CPS mobility indicators: stability rate and in-mobility rate measured separately for school year and summer¶

Element · All elements
Evidence · 4 claims (4 for) · 1 study (1 associational), q2 · 0 of 1 report an effect size · 4 claims rest on one study

Description¶

The report introduces two separate mobility indicators to address problems with conventional single-number mobility formulas, which it says combine "two very different phenomena (exiting and entering a school)" and ignore the stable population and summer moves. The stability rate is the percent of students continuously enrolled in the same school between two points in time; the in-mobility rate is the percent of students new to a school between two points in time. Both are computed for the school year (September to May) and the summer (May to September), excluding natural moves such as promotion and graduation.

Design Implications¶

Context¶

Requirements¶

• Student record data allowing enrollment to be tracked between two points in time (September and May, May and September)

Constraints¶

• Natural moves such as promotion, graduation, and schools no longer serving a student's academic needs are excluded from the indicators

Target Learners¶

• Chicago Public Schools elementary and high school students

Target Learning Goals¶

• Measuring and monitoring student mobility for school improvement and instructional planning

Claims¶

• Elementary student mobility in CPS decreased between 1995 and 2007, with school-year stability rising from 87.9 to 91.2 percent and school-year in-mobility falling from 11.4 to 7.1 percent [+W]
• Elementary student mobility in CPS is predominantly a within-district phenomenon, with CPS-to-CPS transfers accounting for 50-60 percent of school-year transfers and two-thirds of summer transfers [+W]
• High school stability improvements in CPS were largely driven by declining dropout rates, which fell from 7.1 percent to 3.2 percent during the school year between 1995 and 2006 [+W]
• School closings, new school openings, CHA demolitions, and NCLB transfers each affected fewer than 1 percent of CPS students per year, though receiving schools saw summer in-mobility rise by almost 13 percentage points [+W]

Related Elements¶

Examples¶

-

Key Sources¶

• Marisa de la Torre, Julia Gwynne. (2009). Changing Schools: A Look at Student Mobility Trends in Chicago Public Schools Since 1995. Consortium on Chicago School Research at the University of Chicago. https://consortium.uchicago.edu/publications/changing-schools-look-student-mobility-trends-chicago-public-schools-1995