Testing the School System: Dropouts, Accountability, and Social Policy

Abstract

The great strength of the Levin article is that it makes clear the immense importance of the issue, which has very broad social and political ramifications. The issue is important because it represents one way to address the general of equity: How can we help the disadvantaged of our society? The notion that we can identify those in need of help early, while they are still in school, and provide preemptive assistance is very appealing both on humanitarian and on practical and economic grounds. The issue also raises serious questions about the personal and social purposes of schooling, and about the quality of our public schools. I believe that Levin has dismissed these too quickly in his haste to make a case for the second chance option. In this paper I would like first to identify those parts of Levin's argument that I believe are significantly flawed and that limit the utility of the policy alternative proposed. Then I will present an alternative line of argument, together with a policy prescription, that I believe more appropriately addresses the dropout problem (I will argue later that the label itself is seriously misleading). Part of the tone of my reaction is based on the fact that I am presently spending much energy on a parent involvement project in elementary schools that is intended, in part, to address the issue in secondary schools by addressing the participation hypothesis of Jeremy Finn