percent.
  • African-American males in Chicago schools graduate at a rate of about 45 percent.
  • African American males who participated in the Chicago Debate League were almost 70 percent more likely to graduate than their non-debater peers.

B. Findings
Despite many high-profile efforts, graduation rates around the country have only minimally improved.24 “Promoting power,” an indicator which measures the number of students repeating a grade in order to estimate school-level graduation rates, remains stubbornly low in urban school districts.25 Indeed, a range of sources using several measurements conclude that, despite improvements or small declines in national dropout rates, students who grow up in low-income communities of color and attend urban schools have significantly lower chances of graduating high school than national rates and national goals would suggest.26 This gap largely arises because urban students face a range of challenges including economic disadvantage (which influences academic preparation and chances of attending a well-funded school) and educational options (students disproportionately attend “neighborhood” schools with unusually low academic performance.27 Students in this situation often attend schools that effectively function as “dropout factories.”28

Research on the effects of participation in urban debate focused on those students least likely to graduate – African American male students in an urban school system whose graduation rates were about 45 percent – and found that African American males who participated in urban debate were nearly 70 percent more likely to graduate.29 The larger population of urban debaters included in the study graduated at a rate of 77 percent, where the non-debater population sample graduated at a rate of around 55 percent.30 These findings suggest that urban debate improves the outcomes for the students facing some of the highest hurdles.

The UDL approach is both proven to improve outcomes by an emerging body of literature and embodies an evidence-based design built from the best scientific research available. The UDL approach is firmly grounded in research on effective practices in the urban educational settings in which it will be deployed. Specifically, the finding that urban debate reduces dropout rates is consistent with more general research on factors known to influence dropout rates. Researchers have identified “pull” or “alterable” factors, which educators can cultivate to decrease dropout rates; such factors create positive outcomes despite the presence of “unalterable” or “push” factors related to the student’s life situation.31 Factors which keep students in school despite the pressures of their given situation include feelings of academic engagement, self-motivation, and autonomy.32 Students involved in urban debate have reported increases in these feelings.33

As policymakers work toward comprehensive systems improvement, they should consider alternative strategies which require modest investment money and can be implemented quickly while achieving significant results. Such strategies serve as targeted reforms, which work where they are used and deserve a place as a piece of overall reform. Urban debate is a low-cost, highly-effective solution, because UDLs complement existing curriculums by lengthening the school day, augmenting assignments, and changing students’ attitude to their school environment, their teachers, and their academic responsibilities.

IV. College Readiness

The gap between the demands of the high school curriculum and the college curriculum often compels under-prepared college freshmen to enroll in remedial classes. Many students drop out of college entirely. These challenges particularly affect urban students, contributing to low college completion rates for these students. Urban debate participation increases student outcomes across two key measurements of college readiness: GPA and performance on the ACTs.

A. Summary of Findings

  • Urban debate students increased their GPA by 0.20 (20 percent of a letter grade).
  • African American male urban debaters increased their GPA by 0.5 (50 percent of a letter grade).
  • Urban debate students were 50 percent more likely to reach the ACT English benchmark.
  • African American male urban debate students increased their chances of achieving the ACT Reading benchmark by 70 percent.

B. Findings
“College readiness” can be measured along several axes,34 but fundamentally the term refers to the level at which a high school curriculum has prepared a student for applying to, entering, and completing college.35 The college readiness numbers for low-income students of color living in urban settings are significantly lower than the numbers for their peers from different backgrounds.36 These numbers are related to the low rates of college completion among minority students.37 Lack of college readiness means students have to devote time and resources to taking remedial classes before they can begin their main course of study. The students who take such remedial classes come disproportionately from minority backgrounds.38 These weaknesses among students from low-income and minority backgrounds add urgency to the task of increasing college achievement from these students by improving their preparation for college.39

Participation in urban debate increased college readiness along two separate measurements for students from populations which have struggled to complete college.

