[{"data":1,"prerenderedAt":-1},["ShallowReactive",2],{"doc-seo-590697-105":3,"detail-sidebar-cat-0-en-105":81,"doc-detail-590697-en":130},{"code":4,"msg":5,"data":6},0,"ok",{"site_id":7,"language":8,"slug":9,"title":10,"keywords":11,"description":12,"schema_data":13,"social_meta":74,"head_meta":76,"extra_data":78,"updated_unix":80},105,"en","the-long-term-impact-of-systemic-student-support-in-elementary-school-reducing-high-school-dropout","The Long-Term Impact of Systemic Student Support in Elementary School - Reducing High School Dropout","","This study evaluates whether comprehensive elementary school student support lowers later high school dropout. Students in intervention elementary schools from a large urban high-poverty district (2001–2014, N=894) are compared with students not attending intervention schools (N=10,200). Using propensity score-weighted discrete event history analysis, intervention students show about half the odds of dropping out (p\u003C.001). Predicted dropout probability is 9.2% for intervention versus 16.6% for non-intervention students, indicating durable effects of early, tailored support.",{"@graph":14,"@context":73},[15,34,56],{"@type":16,"itemListElement":17},"BreadcrumbList",[18,23,27,31],{"item":19,"name":20,"@type":21,"position":22},"https://docshare.wps.com","Home","ListItem",1,{"item":24,"name":25,"@type":21,"position":26},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/","Document",2,{"item":28,"name":29,"@type":21,"position":30},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/research-report/","Research & Report",3,{"item":32,"name":10,"@type":21,"position":33},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/the-long-term-impact-of-systemic-student-support-in-elementary-school-reducing-high-school-dropout/590697/",4,{"url":32,"name":10,"@type":35,"image":36,"author":41,"headline":10,"publisher":44,"fileFormat":47,"inLanguage":8,"description":12,"dateModified":48,"datePublished":49,"encodingFormat":47,"isAccessibleForFree":50,"interactionStatistic":51},"DigitalDocument",{"url":37,"@type":38,"width":39,"height":40},"https://docshare.wps.com/thumbnails/the-long-term-impact-of-systemic-student-support-in-elementary-school-reducing-high-school-dropout/590697.png","ImageObject",300,407,{"name":42,"@type":43},"Stanley","Person",{"url":19,"name":45,"@type":46},"DocShare","Organization","application/pdf","2026-11-06","2026-10-15",true,{"@type":52,"interactionType":53,"userInteractionCount":55},"InteractionCounter",{"@type":54},"ViewAction",7,{"@type":57,"mainEntity":58},"FAQPage",[59,65,69],{"name":60,"@type":61,"acceptedAnswer":62},"What question does the study address about student support and dropout?","Question",{"text":63,"@type":64},"It examines whether participation in a comprehensive, elementary-school student support intervention is linked to lower rates of high school dropout.","Answer",{"name":66,"@type":61,"acceptedAnswer":67},"How were intervention and comparison students selected?",{"text":68,"@type":64},"Students from intervention elementary schools (2001–2014) were compared with students who did not attend intervention schools, using propensity score-weighted analysis to estimate dropout likelihood.",{"name":70,"@type":61,"acceptedAnswer":71},"What impact did the intervention have on dropout rates?",{"text":72,"@type":64},"Intervention students had roughly half the odds of dropout (p\u003C.001), with predicted dropout probabilities of 9.2% versus 16.6% for non-intervention students.","https://schema.org",{"og:url":32,"og:type":75,"og:title":10,"og:site_name":45,"og:description":12},"article",{"robots":77,"canonical":32},"index,follow",{"doc_id":79,"site_id":7},590697,1792190564,{"code":4,"msg":82,"data":83},"success",[84,88,92,96,101,106,110,114,119,122,126],{"id":22,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":85,"show_sort_weight":86,"slug":87},"Story & Novel",90,"story-novel",{"id":26,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":89,"show_sort_weight":90,"slug":91},"Literature",80,"literature",{"id":33,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":93,"show_sort_weight":94,"slug":95},"Exam",70,"exam",{"id":97,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":98,"show_sort_weight":99,"slug":100},5,"Comic",60,"comic",{"id":102,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":103,"show_sort_weight":104,"slug":105},6,"Technology",50,"technology",{"id":55,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":107,"show_sort_weight":108,"slug":109},"Healthcare",40,"healthcare",{"id":111,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":29,"show_sort_weight":112,"slug":113},8,30,"research-report",{"id":115,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":116,"show_sort_weight":117,"slug":118},9,"Religion & Spirituality",20,"religion-spirituality",{"id":117,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":120,"show_sort_weight":117,"slug":121},"World Cup","world-cup",{"id":123,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":124,"show_sort_weight":123,"slug":125},10,"Lifestyle","lifestyle",{"id":127,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":128,"show_sort_weight":97,"slug":129},19,"General","general",{"code":4,"msg":82,"data":131},{"doc_id":79,"user_id":132,"nickname":42,"user_avatar":133,"doc_module":4,"category_id":111,"category_name":29,"doc_title":10,"doc_description":12,"doc_content":134,"file_id":135,"file_url":136,"file_type":137,"file_size":138,"view_count":55,"is_deleted":4,"is_public":22,"is_downloadable":22,"audit_status":22,"page_count":139,"language":140,"language_code":8,"site_id":7,"html_lang":8,"table_of_contents":141,"faqs":142,"seo_title":143,"seo_description":12,"update_tm":144,"read_time":108,"preview_page_count":4},2336477405376,"https://ap-avatar.wpscdn.com/davatar_29158cc5080c5b710cf443261637dec0","AERA Open  \nOctober-December 2018, Vol. 4, No. 4, pp. 1–16 DOI: 10. 