Here are the U.S. News rankings of the “best” high schools in America. Allegedly. Apparently no one bothered to look at attritionrates.
Amistad Academy is identified as the “best” high school in the state. No one noticed that 75% of its students disappeared between 6th and 12th grade. Hmmm.
After reading Gary Rubinstein’s post this morning about KIPP and the U.S. News’ rankings, a reader sent this data about Amistad Academy:
https://www.publicschoolreview.com/connecticut/amistad-academy/900024-school-district/high
Notice anything about their enrollment trends?
of Students in Pre-Kindergarten: – –
of Students in Kindergarten: 92 92
of Students in 1st Grade: 93 93
of Students in 2nd Grade: 90 90
of Students in 3rd Grade: 90 90
of Students in 4th Grade: 79 79
of Students in 5th Grade: 102 102
of Students in 6th Grade: 102 102
of Students in 7th Grade: 81 81
of Students in 8th Grade: 79 79
of Students in 9th Grade: 59 59
of Students in 10th Grade: 57 57
of Students in 11th Grade: 34 34
of Students in 12th Grade: 26 26
of Ungraded Students:
And here are their scores –
Click to access hss_ct_pub2015.pdf
Hey! Why did the 102 students in sixth grade dwindle to only 26 in senior year? Where did they go?
Obviously, the folks who do the rankings at U.S. News don’t screen for high attrition rates–like losing 75% of your students.
Diane Ravitch's blog 
Not only is the school’s attrition high, but its suspension rate is also astronomical.
” While suspensions statewide decreased from 2010 through 2015, they skyrocketed at Amistad, from 302 to 1,307 suspensions. There were more suspensions in 2014-15 than there were students, who numbered 984. During that five-year period, enrollment increased by about 25 percent, while suspensions more than quadrupled.”
http://www.stamfordadvocate.com/news/article/Wendy-Lecker-A-void-in-oversight-of-charter-7988759.php-
LikeLike
The high suspension rate explains the high attrition rate. The best way to get rid of a student is to suspend her or him repeatedly until they leave.
LikeLike
Not sure this data shows high attrition. Isn’t it a snapshot report of a single year, rather than a historical tracking of a single grade over time?
LikeLike
We ‘MuriKans sures does luf ourselfs our rankinns! We’s #1!
LikeLike
US News & Report’s rankings are always less than logically acceptable. In other words they are USDA Grade B Bovine Excrement. But hey alt-facts help sell copy and/or be click bait. That’s all that matters-truth be damned.
LikeLike
This info is begging for an article to be written. I’d say one more example from another region of the country would be more than enough (just the KIPP example is more than enough for a good article).
LikeLike
From 2013 but perhaps still of interest: http://www.newhavenindependent.org/index.php/archives/entry/amistad_signing_ceremony/
LikeLike
Well, you know the old saying: “There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies, and statistics.”
LikeLike
Because our side commands zero percent of the narrative, Amistad Academy will nevertheless be seen as and talked about by everyone as the best school in CT. Done.
So, chalk it up as a win for the other side.
That’s the only take away here.
LikeLike
The reality is so damning, though, right? And could it be more obvious? There has to be some reporter willing/capable of “uncovering” this, right?
LikeLike
Waaaaay too “in the weeds” and detail-laden.
The papers and news outlets capable of that level of dense reporting and the ability to publish it without fear of turning off readers are all dominated by the reform agenda. For example the NYT wouldn’t touch this because a) they are ideologically allied to the reform movement and agenda and b) more broadly ideologically aligned with the idea of “objective” and definitive idea of rankings. Why? Well the huge bulk of the wealthy meritocratic readership of the Times as well as the vast bulk of its staff are people that have thrived in a world of arbitrary (not to them of course) ranking systems!
This is not the crowd to turn to to toss shade on anything that makes their resumes come in to any doubt, or their ideological stances. Vaguely left meritocratic socially-excellent folk dominate our higher-end (non-fake) media. That means there are many no-go zones.
And we all thought that being on the left was all that really mattered! Nope.
There are few news outlets anymore staffed by salty old school lefties who are union-types and who have the requisite lack of earnestness and abundance of skepticism to do stories that our side needs.
Oh, and our side has basically dropped the ball at every level re. forcing our voice into the fray.