One commonly-cited component of college readiness is GPA,40 which increased among students participating in urban debate. The full population of urban debaters studied increased their GPA by 0.20, or about 20 percent of a letter grade.41 For African American males, the change was about 50 percent of a letter grade.42 GPA requirements work as a signal to colleges that the student is likely to be qualified to enter the classroom and succeed.43

Another common tool for evaluating college readiness is performance on the ACT subject tests.44 Students who participated in urban debate exhibited increased scores in their ACT subject tests for reading-oriented subjects (English and Reading), but not for math and science.45 Although it is possible that the students who choose to participate in debate differ systematically on unobservable characteristics that shape their academic trajectory compared to similarly academically situated students, this outcome strongly suggests that urban debate was the cause of the increased scores, since the skills fostered by debate are mostly verbal and literacy-based. If the urban debaters were simply more motivated or engaged students, their ACT performance would likely increase across non-debate related tests.

For African American males, a population which generally exhibits the lowest levels of college preparedness, the influence of urban debate increased their scores significantly – making these students 70 percent more likely to score above the ACT benchmark for college readiness in English and Reading.46 The larger population of urban debate students in the study was 50 percent more likely to score above the benchmark in English.47 These changes are significant indicators of college readiness because ACT benchmarks signal that the student could enter a college classroom prepared to succeed.48

Students involved in urban debate also gain skills which, while less measurable on tests, contribute significantly to the ability to complete college successfully. Such skills include logical reasoning, extraction of argumentative content from a text, “problem solving,”49 research skills, and engagement with both sides of a complex issue.50 These skills, described as “centrally important to college success,”51 are cultivated by an activity that prioritizes research gathering, framing of research in service of an argumentative point, thinking and arguing for both sides of complex policy issues, step by step construction of arguments, and extemporaneous response to opponents.

V. Secondary Literacy

Secondary literacy implicates both college and career readiness because it involves the application of higher reasoning skills to reading. Urban debate increases achievement in tests involving these skills.

A. Summary of Findings

  • African American males were 70 percent more likely to reach the ACT benchmark in Reading than non-debate counterparts

B. Findings
“Secondary literacy” is defined as the set of skills that allows a reader to comprehend a range of complex texts and function beyond basic literacy. A student with secondary literacy skills is able to read the words on the page, and is also able to extract and evaluate the argument advanced by the text, compare and contrast it with previously read texts, and incorporate the words and arguments of other texts into a global understanding of a subject.52 These skills span a multitude of disciplines,53 since the ability to process complex texts creates a higher level of competence across several fields of study.54 Secondary literacy implicates both college readiness and dropout rates, since the ability to process complex texts creates a higher level of competence across several disciplines,55 which in turn decreases feelings of being overwhelmed or left behind – known factors in the decision to drop out.56 Secondary literacy rates are disproportionately low for low income students and students of color,57 and have remained stagnant in urban schools over several decades.58

African American males who participated in urban debate were 70 percent more likely to score above the ACT benchmark in Reading than their counterparts.59 This population performs exceptionally poorly on tests of secondary literacy, and the change wrought by participation in debate should signal the presence of a new, effective tool to reach these students.60 While the outcomes on ACT Reading tests did not significantly shift for other urban debaters involved in the study,61 more general research has indicated that effective strategies to increase secondary literacy involve training in argumentative interactions under the supervision of an educator, independent research projects, and the development of public speaking skills.62 Urban debate captures the benefits of these strategies with its focus on argument, research, and spoken debate. Activities which foster students’ engagement with educational projects also lead to increased secondary literacy skills.63

Educational interventions designed to improve literacy have so far focused largely on basic literacy, pouring money and attention into initiatives targeted at early childhood and elementary schools.64 These programs have made great strides in ensuring that American students can read and write at a basic level.65 However, research suggests that even students with basic literacy who fail to master secondary literacy skills remain at risk of not completing high school or college and not having the necessary qualifications for employment after high school.66 The lack of secondary literacy skills overwhelms and ultimately depreciates the value of the early childhood and elementary school programs if they are de-coupled from an advanced component in middle and high school.67 Interventions which increase secondary literacy skills, such as Urban Debate Leagues, should be a priority of educators who desire to ensure the greatest return on investment from the resources and effort already invested in primary literacy.68

