For a long time, the problem of early school leaving was seen purely in psychological terms and attributed to shortcomings in the individual. This is now an outdated view, since it ignores possible shortcomings in structural provisions (such as the lack of support in the early stages) and the responsibility of the school as an institution. A consensus has in the meantime been reached amongst researchers that dropping out of school is a significantly more complex phenomenon, and that each case has a distinct history whose roots can frequently be traced back to kindergarten.
Early school leaving is rightly considered as one of the major challenges in education policy. Within the European Union, it affects more than four million young people between the ages of 18 and 24 who have not attained an upper secondary level education qualification and who are not receiving any formal education or training (EU definition). Many of these young people are either unable to find employment or work in low-skilled – and often unstable - jobs. They quickly enter a downwards spiral characterised by failure, a low sense of self-esteem, stigmatisation and social and vocational exclusion. Low income, dependence on government subsidies and physical and mental illnesses due to their precarious circumstances often lead to social withdrawal, a fatalistic attitude to life and dramatically reduced participation in society. The subsequent costs are hard to quantify, but weigh all the heavier in socio-political terms. Early school leaving is thus not only one of the biggest challenges facing education policy but also a highly charged economic and political issue.
The typical evolution of a young person into an early school leaver was (and, according to our research with teachers, still is) frequently described as follows: The pupil comes from a poorly educated, socially and economically disadvantaged background which affords little support. Failure at school in the early stages leads to hostile attitude to school, which typically ends in chronic absenteeism. This is often reinforced by an out-of-school situation with few controls and in which the peer group plays a significant role. After a phase of truancy and school reports that reflect the pupil’s lack of attendance, he/she ultimately leaves school early. This description, which focussed primarily on the individual, only points to clear failings in the 'professionalisation' of teachers. In particular, it hides any structural failings, and largely absolves the school (as an institution) of responsibility. Yet early school leaving – in the current research consensus – is a deep-seated and far more complex phenomenon with manifold causes.
Long-term studies show that the processes in which a child begins to distance himself/herself from educational institutions often emerge in kindergarten, e.g. when young children experience social rejection as a result of their habitus, which is seen to be 'inappropriate' or disturbing. Furthermore, early school leavers often have problems with specific teachers or experience a lack of understanding of their personal circumstances. Our research revealed a number of different habitus types among early school leavers (status-conscious, maladjusted, disoriented, escapist, ambitious, resignation, constraint) and a multitude of mostly compounding causes. Yet early school leavers do also have some things in common, such as a sense of stigmatisation, negative relationships (with at least one teacher) and the experiencing of report cards as symbolic violence. Efforts to establish good relationships and positive interactions could act here as a buffer and help to reduce fear of failure, stress and thoughts of escape, above all in cases where the pupil has achieved poor results.
Studies of successful prevention and intervention programmes point to the importance of professionalisation (of teachers and headteachers) and, above all, of the establishment of 'professional communities'. These are cross-institutional, interdisciplinary teams that work on pedagogical challenges over the longer term and try to devise solutions to the issues faced in their respective local schools. The notion of 'professionalism' is often reduced to specialist and teaching expertise; yet studies show that social skills, together with the associated building of positive relationships with pupils, are paramount in the educational process. In this context, it is important that a positive school climate should prevail, as well as a protected environment (from safe routes to school to the avoidance of physical violence and bullying). Alienation and lack of identification can easily happen, particularly in large school complexes (where anonymity is an issue). Relationships and classes should be designed in such a way as to reduce fear of failure and keep escapist fantasies at bay. Too rarely does teaching build on the skills that pupils have already acquired in their everyday lives, thus resulting in teaching practices which are oriented more on deficiencies than on resources. Indeed, there is often a mistaken belief that such an approach would place decreasing academic demands on pupils. Yet research shows that the opposite is in fact the case: high standards combined with intensive support increase academic performance and exam success rates.
At the same time, prevention and intervention measures should always address in-school activities in their entirety. A distinction can be made here between three areas, namely in-school, out-of-school and systemic areas. Programmes that cover all three areas produce the best results. A good example here would be a programme that links new types of teaching and tutoring (in-school), out-of-school activities and partnerships (work experience, leisure activities, mentoring, etc.) with changes to the system (new curricula, cooperation between schools, etc.). Modern evidence-based prevention programmes thus focus on opportunities within the institutional framework of the school.
For the simple reason that the distancing process from school occurs over a long period, measures are more effective and more efficient the earlier they are deployed in the educational system (through high quality programmes in early childhood education and care). These measures spare many young people the stigma of being branded a loser or being ostracised at an early age.
Professor Erna Nairz-Wirth is Head of Educational Science at Vienna University of Economics and Business. Her research and teaching interests include educational and occupational trajectories, where she links her work into the causes and consequences of dropout and early school leaving. She is a member of the EU research project RESL.eu, “Reducing Early School Leaving in Europe”. She has also designed and led a qualitative longitudinal study on early school leavers in Austria, and developed recommended measures for the prevention of absenteeism and drop-out for teachers, parents and school heads within the City of Vienna. More studies on Early School Leaving: http://www.wu.ac.at/education-sciences-group/aktuelles/en/.