LikeLike
NYS TEACHER
https://www.nytimes.com/roomfordebate/2014/12/10/are-charter-schools-cherry-picking-students/charter-school-cherry-picking-from-admission-to-expulsion
Not that the ratings mean anything, except for the public perception they foster
But I would say nothing would dispel the myth more than the thousands of specialty HS students and Teachers showing up at Zuckerman’s Daily news to complain about fake news.
LikeLike
I read this and almost choked…That is carpetbagger Stefan Pryor’s charter-one that Deborah Gist ex RI Commish of Ed took ex governor Chafee to visit. When raimondo became the governor (I call her the liar in chief) she took Stefan Pryor from Conn before he was tarred and feathered there & away from education and the Yalie yahoo created for Pryor, another Yalie yahoo, a new position that raimondo made up for him when she became governor because of the 38 Studios scandal. She rebranded both the EDC and the idiot Pryor by creating the Secretary of Commerce position for him. Pryor screwed up a few times and the taxpayers are paying for his debacles, too…no personal consequence. And now the same pattern exists raimondo is in trouble for hiding the fact that the feds fined her 800,000 for the UHIP scandal…bigger than 38 Studios…
What bothers me very much is that she screws up, and it is the people-the taxpayers paying the fine. Not her. She loses nothing.
She was told by the feds not to use the UHIP software–she ignores them, uses it, causes a 364M scandal which has ballooned to almost 400 M and yet she is not held accountable, we RI taxpayers are the ones to pay the debt. There is something wrong with this picture.
LikeLike
In what setting is attrition acceptable? Attrition is the backbone of every nurse education program I know about. Is that good? Attrition is the way of life in professional sports. We can argue about whether that system does or does not produce the best outcome.
Is forcing people who do not comply with guidelines or authorities to leave a good or bad thing? Is this appropriate for any level of education? If so, what level? Surely we agree that we should not force out a majority of our students so that a few can learn a bit more. If forcing people out of the gym produces a better ball team, should we therefore conclude that the cause of ball in general is helped by that method of producing a better bal team?
I think I have answers to all of these questions. I wonder if others have answers.
LikeLike
Getting an education as not the same as competing for a spot on the football team, which is necessarily limited
LikeLike
In my country, we tend to let all kids who wants to play sport join a team (although affordability is a problem for some). We grade kids into different teams based on ability, weight or age depending on the sport but we don’t exclude them. It seems to work for us – we tend to be up near the top of the table on per capita Olympic medal counts and our national sports teams do exceedingly well in rugby and netball and more than ok in hockey and cricket.
It’s really hard to tell who is going to be an elite sportsman/women until kids near the end of puberty, especially for boys. It’s silly to waste talent by excluding kids too early.
I guess my question to Roy is what does he see as the purpose of sport? Is the purpose of sport to be for the glory of that sport; for winning at any cost; or for the health and well being of the people who play it?
And taking it back to education. Is the purpose of education to bring glory to the school; to get to the top of the league table at any cost; or for giving a great education to all the kids who enroll?
LikeLike
I would like to suggest that even in nursing school and sports, using attrition to shake out candidates does not add positively to that thing. If playing ball is good for people, we should benefit if more people played ball. Those of us who believe in education and its salutary effect on society should see that we would be more educated as a whole if more people received an education. I would be you would concur that charters who use attrition to look better on paper are really not demonstrating the desire to help society. Rather they seek to look good. The same is true for public schools who only seek to serve students who,are easy to teach.
LikeLike
I’ve never seen where “attrition is the backbone of every nurse education program”.
Where did you come up with that one Roy??
Having had more than a couple of intimate dealings with nursing students and nurses-hell, I was married to two different long legged tall blonde blue-eyed nurses for a total of almost thirty years, coached a slo-pitch softball team of nurses for a few years, knowing quite a few nurses now, I never heard or saw anything that resembles the kind of attrition that goes on in the schools mentioned here. Did some not make it through? Yes, just as in all professional courses of study. To suggest that attrition is an integral part of the learning process of nursing is absurd.
LikeLike
Charter school attrition works great for
public school teachers who have the privilege of instructing higher and higher percentages of English language learners, special needs students and children with behavioral challenges. The reward is to be labeled below par teachers who dominate so called failing schools. It is a zero sum game.
LikeLike
While that sounds a plausible complaint, is it supported by research?
