A case study of the assignment of withdrawal codes for reporting dropout in two disciplinary alternative schools

Dropout rates are major issues facing any nation's continued economic and social progress. The seriousness of this issue in the United States is evidenced by the recent legislation of the 2001 No Child Left Behind Act. The purpose of this study was to use the richness of qualitative methodology to analyze inaccuracies in the assignment of withdrawal codes by school administrators in two different disciplinary alternative schools. The primary codes examined were Code 05, any students over the age of 16 who leaves school voluntarily with no intention of returning; Code 15, any PK–12 student who is withdrawn from school due to nonattendance; Code 22, whereabouts unknown; Code 23, no other code can be used to identify the student's reason for leaving school, and Code 26, entering an adult program. ^ The cross-case method was used for this study. The participants were comprised of 19 school personnel and 25 students from two disciplinary alternative schools, designated X and Y, in the Miami-Dade County Public School system, Miami, FL. Data collection procedures included semi-structured interview, observations, field notes, and district documents. With a matrix, these data were analyzed to compare patterns and themes that emerged within both schools. ^ Results indicated that withdrawal codes were assigned inaccurately for two distinct reasons. At School Y, withdrawal codes were inaccurately assigned intentionally to keep the students from returning to a regular school without notification. At School X, withdrawal codes were inaccurately assigned due to lack of ability to properly track students and ascertain the real circumstances for their departure from school. The end result in both cases was that the school systems were not accurately identifying the whereabouts of students. It was recommended that further investigation be conducted to compare the accuracy of reporting dropouts among traditional/regular high schools and disciplinary alternative schools. ^

A Case Study of the Assignment of Withdrawal Codes for Reporting Dropouts in Two Disciplinary Alternative Schools

This study examined assignment of withdrawal codes by school administrators in two disciplinary alternative schools. Findings revealed: (a) codes were inaccurately assigned intentionally to keep students from returning to a regular school without notification, and (b) administrators improperly tracked students and failed to ascertain students’ reasons for dropping out.

Evaluating and Selecting a Property Management System

In his study - Evaluating and Selecting a Property Management System - by Galen Collins, Assistant Professor, School of Hotel and Restaurant Management, Northern Arizona University, Assistant Professor Collins states briefly at the outset: “Computerizing a property requires a game plan. Many have selected a Property Management System without much forethought and have been unhappy with the final results. The author discusses the major factors that must be taken into consideration in the selection of a PMS, based on his personal experience.” Although, this article was written in the year 1988 and some information contained may be dated, there are many salient points to consider. “Technological advances have encouraged many hospitality operators to rethink how information should be processed, stored, retrieved, and analyzed,” offers Collins. “Research has led to the implementation of various cost-effective applications addressing almost every phase of operations,” he says in introducing the computer technology germane to many PMS functions. Professor Collins talks about the Request for Proposal, its conditions and its relevance in negotiating a PMS system. The author also wants the system buyer to be aware [not necessarily beware] of vendor recommendations, and not to rely solely on them. Exercising forethought will help in avoiding the drawback of purchasing an inadequate PMS system. Remember, the vendor is there first and foremost to sell you a system. This doesn’t necessarily mean that the adjectives unreliable and unethical are on the table, but do be advised. Professor Collins presents a graphic outline for the Weighted Average Approach to Scoring Vendor Evaluations. Among the elements to be considered in evaluating a PMS system, and there are several analyzed in this essay, Professor Collins advises that a perspective buyer not overlook the service factor when choosing a PMS system. Service is an important element to contemplate. “In a hotel environment, the special emphasis should be on service. System downtime can be costly and aggravating and will happen periodically,” Collins warns. Professor Collins also examines the topic of PMS system environment; of which the importance of such a factor should not be underestimated. “The design of the computer system should be based on the physical layout of the property and the projected workloads. The heart of the system, housed in a protected, isolated area, can support work stations strategically located throughout the property,” Professor Collins provides. A Property Profile Description is outlined in Table 1. The author would also point out that ease-of-operation is another significant factor to think about. “A user-friendly software package allows the user to easily move through the program without encountering frustrating obstacles,” says Collins. “Programs that require users to memorize abstract abbreviations, codes, and information to carry out standard routines should be avoided,” he counsels.