1177/2332858418799085  \nArticle reuse guidelines: [sagepub.com/journals-permissions](sagepub.com/journals-permissions)[ ](sagepub.com/journals-permissions)© The Author(s) 2018. [http://journals.sagepub.com/home/ero](http://journals.sagepub.com/home/ero)  \nThe Long-Term Impact of Systemic Student Support in Elementary School: Reducing High School Dropout  \nTerrence J. Lee-St. John  \nMary E. Walsh  \nAnastasia E. Raczek  \nCaroline E. Vuilleumier  \nClaire Foley  \nAmy Heberle  \nErin Sibley  \nEric Dearing  \nCenter for Optimized Student Support, Lynch School of Education, Boston College  \nDropping out of high school has adverse consequences, including negative effects on employment, lifetime earnings, and physical health. Students often fail to complete high school for complex reasons that often manifest long before they reach high school. This study examines the link between participation in a comprehensive elementary school student support intervention and high school dropout. In this study, students who attended intervention elementary schools in a large, urban, high-poverty district during 2001–2014 (N=894) were compared to students who did not attend intervention schools (N=10,200). Likelihood of dropping out in grades 9–12 was estimated using propensity score-weighted Discrete Event History Analysis. Intervention students had approximately half the odds of dropout (p\u003C.001); the probability of dropout for intervention was 9.2%, compared to 16.6% for non-intervention students. Individually tailored student support interventions during elementary school can lead to lasting and meaningful effects.  \nKeywords: integrated student support, school dropout, elementary schools  \nIntroduction  \nAfter stagnating for several decades, public high school graduation rates in the United States have increased over the past 15 years, peaking at 83% in 2014–2015 (Murnane, 2013; National Center for Education Statistics (NCES), 2016) . Still, dropping out of high school has clear and measurable adverse consequences for both individuals and society (De Witte & Rogge, 2013; Hanushek & Wobmann, 2007; McNeal, 1995; Strom & Boster, 2007) . These include negative effects on employment, lifetime earnings, and physical health; an increased risk of incarceration; and social costs associated with these outcomes (Belfield & Levin, 2007; Chapman, Laird, Ifill, & Kewal Ramani, 2011; Lleras-Muney, 2005) . Therefore, despite generally positive trends in the national graduation rate, the loss of human potential associated with dropout necessitates research to identify interventions that may further reduce the rate of school dropout.  \nArecent review of the literature on interventions designed to prevent school dropout concluded that few have been designed to address multiple risk factors and to be implemented early in life rather than in high school (Freeman & Simonsen, 2015) . The authors of this review conclude that“evidence does support the use of multicomponent interventions, early intervention, and strategies that address the school organizational structure,” further noting that“researchers…need to tackle the complexity of the dropout problem and conduct research that either confirms or denies current best practice recommendations with particular attention to the integration of practices…that address student needs proactively and effectively”(p. 242). Accordingly, the current study examines the link between high-quality, comprehensive, individualized elementary school student support and high school dropout. We examine whether students participating in an evidence-based, theory-guided student support intervention during elementary school drop out of high school at lower rates than comparable students who  \nCreative Commons Non Commercial CC BY-NC: This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons  \nAttribution-NonCommercial 4.0 License ([http://www.creativecommons.org/license","cbCaic29s7jWyb56","https://ap.wps.com/l/cbCaic29s7jWyb56","pdf",885540,16,"English","# Introduction\n# Pathways Leading to Dropout","[{\"question\":\"What question does the study address about student support and dropout?\",\"answer\":\"It examines whether participation in a comprehensive, elementary-school student support intervention is linked to lower rates of high school dropout.\"},{\"question\":\"How were intervention and comparison students selected?\",\"answer\":\"Students from intervention elementary schools (2001–2014) were compared with students who did not attend intervention schools, using propensity score-weighted analysis to estimate dropout likelihood.\"},{\"question\":\"What impact did the intervention have on dropout rates?\",\"answer\":\"Intervention students had roughly half the odds of dropout (p\\u003c.001), with predicted dropout probabilities of 9.2% versus 16.6% for non-intervention students.\"}]","The Long-Term Impact of Systemic Student Support in Elementary School - Reducing High School Dropout | PDF",1792070227]