I’m not familiar with national studies, but it is countered, for example, by the findings in: “Stand and Deliver: Effects of Boston’s Charter High Schools on College Preparation, Entry, and Choice” by Angrist et al.
“The pattern of peer composition effects is driven, in part, by increasing peer quality in the schools attended by those who lose charter lotteries…. Figure 4 documents a large initial gap in favor of lottery winners. This gap closes with time, as peer quality rises more sharply for compliers who lose the lottery. This pattern is likely driven by high dropout rates at traditional public schools among students with the lowest baseline scores. These results suggest that positive charter effects cannot be attributed to low-quality peers leaving charter schools. If anything, selective exit of low achievers is more pronounced at Boston’s traditional public schools.”
http://www.nber.org/papers/w19275
LikeLike
Where do kids go when they leave the public schools? Not to charters. Where?
LikeLike
“Where do kids go when they leave the public schools? Not to charters. Where?”
I am not sure I understand your question. As you perspicaciously note, kids who leave the public schools don’t go to charter schools, since charter schools are public schools. In addition to those who transfer between public schools, traditional and charter, some, of course, go to private schools. But perhaps you are just inquiring about the fate of those who drop out, leaving school entirely, since they were the focus of that extract from Angrist’s paper? I imagine you are actually quite knowledgeable regarding the research on the subject and perhaps it is a rhetorical question?
But if you’re looking to brush up on the subject… via Wikipedia:
“High school dropouts are less likely to be active labor force participants and are more likely to be unemployed than their more educated counterparts. The current unemployment rate for high school dropouts is about 56 percent greater than that for high school completers. Lifetime earnings for this group are estimated to be $260,000 less than those for high school graduates. Female dropouts are much more likely to become single mothers and consequently be more likely to have an income under the poverty threshold or live on welfare. High school dropouts make up 68 percent of the nation’s prison population. Nearly 37% of dropouts live in poor/near poor families.Additionally, high school dropouts have a life expectancy that is 3–5 years shorter than high school graduates.”
Then again (from the same source) there’s Bobby Fischer who “dropped out of high school when he turned age sixteen and later explained ‘You don’t learn anything in school’.”
LikeLike
So……despite the awful unemployment rates, lesser life expectancy, higher likelihood of winding up in prison, etc, of the drop-outs, the fact that Bobby Fischer thought that school was useless, and that he was a world champion chess player, excuses the awful consequences for far too many of the other high school drop-outs?
Because you may not have meant to imply this, but it sure came across that way.
Or maybe you did mean to imply this. Hard to tell.
LikeLike
I did not intend imply that. Thanks for prompting clarification.
LikeLike
“since charter schools are public schools.”
Do you always lie, Stephen?
LikeLike
What interpretation of Diane’s remark “Where do kids go when they leave the public schools? Not to charters. Where?” do you think, Duane, would be more accurate and logical than recognition that charter schools are public schools?
LikeLike
Stephen,
In every litigation in the federal courts and in every NLRB action, charter operators say they are NOT “state actors” and are not governed by state law.
Public schools are state actors.
Charter schools, by their own admission, are not.
Why is that so hard for you to accept?
LikeLike
Your question containing “would be more accurate and logical than . . . ” is illogical and inaccurate at face value.
Charter schools are NOT public schools (except the few that are authorized by a local school board and operate under the auspices of that board). Charters have argued in the courts and before the NLRB that they should not be considered public schools. They may receive tax monies that are originally purposed for public school but that does not make them public. It is no different than a private contractor who does work for the government, let’s say a paving company that resurfaces a road, receiving payment for work. They are not considered “public”.
Your statement is a falsehood, which I believe to be proffered as a means of deceiving those who don’t know. That makes it a lie.
LikeLike
“Charter schools are NOT public schools (except the few that are authorized by a local school board and operate under the auspices of that board). ”
As with the court rulings I alluded to in response to Diane, the NLRB decision was far narrower in scope that you seem to realize, Duane.
The 2-1 majority in the NLRB’s Hyde decision did not dispute the dissent in respect to these assertions:
“Second, the existence of Section 2(2) jurisdiction over Hyde Leadership does not mean that the Board has Section 2(2) jurisdiction over other charter schools. Rather, under the Hawkins County test, the question of Section 2(2) jurisdiction over any charter school depends on the particular facts of each case, which vary significantly because many different state and local laws govern the creation, structure and operation of charter schools.
