Student Dropout

The social climate of today’s society recognizes the significance of education more than ever before. Nonetheless, the modern society suffers from social and economic inequalities, making education the greatest weapon for fighting poverty as well as aiding upward social mobility. Essentially, higher education is increasingly becoming the key to success; it is nearly impossible to secure a well-paying job without university or college education. According to Erin, school dropout has become a national concern, with historical trends showing large numbers of students pulling out of college before completion (13). Despite the lasting upward development in the completion of college studies across the nation, each year a significant number of students in college do not complete their studies. Surprisingly, most college-going students often wonder why educational stakeholders and policy makers discourage youths from terminating their studies. The national interest of reducing college dropout has increased, and various legislations are in place to ensure an upsurge in rates of graduation. In this case, the main interest it to enable students have a successful and promising future through prospective career development. Clearly, dropping out of college has particular consequences for individual students and the economy at large. This discourse underscores reasons for dropouts, consequences, and measures to prevent such occurrences. 

Causes of Student Dropout

A proper comprehension of the reasons behind college student dropout is the main factor for addressing this recurrent educational challenge. On the other hand, identification of the causes is reasonably difficult because this trend emanates from varied distal and proximal factors related to family, institution, individual, and community settings. It is apparent that the main factors responsible for college dropouts are student’s behavior, values, attitude, and institution performance, which instantly precede their decision to leave college. In the first place, students receiving lower grades and scores experience educational instability and are at a risk of leaving college. As quoted from Frank Daley’s article, “Second, we find that students who drop-out of four-year colleges generally also have very low predicted probabilities of completion, although this varies across student groups” (11). Factually, students who choose to drop out of college at lower ages due to poor performance in academics are less likely to graduate within a particular college segment. For some students, blemished backgrounds, including social class and aspirations, affect their educational achievement. At the same time, multiple background characteristics have the potential to discourage students from studying to completion. In detail, demographic variables, including gender, race, language, and ethnic backgrounds determine a student’s desire to learn. Students of the minority regarding demographic factors are most likely to drop out of college. Perhaps, this may result from unfair treatment by the community, educational institution, or fellow students. 

Frank Daley states further that institutional factors are responsible for setting the contexts of students’ lives while in college (11). Factors such as family, community, and colleges all shape a student’s behavior towards dropping out of higher education. Indeed, family backgrounds are the single most recognized contributor of student success in college. In detail, structural characteristics of families, including socioeconomic and political status, have a say at student’s educational profile. On the other hand, socioeconomic status estimated through parental income and education is a useful predictor of achievement in college. This way, students whose parents were victims of dropout are more likely to follow suit. Meanwhile, low-income families may cause potential dropout of students as they lack basic needs to support the education of their children. Worse still, college structures may also exert powerful influences on the achievement of a student. Institutional characteristics, for example, resources, processes and practices, rules and regulations, and structural characteristics may daunt a student’s chances of education. College resources, including student-tutor ratio, books, and facilities have the latent to influence the performance of students who may leave college altogether. 

Consequences 

Higher education dropouts imply a reduction in graduates who would become future economic builders. Equally, college dropouts are an economic burden to any nation because they lack skills required in job placement. As Erin posits, in the end, they enter low-paying jobs, pay lower or no taxes, and still expect to gain from government welfare services (14). It becomes intricate given that government uses taxpayer’s money to provide essential services, such as health and security to the citizens. College dropouts are more likely to live a poor life as opposed to their counterparts who graduated and gained significant knowledge and skills. Overall, dropouts would solely depend on government-funded services and retard nation’s economic growth. In light of taxation, dropouts openly deny the government tax money, since they have low-paying jobs and struggle to provide for their basic needs. For that reason, the government finds itself in a fix to use taxpayers’ money to provide support and ensure all citizens access vital services equally. Subsequently, college dropouts are likely to engage in criminal activities and cause security threats; most of the populations serving incarceration are college dropouts. The cost of maintaining these criminals behind the bars is high, what piles more pressure on taxpayers’ money. Finally, dropouts are less likely to contribute to the national democratic process, such as voting and community development programs; otherwise, they may select bad leaders into important positions. To say the least, they depend on the rest of the population to decide for them.

Prevention 

Some recommendations for reducing rates of college dropouts and promoting graduation exist. Interventions include implementation of college-wide reform strategies that heighten engagement with students in order to support identified groups or individual students at risk of leaving college. As Frank Daley suggests, it is important to provide incentives for students, including lunch programs and making college education free and fair to allow for equal access (12). Colleges should also allow for smooth transition of students from one level to another and strive to motivate students, rather than encouraging course repetition. As cited from Frank Daley’s article, “We can’t fix the problem completely, of course, but we can improve students’ academic state of preparedness. They can also develop self-knowledge. They can study themselves and their relationship to others…” Most importantly, the use of diagnostic tracking systems to identify community, individual, and institutional factors that influence college dropout rates would provide significant reduction. Tracking systems using unique identifiers of students at risk of dropping out would allow for a comprehensive longitudinal tracking of factors influencing an individual student. Colleges ought to employ mentors and counselors to communicate with students with undesirable behavior and bring them back to the normal behavior that supports educational achievement. As noted in the article “America’s College Dropout Epidemic: Understanding the College Drop-Out Population,” mentoring would prepare all students for education, work, and transition of life stages in and after college (Erin 15). The author suggests developing a college-within-a-college model, which allows students to stay with the same tutors for prolonged periods in both academic and occupational coursework. As supported by Daley, “Colleges also offer counseling services (mostly underfunded). More students than you can imagine suffer from emotional or psychological problems. Colleges are centers of education, not health, but you might reconsider that…” Adaptation of this approach into the curriculum creates powerful partnerships between colleges and potential future employers, consequently, formulating study-work paradigm. Students will be reluctant to drop out of college given imminent future career prospects. Such measures among others would ensure that college dropout rates reduce, and a high number of graduates emerge to help build the economy. 

Conclusion

This essay attempted to discern the causes of college student dropouts, consequences, and preventive measures. It establishes that individual student behavior, values, and beliefs are the major contributing factors to students leaving college; in particular, students from low social and economic backgrounds have difficulties in achieving their educational dreams. Likewise, educational institution and community factors also play a significant role in predisposing students to drop out. Optimistically, preventive measures such as the use of tracking systems would enable college counselors to identify and correct factors threatening student academic success. The consequences of dropout are severe and counteractive measures are indispensable to rectify the situation. As underscored in the discourse, college dropouts present undeserved pressure to the government and other citizens, as they cannot contribute to developing the nation. As such, the government, policymakers, and all educational stakeholders should work toward reducing rate of dropout. Legislation enforcement should underscore the need to deter this flawed educational trend, providing detailed approaches in a bid to save the economy from unwarranted effects of dropouts. 

Works Cited

Erin, Velez. “America’s College Dropout Epidemic: Understanding the College Drop-Out Population.” American Institutes for Research, 109.11 (2014): 2-22. Web. 10 Nov 2015.

Daley, Frank. “Why College Students Drop Out and What We Do about It.” College Quarterly, 13.3 (2010): 1-17. Print.