Remarks made in testimony before the New Hampshire House Education Committee
Regarding SB268
4 April 2006

Chairman L’Heureux and Members of the Committee:


    My name is Mary Faiella, from Northwood, New Hampshire,  and I am here today representing simply myself as a citizen with a long-standing interest in education in New Hampshire.   I was educated at the University of New Hampshire, taught biochemistry there for several years during the 1980’s, and also taught chemistry in a private New Hampshire high school.  I have educated my own children at home for the past 19 years, as well as having taught science and civics courses on a volunteer basis for groups of homeschooled teens.

    The first question that occurred to me when I heard that raising the compulsory school attendance age to 18 was again before the New Hampshire legislature was “How many 16 and 17 year olds actually leave school?”  Members of this committee might be surprised to learn that no one seems to know.  New Hampshire Department of Education’s (DOE) Information Services has not yet collected this data, although they may begin to do so now that each New Hampshire pupil is being issued a “unique pupil identification number.”

    The NHDOE does report that out of New Hampshire’s high school population of almost 67000, a few more than 2300 students left school without graduating in 2004-2005.  This number, however, includes 18, 19, and 20 year olds.  In the meantime, NHDOE’s Bureau of Adult Education reports that over 1500 16-24 year olds got a GED or an adult education diploma last year,  and documents distributed at the  “Dropout Prevention Summit” in March indicated that 1100 16 and 17 year olds are in GED or adult education programs.

    I kept asking people “How many of the 2300 dropouts are 16 or 17?”   Then I had an idea.  I called a  high school guidance counselor in my town last week.  Coe-Brown had ten dropouts indicated last year in the NHDOE report.  Well, the guidance counselor told me, two were back this year, but, of the others, four were 18, three were 17 (and who knows how close to 18), and only one was 16.

    In another nearby town with twelve dropouts indicated in the DOE figures, the guidance office was only able to tell me that about five were under 18.   A guidance director, in a town with over 50 dropouts, knew the age of every one of them, and, as in my own town, it turned out
that about 10% were 16, 40% were 17, and 50% were 18, 19, or 20.  What about cities? I wondered.  The one city’s assistant principal with whom I was able to speak did not have a tally readily available, but thought that most of the schools dropouts were juniors or seniors, more than half of which group, on average, would be 18 or older.

    Surely there are towns with different situations, but if these schools  are representative of the circumstances at large, some interesting things emerge.    If we go back to our 2300 dropouts for 2004-05 and apply the percentages that seem to arise out my sampling, only about 250 would have been 16, another 900 or so would have been 17, and several hundred may be back in school.  

    Very importantly, leaving high school does not translate into an end to education.  In fact in New Hampshire, it seems that more often than not, students called dropouts do continue their education.  The DOE reports that, in the same year that I estimate 1150  16 and 17 year olds left school,  1100 16 and 17 year olds were taking part in adult education programs.  Some claim that these students do not get “real” diplomas, and so they insist that students with GEDs never be added to the “graduation rate,”  even if they go on to college or other successes.  Why?  Most colleges have some process by which they accept a GED,  GED’s are accepted and sometimes preferred by employers, and only seven out of ten recipients of  what some call “real” diplomas could pass the GED.  [correction: 7 out of 10 high school seniors/ documentation submitted]

    [Adding to the printed testimony which I had submitted to the Committee I noted that proponents of the bill have testified that 70% of the prison population are dropouts.  Of course, this does not mean that 70% of dropouts are in jail! ]

    So, the larger question is “What is New Hampshire’s real 16 and 17 year old dropout problem?”    I think that the DOE's numbers actually tell us that the situation is considerably more hopeful than some fear.  In fact, according to the US Census Bureau figures compiled by the Annie E. Casey Foundation (AECF), New Hampshire’s dropout rate has declined from 9% in 1990 to 8% in 2000, and at an even faster rate in recent years, to 7% in 2005.  New Hampshire is in good company in this respect -- AECF reports that dropout rates are declining in almost every state, nationwide.  While some think-tank style organizations postulate that the dropout rate is as high as 25%, and NHDOE calculates a “cumulative” rate of 13%, Census Bureau numbers show about 7% of New Hampshire’s 16-19 year olds who are out of school and without a credential (yet).   .

    The logical next question is “What is the expected effect of raising the compulsory attendance age to 18?”  One state, Connecticut, which did so in 2000 has been widely cited in the course of the SB268 discussion as being an enormous success story.  Perhaps the most interesting part of this story is that New Hampshire’s 1994 compulsory attendance legislation, now NH RSA 193:1,IV, in place for over a decade, is virtually identical to Connecticut’s 2000 legislation which is hailed as having turned around the dropout situation there.  [documentation submitted]

    Connecticut’s rate, as tabulated in the Census Bureau figures has dropped in recent years, and Connecticut has moved from 30th in 2000 to 3rd in 2004 in the AECF rankings based on the Census Bureau numbers, but Connecticut’s numbers have been volatile and I encourage you to look at them closely if you are relying on them in your decision-making.  [documentation submitted]

    An interesting aspect of Connecticut’s situation is that their own Department of Education analyst, Robert Lucco,  says that they are not sure whether the increase in compulsory attendance age is related to the reduction in the dropout rate.   In fact, he says,  “On face value, it doesn't appear as though the law, itself, has had significant impact on dropout rates.” If we look at other states in the AECF rankings, we find that, even though almost all states are showing improved dropout rates, of the states that have a compulsory attendance age of 18 about half  saw their rankings get worse in the same period of time during which Connecticut’s ranking improved.  

    The move to increase the compulsory attendance age to 18 is a nationwide wave.  Bills have been filed in state after state in recent years.   As of today, only a couple of those have passed their state legislatures.  I urge this committee as you study SB268 to look carefully at the question of whether this is truly the right thing for our state.  

    Thank you for this opportunity to speak with you.  I have some further testimony regarding the history of compulsory school attendance ages in New Hampshire, as that issue has been part of the debate on this bill,  but I will offer that at the discretion of the committee after others have had an opportunity to speak.  

(In particular, I wanted to inform the committee regarding the fact that the age was originally established in 1871 at 14, raised to 16 during the 1891 compilation of the Public Statutes, and reduced again to 14 in 1901.  In 1903 14 and 15 year olds who could not read or write were required to remain in school, then in 1913,  14 and 15 year olds who had not completed elementary school were added.  In 1953, 14 and 15 year olds were required to attend high school if their district maintained a high school, and only in 1985 were all New Hampshire 14 and 15 year olds required to attend high school even when they would have to travel outside their district to do so.)    [documentation submitted]