“Even if Section 2(2) jurisdiction existed here, there is little question that Section 2(2) jurisdiction will not exist in various other charter school cases.
“…the most that could result from Board efforts to exercise jurisdiction over charter schools will be a jurisdictional patchwork—where federal jurisdiction exists here and state jurisdiction exists there, depending on how the “political subdivision” question is resolved…”
“nor can there be any hope that a ‘single, uniform, national rule’ will displace the ‘variegated laws of the several States.'”
Duane, where you write “except the few that are authorized by a local school board and operate under the auspices of that board” you seem to be misconstruing the NLRB decision.
Let’s consider the NLRB decision’s applicability, or lack thereof, to Commonwealth charter schools in Massachusetts, where I live. Commonwealth charter schools are not authorized by a local school board, nor do they operate under the auspices of such a board.
The NLRB majority argued:
“Under the second prong of the Hawkins County test, an entity will be deemed a political subdivision if ‘it is administered by individuals who are responsible to public officials or the general electorate.’ …In making this determination, the dispositive question is whether a majority of the individuals who administer the entity—Hyde’s governing board members and executive officers—are appointed by or subject to removal by public officials.”
[…]
“Rather, the CSA [NY Charter School Act] places decision-making authority for Hyde’s policy and operations in the self-appointed and self-perpetuating board of trustees rather than any public entity. The Regional Director found that public officials did not appoint any of the trustees on the School’s board….”
[…]
At Hyde: “Trustees are elected by the current trustees for a term of three years and may be reelected for unlimited successive terms.”
By contrast, according to our Massachusetts law:
“(ii) the appointing official of a member of the board of trustees of a charter school shall be deemed to be the
commissioner of education.”
http://www.doe.mass.edu/lawsre…
That’s further detailed in “Charter School Administrative and Governance Guide: An Overview of the Laws and Regulations that Schools Leaders and Boards of Trustees Need to Know” as follows:
“5. State Approval of New Board Members
When a charter school’s Board of Trustees votes to accept new members, and before those individuals may take official action, the following steps must be taken to receive approval of the new members from the Commissioner of Education:…”
The steps include submitting a letter seeking the Commissioner’s approval with copy of resume, financial disclosure forms…
http://www.doe.mass.edu/charte…
Do you still think the NLRB finding in respect to the Hyde school is applicable also to Commonwealth Charter Schools, Duane? If so, kindly explain your reasoning.
p.s. if you have by now come up with an interpretation of Diane’s remark that you think sensible, please do provide it.
LikeLike
Stephen,
If charter schools are public schools–which they are not–why did it require a referendum to open more of them? Public schools don’t need a statewide referendum to open.
You lost, overwhelmingly. The people of Massachusetts voted NO to more charters because they know that charters are not public schools. They are not under the jurisdiction of an elected board. They suck money away from public schools. The vote against them was highest in communities that already have charters. The public wants to preserve local control. They reject the DeVos agenda.
LikeLike
Diane: “If charter schools are public schools–which they are not–why did it require a referendum to open more of them? Public schools don’t need a statewide referendum to open.”
I don’t grasp the logic there. Seems that’d be more sensibly phrased as: “If charter schools were in all respects private schools–which they are not–why would it require a referendum to open more of them? Private schools don’t need a statewide referendum to open.”
Diane: “You lost, overwhelmingly. The people of Massachusetts voted NO to more charters because they know that charters are not public schools.”
I’d be interested in your basis for that statement. Exit polling? Guesswork? You would certainly be correct to imply that an influential, steady stream of facts alternative to reality were disseminated to voters by ballot question opponents. Feel free to request examples if you’d like to refresh your memory on such details. And think a bit please, Diane, as to whether it’s advisable to celebrate such alternative facts in this context, while decrying them in others.
LikeLike
Stephen,
The charters should be honest and open as private schools with private boards and private money.
The reason for the referendum was that these privately governed schools wanted public money while they remain under private control.
LikeLike
Don’t know about the Commonwealth Chart Schools. Your response comes under the rubric of “baffle em with bullshit”. In other words the very fine legal points of MA charter school law does not negate the fact that charters have successfully argued in the courts and in NLRB hearings (even if that particular decision you cite is grounded in narrow legalese) that they are not public schools and should not have to open their books, have their operating procedures open to scrutiny and that information is proprietary, therefore not subject to public inspection.