VI. Conclusion

Urban debate merits consideration as a proven approach for educators who seek to improve outcomes for low performing students in the lowest-performing school districts, and specifically for the worst-performing students in those districts. The research indicates that urban debate programs function to enhance critical measures of achievement – graduation rates, college preparation, and secondary literacy. While the total number of students who participate in urban debate may seem small, the program targets students in the “dropout factories” who are most at risk. Moreover, urban debate accomplishes its results without demanding a total overhaul of the nation’s school system or individual school districts: it functions as a complement to existing curriculum and practices, which means that results can be achieved quickly and efficiently. As studies demonstrate the correlation between urban debate participation and academic success, policymakers and educational leaders should adopt urban debate as an innovative tool in advancing student preparation and achievement.

Back to the Top

_______________________________


1. Fredricks, L, & Dickson, S., Framing the Problem 1, in EDU. COMM’N OF THE STATES, IMPROVING ACADEMIC ACHIEVEMENT IN URBAN DISTRICTS: WHAT STATE POLICYMAKERS CAN DO 1-10 (Edu. Comm’n of the States, Dec. 2003).

2. Id.

3. GAROFANO, A. & SABLE, J. CHARACTERISTICS OF THE 100 LARGEST PUBLIC ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY SCHOOL DISTRICTS IN THE UNITED STATES: 2005–06 (NCES 2008-339) iii (Nat’l Center for Edu. Statistics, Institute of Edu. Sciences, U.S. Dept. of Edu. 2008), available at http://nces.ed.gov/pubs2008/2008339.pdf.

4. BALFANZ, R., AND LEGTERS, N., LOCATING THE DROPOUT CRISIS: WHICH HIGH SCHOOLS PRODUCE THE NATION’S DROPOUTS? WHERE ARE THEY LOCATED? WHO ATTENDS THEM? (CRESPAR Report 70, Sept. 2004), available at http://eric.ed.gov/ERICDocs/data/ericdocs2sql/content_storage_01/0000019b/80/1b/a3/a0.pdf.

5. Steinberg, A., & Almeida, C., The Dropout Crisis: Promising Approaches in Prevention and Recovery 4 (White Paper for U.S. Dep’t of Education, Office of Vocational & Adult Education, published by Jobs for the Future, June 2004), available at http://eric.ed.gov/ERICDocs/data/ericdocs2sql/content_storage_01/0000019b/80/30/af/36.pdf.

6. Snipes, J., & Horowitz, A., Advancing Adolescent Literacy in Urban Schools 3, RESEARCH BRIEF, (Council of the Great City Schools, Fall 2008), available at http://www.cgcs.org/Pubs/ResearchBrief_08.pdf.

7. Students of color have a higher incidence of being “incidental” college attenders who do not complete college. ADELMAN, C. PRINCIPAL INDICATORS OF STUDENT ACADEMIC HISTORIES IN POSTSECONDARY EDUCATION, 1972-2000 30-35 (U.S. Dept. of Edu., Institute of Edu. Sciences 2004), available at http://www.ed.gov/rschstat/research/pubs/prinindicat/prinindicat.pdf.

8. 100 school districts educate 24 percent of the nation’s children. See Fredricks,& Dickson, supra note 1, at 1.

9. Id.

10. Id.; see also GAROFANO & SABLE, supra note 3.

11. Mezuk, B., Urban debate and high school educational outcomes for African American males: The case of the Chicago Debate League, J. OF NEGRO EDU. 290, 299 (Oct. 2009).

12. See GAROFANO & SABLE, supra note 3 (listing the 100 largest school districts); www.urbandebate.org (listing the cities in which Urban Debate Leagues have been formed, which track the top fifty of that 100).

