INTRODUCTIONSubstantial and potentially growing disparities based on race, ethnicity, and socioeconomic status (SES) exist in educational attainment. Male students, Black and Latino students, and students living in areas with high rates of poverty are at particularly elevated risk for not completing high school (Swanson, 2004). While 75% of U.S. students overall graduated high school in 2009, only 62% of Black students and 64% of Latino students graduated, versus 81% of White students (National Center for Health Statistics, NCHS, 2012). Healthy People 2020 includes new school-related objectives for adolescent health, aiming to improve high school graduation rates to 84.2% over the next four year period (U.S. Department of Health & Human Services, 2012), reflecting an appreciation for the importance of educational attainment to health over the life course (Winkleby et al., 1992). For example, college graduates can expect to live approximately five years longer than individuals who did not finish high school (Robert Wood Johnson Foundation, RWJF, 2011). Greater educational attainment is associated with reduced likelihood of almost every chronic disease, including asthma, heart disease, and cancer (Silles, 2009).The impact of educational attainment is also transgenerational: parental educational attainment has a robust effect on children's likelihood of graduating from high school (Ensminger & Slusarcick, 1992). A constellation of social and contextual factors, including characteristics of the school environment, neighborhood conditions and safety, and concentrated poverty reinforce existing educational disparities (Crowder & South, 2003; Wodtke, Harding, & Elwert, 2011). Disparities in education thus perpetuate cycles of poverty and compound parallel disparities in health and related factors, including violence victimization (Krieger et al., 2005; Williams & Jackson, 2005).Conceptual Framework: Positive Youth DevelopmentPositive Youth Development (PYD) is a framework for understanding the patterns of risk and protective factors in adolescence that promote healthy social, emotional, behavioral, and cognitive (Catalano et al., 2004). Rather than targeting a single behavior, PYD programs aim to impact a cluster of developmental factors including bonding, resilience, social and emotional competence, and prosocial norms (Catalano et al., 2004). These domains impact multiple behavioral outcomes, including those related to academic performance and educational achievement. Improving opportunities for positive development is particularly important for adolescents most at risk for dropping out of high school or becoming engaged in delinquent behavior (Edwards, Mumford, & Serra-Roldan, 2007).Adolescence presents a particularly salient period for altering behavioral trajectories. Adolescence is a period of experimentation with risky behaviors (e.g., experimenting with illicit substance, carrying weapons, tobacco use, sexual behavior) that can become established long-term (Eaton et al., 2010). Adolescence is also characterized by reward-seeking and risk-taking behavior (Galvan, 2010; Wolfgang, Thornberry, & Figlio, 1987) and the development of higher-level thinking and reasoning skills (Sternberg & Downing, 1982). Therefore, providing adolescents opportunities for less-risky peer socialization and engagement with pro-social institutions (i.e., school) may prevent disengagement from normative educational trajectories (Morrison et al., 2002).School Engagement as a Mediator between Adolescent Behaviors and Educational OutcomesImproving adolescents' engagement with school can improve youth outcomes across a range of indicators. School engagement, or students' behavioral and emotional connectedness with school, is a strong predictor of high school graduation and college attendance (Finn & Owings, 2006) and is an indicator of PYD (Catalano et al., 2004). …