At-risk students
An at-risk student is a term used in the United States to describe a student who requires temporary or ongoing intervention in order to succeed academically.[1] At risk students, sometimes referred to as at-risk youth or at-promise youth,[2] are also adolescents who are less likely to transition successfully into adulthood and achieve economic self-sufficiency.[3] Characteristics of at-risk students include emotional or behavioral problems, truancy, low academic performance, showing a lack of interest for academics, and expressing a disconnection from the school environment.[1] A school's effort to at-risk students is essential. For example, a study showed that 80% to 87% of variables that led to a school's retention are predictable with linear modeling.[4] In January 2020, Governor Newsom of California changed all references to "at-risk" to "at-promise" in the California Penal Codes.[5]
History of the Term "At Risk"[edit]
The term "at-risk" came into use after the 1983 article "A Nation at Risk," published by the National Commission on Excellence in Education. The article described United States society as being economically and socially endangered.[6] At-risk students are those students who have been labeled, either officially or unofficially, as being in danger of academic failure. In the U.S., different states define "at-risk" differently, so it is difficult to compare the varying state policies on the subject.
Students who are labeled as "at-risk" face a number of challenges that other students do not. According to Becky Smerdon's research for the American Institutes for Research, students, especially boys, with low socioeconomic status (and therefore more likely to be labeled "at-risk") show feelings of isolation and estrangement in their schools.[7] Educational philosopher Gloria Ladson-Billings claimed in a 2006 speech that the label itself actually contributes to the challenges. Her view is that, "We cannot saddle these babies at kindergarten with this label and expect them to proudly wear it for the next 13 years, and think, 'Well, gee, I don't know why they aren't doing good.'"[8] There is an ongoing conversation among experts in this field about the importance of asset-based terminology. In 2021, the National Journal of At-risk Youth actually changed their name to the National Journal of Youth Advocacy and Resilience as a way to employ asset-based terminology about youth and to better describe the perspective of those in the field.[9]
History of Prevention for "At-Risk Youth"[edit]
At the time of the mid-20th century, the term, "at-risk" wasn't identified or acknowledge in society. However, during the 1960s and 1970s, there was a pivotal point in how society viewed juvenile offenders and their approach to restorative justice. Studies have shown that punitive measures were often ineffective in addressing the reduction in juvenile crimes. [10]Through research and findings, it resulted in factors that effect a youth's action and increase risk in encountering the juvenile system.[11] It later identified that at-risk youth have a higher chance entering the juvenile system. Subsequently, the need for preventative juvenile justice services, specifically from community services, to help youth, take preventive action, and navigate youth entering and exiting the juvenile system. Preventative juvenile justice services became needed at the end of the 1970s and there is still current debates on preventing juveniles from entering the juvenile system.
Contributing factors documented in the United States[edit]
Poverty[edit]
Youth that come from low socio-economic status are more likely to be labeled "at-risk."[12] Impoverished environments can create several risk factors for youth, making them increasingly vulnerable to risk-behaviors and impacted life outcomes as they grow.[12] Growing up in poverty is associated with several risk factors, including those social-behavioral (for example substance abuse), environmental (violent neighborhoods), ecological, and familial (exposure to psychological imbalance).[13][14] These risk factors are shown to have negative correlations with academic achievement, and positive correlations with problem behaviors.[15] Youth living in households with income under 50% of the federal poverty level are those most vulnerable.[3]