Why to you keep obfuscating that point, Stephen? It’s just an attempt to justify your basic lie that the vast majority, with a few exceptions,
of “charters are public schools”. They are not and no amount of disseminating and obfuscating by you can change that. Why do you continue to lie about charters in this fashion when you’ve been shown by many here that the vast majority of charters are not public (as argued by the charters themselves) schools?
That “charters are a public school” is a lie, Stephen. Why do you promote that lie?
LikeLike
To quote from the decision:
“The Union also asserts that the Board of Regents created the School to operate as a public school—an administrative arm of government. The Union notes that the Board of Regents incorporated the charter school as a New York State education corporation. Further, under the CSA, charter schools, like public schools, must comply with health, safety, and sanitary requirements, civil rights laws, and student assessment criteria. The School does not pay rent for the use of a public school building and is overseen by the Board of Regents. Moreover, under the CSA, if the charter school closed, students would automatically be transferred to the school district where the charter school was located, and the funds would be relinquished to that public school. The Union also focuses on the CSA’s references to the Taylor Law, under which charter schools are designated as public employers and employees of charter schools are declared public employees subject to that law. Under the CSA, a charter entity can terminate a charter if there is a “practice practice and pattern of egregious violations of” the Taylor Law.
“Regarding the second prong of Hawkins County, the Union argues that the Regional Director incorrectly determined that the members of the board of trustees are not responsible to public officials. The Union points out that each member of the Board of Regents is elected by
the New York State legislature to a 7-year term. In turn, the Board Regents appointed the initial trustees, and every trustee is subject to removal by the Board of Regents for certain kinds of misconduct.
“The Union argues that the Regional Director erred by relying on New York State court of appeals cases DiNapoli and Smith, supra, as neither case concerned the CSA. Instead, the Union urges the Board to rely on the PERB decisions in Brooklyn Excelsior and Buffalo United,
supra.
“Three amicus briefs were filed in support of the Union’s contention that Hyde is exempt from the Board’s jurisdiction. Amici fully adopt the Union’s arguments above. The amicus brief of the Council of School Supervisors and Administrators, Local 1 (CSSA) and the joint amicus brief of the AFT and the NEA additionally focus on why the Board should exercise its discretion to decline jurisdiction over New York charter schools. In essence, they argue that the Board should decline jurisdiction because of the state’s unique responsibility for providing and overseeing education and the state’s extensive role in regulating the employment of teachers and other employees in the public school system…”
Your response to that, Duane, is, let me guess: “Oh those unions, they’re all just a bunch of liars like you, Stephen. Obviously, any contrary argument a charter school made must be taken at face value, deemed as valid, and the result then automatically extrapolated to all other charter schools nationwide that aren’t under the rule of a school board.” Have I got that right? Or is it more like: “Frankly, Stephen, I’m woefully poorly informed on the subject, and rather than strive to correct that, I’d prefer to assume that because I agree with Diane Ravitch and at least one or two other bloggers I’ve skimmed on the subject, I may perhaps be correct, though the more facts you throw at me the less certain I am of that. So please stop. Liar. Liar.”?
LikeLike
Stephen,
You lost. Accept your defeat and move on. The people of Massachusetts said no, overwhelmingly, to more charters. They voted not to allow more public money to flow to private corporations.
LikeLike
No that’s not my response. I have stated that there are some charters that are indeed public schools, the ones that have been authorized by a local school district. The vast majority of charters (99% or so) do not fall under that category. Because you have pointed out a couple of schools that do, that I have acknowledged already, does not make the vast majority of charters “public”. You have never clearly countered my assertion that the vast majority of charters are private. Do you not see that or are you still just obfuscating and lying about them because you can’t counter the FACT that the vast majority claim that private status in courts and in front of the NLRB.
Basta con tus mentiras.
LikeLike
Swacker: “I have stated that there are some charters that are indeed public schools, the ones that have been authorized by a local school district.”
What’s the source for your understanding that those are the only public charter schools? Perhaps what the NLRB majority stated here? “Under the second prong of the Hawkins County test, an entity will be deemed a political subdivision if ‘it is administered by individuals who are responsible to public officials or the general electorate.’ …In making this determination, the dispositive question is whether a majority of the individuals who administer the entity—Hyde’s governing board members and executive officers—are appointed by or subject to removal by public officials.”
