Individualized advocacy support and engagement curricula each have direct tests from multiple studies, giving stronger evidence than the other recommendations¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · review r3 · q3
Currency · newest study 2017 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q3 i? Recommendations 2 and 3 are each supported by multiple studies that directly test the recommended practices, unlike Recommendations 1 and 4 whose studies examined multifaceted interventions. → Rumberger 2017

Evidence¶

Rumberger 2017¶

Rumberger, R., Addis, H., Allensworth, E., Balfanz, R., Bruch, J., Dillon, E., Duardo, D., Dynarski, M., Furgeson, J., Jayanthi, M., Newman-Gonchar, R., Place, K., & Tuttle, C. (2017). Preventing dropout in secondary schools (NCEE 2017-4028). Washington, DC: National Center for Education Evaluation and Regional Assistance (NCEE), Institute of Education Sciences, U.S. Department of Education. https://ies.ed.gov/ncee/wwc/PracticeGuide/24

q3 · i? · review · r3

The guide's introduction explains that dropout prevention studies often examine multifaceted interventions whose components cannot be isolated. By contrast, Recommendations 2 (advocates) and 3 (engagement curricula) have studies providing direct tests, supporting their Moderate and Strong evidence ratings.

"However, Recommendations 2 and 3 are each supported by multiple studies that provide a direct test of the recommended practices, so there is stronger evidence of the effectiveness of those practices."

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• Monitoring all students and proactively intervening on early warning signs has minimal-level evidence of improving dropout-related outcomes — related
• Implementing the guide's five recommendations together improves students' math achievement, while no component's isolated effectiveness was established — reports the opposite
• Self-determination skills instruction for students with disabilities increases self-determination on some measures but not others — related