13. BALFANZ & LEGTERS, supra note 4, at 31-32 (listing the schools with the lowest promoting power); www.urbandebate.org (listing the cities in which urban debate leagues have been formed, which tracks the top range of the dropout factories).

14. http://urbandebate.org/mission.shtml

15. Neild, R., & Balfanz, R,, An Extreme Degree of Difficulty: The Educational Demographics of Urban Neighborhood High Schools, J. OF EDU. FOR STUDENTS PLACED AT RISK 123, 126-27 (2006).

16. Tyler, J. & Lofstrom, M., Finishing High School: Alternative Pathways and Dropout Recovery, FUTURE OF CHILDREN 77, 88 (Spring 2009), available at http://eric.ed.gov/ERICDocs/data/ericdocs2sql/content_storage_01/0000019b/80/44/55/de.pdf.

17. Id.

18. LAIRD, J., DEBELL, M., KIENZL, G., and CHAPMAN, C. DROPOUT RATES IN THE UNITED STATES (NCES 2007-059) 1 (U.S. Dept. of Edu.: National Center for Education Statistics 2007), http://nces.ed.gov/pubsearch (last visited Aug. 2009).

19. Kasarda, J., Cities as Places Where People Live and Work: Urban Change and Neighborhood Distress 20, in CISNEROS, H, Ed., INTERWOVEN DESTINIES: CITIES AND THE NATION 81–124 (W.W. Norton 1993).

20. WYNER, J., BRIDGELAND, J., & DIIULIO, J., ACHIEVEMENTRAP: HOW AMERICA IS FAILING MILLIONS OF HIGH-ACHIEVING STUDENTS FROM LOWER-INCOME FAMILIES 29 (Jack Kent Cooke Foundation & Civic Enterprises 2007), available at http://eric.ed.gov/ERICDocs/data/ericdocs2sql/content_storage_01/0000019b/80/41/df/69.pdf.

21. A college degree produces at least 17 percent more income over the lifetime of the household compared to a high school diploma only. GOUSKOVA, E. & STAFFORD, F. TRENDS IN HOUSEHOLD WEALTH DYNAMICS, 2001-2003 4, 8-9 (Institute for Social Research, Univ. of Mich. 2005), available at http://psidonline.isr.umich.edu/Publications/Papers/TrendsIndynamics1999-2001.pdf.

22. GAROFANO & SABLE, supra note 3.

23. BALFANZ & LEGTERS, supra note 4, at 19-20.

24. Id. at 3-4

25. Id. See also Neild & Balfanz, supra note 15, at 137-39.

26. Heckman, J. & LaFontaine, P., The Declining American High School Graduation Rate: Evidence, Sources, And Consequences (NBER Reporter: Research Summary 2008 No. 1, 2000), available at http://www.nber.org/reporter/2008number1/heckman.html.

27. Neild & Balfanz, supra note 15, at 123-24. See also Kasarda, supra note 19, at 82. (tracing the development of cities as places of concentrated poverty at rates higher than non-city settings).

28. BALFANZ & LEGTERS, supra note 4, at 11.

29. Mezuk, supra note 11, at 296-98.

30. Id. at 296.

31. LEHR, C., JOHNSON, D., BREMER, C., COSIO, A., & THOMPSON, M., ESSENTIAL TOOLS: INCREASING RATES OF SCHOOL COMPLETION 7-8 (Nat’l Center on Secondary Edu. & Transition 2004), available at http://eric.ed.gov/ERICDocs/data/ericdocs2sql/content_storage_01/0000019b/80/1b/ab/01.pdf.

32. Id.

33. Sugland, B., Pelea, B., Leon, J., Harris, V., & Peak, G. Learning What You Can, Building From What You Learn: Assessing the Role of the Baltimore Urban Debate League on Academic and Social Development Outcomes of Students, Baltimore, MD: Fund for Educational Excellence (2003).

