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over the age of 16 who leaves school voluntarily with no intention of returning; Code 15, any PK–12 student who is withdrawn from school due to nonattendance; Code 22, whereabouts unknown; Code 23, no other code can be used to identify the student's reason for leaving school, and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 model of mistaken alibis: How innocent alibi providers generate inaccurate alibis

This dissertation comprised two experiments, which addressed three main goals: (a) to test a new paradigm for measuring objectively the accuracy of alibis, (b) to explore the effectiveness of three retrieval cues (time only, location only, and time-and-location) in an alibi context, and (c) to explore the metacognitive strategies of innocent alibi providers who experience different financial incentives as well as different motivations for reporting (be informative vs. be convincing). ^ The novel paradigm appears promising: by surreptitiously controlling the whereabouts of future alibi providers during a critical time, objective accuracy measurements were in fact possible. Such accuracy measurements revealed that time-cued retrieval can be devastating to innocent alibi providers. Participants who attempted to recall their whereabouts via a time cue were significantly less accurate than participants who attempted recall via a location cue (Experiment 1). ^ Innocent alibi providers, when cued effectively, may not, however, report their memories differently from memory reporters in non-alibi contexts. When cued effectively, participants who experienced a goal of being convincing did not differ in accuracy from participants who experienced a goal of merely being informative (Experiment 2). Similarly, participants did not differ from one another in accuracy across different levels of financial incentive (Experiment 2). ^ Despite the indistinguishable accuracy rates of alibi providers and non-alibi memory reporters when retrieval was cued effectively, proffering mistaken alibis presents a real risk for innocent suspects. Future research needs to address methods by which that risk can be reduced. ^