If so, you’re missing the point that such public officials need not be members of a local school committee; one such public official could be the state’s commissioner of education, as is the case here in Massachusetts in respect to our Commonwealth charter schools.
You can satisfy some of your curiosity to learn more about those here: http://www.doe.mass.edu/charter/new/2015-2016QandA.pdf
Swacker: “Answer a simple yes/no question Stephen:
“Do all private, whether for profit or not, open there books for public inspection?”
Wow, if that’s a simple yes/no question, I’d hate to see a more obscure one. But perhaps you’ll find these resources useful.
https://www.irs.gov/charities-non-profits/exempt-organization-public-disclosure-and-availability-requirements
https://www.councilofnonprofits.org/nonprofit-audit-guide/state-law-audit-requirements
LikeLike
Answer a simple yes/no question Stephen:
Do all private, whether for profit or not, open there books for public inspection?
LikeLike
Another simple question for you to answer Stehpen:
Do all charter schools, whether for profit or not, allow for the public to come in and inspect their premises?
LikeLike
How about one for to make it three times a charm:
Do all charter schools, whether for profit or not, allow for the public to observe their instructional practices?
LikeLike
I am struck by the small numbers of students per grade. Those must be quite minimal as compared to the public schools in the same areas.
LikeLike
The real issue with ratings is that they play into the notion that public education is a commodity: https://waynegersen.com/2017/04/27/its-the-end-of-april-the-senseless-season-of-rating-high-schools/
LikeLike
We have the same data in Denver. The highest performing charters have attrition rates typically between 30% – 50%. Their FRL, sped and ELL numbers also decrease from 9th – 12th grade. The highest performing charter has 6% sped, 17% ELL and 30% gifted and talented. Compare that to a district school that had similar growth, but has 22% sped, 30% ELL, 4% gifted and talented.
The CMOs spend significant money on marketing and recruiting students. A charter will fill up in round one of the DPS choice process and begin the year with an overall proficiency rate of 50%. The district school sharing the same building accepts students in subsequent rounds and starts the year with a 20% proficiency rate. This is not a level playing field and there is no basis to claim that the charter is outperforming the district school.
LikeLike
“The highest performing charters have attrition rates typically between 30% – 50%. Their FRL, sped and ELL numbers also decrease from 9th – 12th grade.”
Where does Colorado publish those attrition rates? In respect to decreasing ELL rates, could a good portion of that be because the students have successfully learned English? And as for declining SPED percentages, is some of that due to students who were previously in need of special education now making good progress in a regular classroom?
“The highest performing charter has 6% sped, 17% ELL and 30% gifted and talented. Compare that to a district school that had similar growth, but has 22% sped, 30% ELL, 4% gifted and talented.”
In case the irony had escaped anyone here, if I understand correctly, the school where Gary Rubinstein teaches in NYC is 3% Hispanic, 1% Black, 1% students with special needs, 0% ELL.
Click to access School_Quality_Snapshot_2016_HS_M475.pdf
LikeLike
“In case the irony had escaped anyone here, if I understand correctly, the school where Gary Rubinstein teaches in NYC is 3% Hispanic, 1% Black, 1% students with special needs, 0% ELL.’
Umm, I never had the irony to begin with. What the hell does that fact have to do with the price of tea in China??
Are you really that obtuse or do they just pay you well for posting nonsense.
LikeLike
Stephen,
That’s a dumb comment. Gary teaches in a selective examination school in Manhattan. Admission is highly competitive. I haven’t seen anyone boasting that Stuyvesant is “better” or has higher test scores than open-enrollment schools. The selective, competitive nature of Stuyvesant is no secret. If kids don’t gain admission to Stuyvesant, they can enroll in another public school. Stuyvesant is a public school, unlike the charters, which are run by private boards that do not hold open meetings and are not financially transparent.
LikeLike
I had a brief but interesting conversation with a former KIPP administrator about attrition and backfilling. While the admin thought they should be trying to serve as many kids as possible, the funders (vulture philanthropy) didn’t want to backfill as they knew the attrition would make their results look better
LikeLike
“Hey! Why did the 102 students in sixth grade dwindle to only 26 in senior year?”
This data looks like a snapshot of a single year, presumably the last year of available data. That is, when the 102 sixth grade students were attending the school, there was a senior class of 26 students. So this data doesn’t show attrition. There may be high attrition, but it doesn’t show up in this data.
LikeLike