34. Roderick, M., Nagakoa, J. & Coca, V., College Readiness for All: The Challenge for Urban High Schools, FUTURE OF CHILDREN 185, 187-88 (Spring 2009), available at http://eric.ed.gov/ERICDocs/data/ericdocs2sql/content_storage_01/0000019b/80/44/58/2e.pdf (identifying several methods of evaluating college readiness, primarily GPA, test scores, and quality of high school classes).

35. Greene, J. & Forster, G., Public High School Graduation and College Readiness Rates in the United States 7-8 (Education Working Paper No. 3, Sept 2003), available at http://eric.ed.gov/ERICDocs/data/ericdocs2sql/content_storage_01/0000019b/80/31/9a/7e.pdf.

36. Id at i.

37. ADELMAN, supra note 7.

38. VENEZIA, A., KIRST, M., and ANTONIO, A. BETRAYING THE COLLEGE DREAM: HOW DISCONNECTED K-12 AND POSTSECONDARY SYSTEMS UNDERMINE STUDENT ASPIRATIONS 8-9 (Jossey-Bass 2004), available at http://www.stanford.edu/group/bridgeproject/betrayingthecollegedream.pdf.

39. Greene, J., & Winters, M., Public High School Graduation and College-Readiness Rates: 1991–2002, 8-9 (CCI Education Working Paper No. 8, Feb. 2005), available at http://eric.ed.gov/ERICDocs/data/ericdocs2sql/content_storage_01/0000019b/80/33/2c/d5.pdf.

40. Roderick, Nagakoa, & Coca, supra note 34, at 190-91.

41. Mezuk, supra note 11, at 297.

42. Id.

43. Roderick, Nagakoa, & Coca, supra note 34, at 190-91.

44. Id at 193-94.

45. Mezuk, supra note 11, at 298, 300.

46. Id. at 298.

47. Id.

48. ACT, ACT’s COLLEGE READINESS SYSTEM: MEETING THE CHALLENGE OF A CHANGING WORLD 1 (ACT, Inc. 2008).

49. Conley, D., Rethinking College Readiness, NEW DIRECTIONS FOR HIGHER EDUCATION 3, 3 (Win. 2008).

50. Id. at 5.

51. Id. at 3.

52. U.S. DEPT. of EDU, READING FRAMEWORK FOR THE NATIONAL ASSESSMENT OF EDUCATIONAL PROGRESS 36-38, 11 (Nat’l Assessment Governing Board 2009), available at http://www.corestandards.net/NAEP/NAEP36.pdf, cited in Coleman, D., Core Standards for Reading Literary and Informational Texts, available at http://www.corestandards.net/rs1_whattextsays.html.

53. Snipes & Horowitz, supra note 6, at 3

54. Id. at 4-5.

55. Id. at 4-5.

56. Miller, M. Seize the Moment: The Need for a Comprehensive Federal Investment in Adolescent Literacy 2 (Alliance for Excellent Education Policy Brief, July 2009), available at http://www.all4ed.org/files/PolicyBriefSeizeTheMoment.pdf.

57. Id.

58. Snipes & Horowitz, supra note 6, at 1.

59. Mezuk, supra note 11, at 298.

60. Id. at 301.

61. Id. at 298, 301.

62. Miller, supra note 56, at 3-4.

63. Snipes & Horowitz, supra note 6, at 6.

64. Miller, supra note 56, at 1.

65. Id.

66. Neild & Balfanz, supra note 15, at 133, 135-36 (pointing out that urban students frequently cannot achieve the literacy targets set in high school, which leads to dropouts, poor preparation for college work and overall weak academic skills).

67. Miller, supra note 56, at 1.

68. Snipes & Horowitz, supra note 6, at 3-4 (advocating an overhaul of the standards used to evaluate teachers, the inclusion of secondary literacy teaching strategies at the curricular level, and a fundamental attitudinal change in the way teachers segregate secondary literacy into English classes); see also Miller, supra note 57, at 3 (advocating programs integrating secondary literacy standards into all subjects and cultivating resources and tools for teachers to use to inculcate secondary literacy skills).

Back to the Top