1

U.S. Department of Education

Office of Planning, Evaluation and Policy Development

Policy and Program Studies Service

Issue Brief: Academic Support Classes

March 2018

Introduction

In 2015–16, the high school graduation rate reached a record high of 84 percent (U.S. Department of 

Education 2017). Despite the gains, over half a million students still drop out of high school each year 

(U.S. Department of Education 2015). High schools have adopted various strategies designed to keep 

students who are at risk of not graduating in school and on track for earning the credits required to 

graduate. “At-risk” students are defined as those failing to achieve basic proficiency in key subjects or 

exhibiting behaviors that can lead to failure and/or dropping out of school. Dropout prevention 

strategies are diverse; they vary in type of program, services offered, frequency, intensity, and duration 

of contact with target students.

The U.S. Department of Education (Department) sponsored the National Survey on High School 

Strategies Designed to Help At-Risk Students Graduate (HSS), which aimed to provide descriptive 

information on the prevalence and characteristics of dropout prevention strategies for at-risk students. 

The survey collected data in the 2014–15 school year from a nationally representative sample of 

2,142 public high schools and focused on 13 specific high school improvement strategies1 identified by a 

panel of external experts and senior Department officials. All findings are based on self-reported data 

from school principals. This brief on academic support classes is the twelfth in a series of briefs with key 

findings about these high school improvement strategies.

Definition of Academic Support Classes

The HSS focused on high schools and defined academic support classes2 as credit-bearing courses

designed to help high school students succeed in their required academic courses by providing 

additional instructional time and subject-specific learning strategies for students who need the extra 

assistance. Academic support classes may also provide opportunities for students to work on homework 

and supplemental assignments to practice their academic skills. An academic support class is considered 

a companion course to a required academic course such as English/Language Arts I, Algebra I, and/or

Geometry. Both courses are taken during the regular class schedule, and in some schools this 

coursework is known as a “double dose.”

 

1 The survey examined 13 strategies that are designed to improve high school outcomes for at-risk students. These strategies 

are: (1) academic support classes, (2) academic tutoring, (3) career-themed curriculum, (4) case management services, 

(5) college-level coursework, (6) competency-based advancement, (7) credit recovery, (8) early warning systems, (9) high school 

transition activities, (10) mentoring, (11) personalized learning plans, (12) social services, and (13) student support teams. See 

http://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/opepd/ppss/reports-high-school.html for the series of briefs. Researchers may request 

access to a restricted-use data file by completing an application with the Institute of Education Science’s National Center for 

Education Statistics. Information about the process is also available at this website above. 2 Nomi, T., and E. Allensworth. 2009. “Double Dose” Algebra as an Alternative Strategy to Remediation: Effects on Students’ 

Academic Outcomes. Chicago, IL: Chicago Consortium on School Research.
2

Research on Academic Support Classes

Research suggests that academic support classes may have a positive effect on student outcomes such 

as average number of credits earned, high school graduation, and college enrollment. One study used a 

regression discontinuity design to analyze the effects of academic support classes for Algebra I on 9thgraders in Chicago Public Schools (Cortes et al. 2015). Students were assigned to an academic support 

class if they scored below the national median on the mathematics portion of the 8th grade Iowa Tests of 

Basic Skills (ITBS). The study determined the effects of academic support classes by comparing two 

groups of students: (1) 9th-graders who were identified for academic support and who performed close 

to (but below) a cutoff score on the ITBS and (2) 9th-graders who were not identified for academic 

support and who performed close to (but above) a cutoff score on the ITBS. Students who took an 

academic support class were found to have improved outcomes, and in particular, students with belowaverage reading skills were found to benefit the most from taking an academic support class.

Research has also shown that academic support and enrichment as a whole, which may include both 

academic support classes and academic tutoring, have a positive effect on student outcomes. One quasiexperimental study of Talent Development High Schools (TDHS), a schoolwide reform model that 

features a “double-dose” of 9th grade Algebra I among other academic support strategies for 9th-graders, 

found small improvements in the average number of credits earned and grade promotion for students 

enrolled in a TDHS compared to students who were not enrolled in a TDHS (Kemple et al. 2005).

Survey Findings on Academic Support Classes

This brief describes the prevalence of academic support classes as a high school dropout prevention 

strategy. It does not measure the effectiveness of the strategy but instead describes the kinds of schools 

that offer academic support classes and their approaches to implementing it. This analysis included an 

examination of four school characteristics: (1) size, (2) poverty, (3) locale, and (4) graduation rate. Only 

statistically significant differences within a school characteristic (at p < .05) are discussed; nonstatistically significant differences are not reported. School characteristics were defined in the following 

ways.

School size. Size categories consisted of small schools (fewer than 500 students), medium 

schools (500–1,199 students), and large schools (1,200 or more students) based on 2013–14 

Common Core of Data (CCD) student enrollment data.

School poverty. Poverty levels were based on 2013–14 free or reduced-price lunch (FRPL) and 

total CCD school enrollment data. The categories were low-poverty schools (below 35 percent 

students with FRPL), medium-poverty schools (35–49 percent students with FRPL), and highpoverty schools (50 percent or more students with FRPL).

School locale. School locale included three mutually exclusive locales from the CCD: rural

schools, suburban/town schools, and city schools.

Graduation rate. School classification by graduation rate was based on three categories: lowgraduation-rate (67 percent or lower graduation rate), medium-graduation-rate (68 to 

89 percent graduation rate), and high-graduation-rate (90 percent or higher graduation rate).
3

Summary of Key Findings

• In 2014–15, 67 percent of high schools nationwide offered at least one academic support class

to some students; an estimated 13 percent of high school students3 participated in at least one

academic support class, according to school principals.

• Large schools were more likely than small schools to offer at least one academic support class; 

more city and suburban schools offered at least one academic support class than rural schools;

and high-graduation-rate schools were more likely than low-graduation-rate schools to offer at 

least one academic support class.

• Among high schools offering at least one academic support class, schools most commonly 

targeted students on the basis of academic performance (91 percent), followed by staff referrals 

(59 percent), attendance issues4 (31 percent), and whether students were English learners (30 

percent) among others.

• High schools delivered their academic support classes to students using more traditional 

approaches. Most commonly, an academic support class was provided to students in person (92 

percent), followed by a blended model with an in-person facilitator and online tools (19 

percent), and then online only (10 percent).

• The most common types of instructors for academic support classes were regular core course 

teachers who taught the student’s core course (63 percent), followed by regular core course

teachers who did not teach the student’s core course (46 percent) and special education 

teachers (42 percent), among others. 

• High schools with academic support classes most frequently used a support curriculum that was

aligned with the regular core course curriculum (57 percent), followed by the same curriculum

as used in the regular core course (32 percent), no standard curriculum (5 percent), and a 

support curriculum that was not aligned with the regular core course (4 percent).5

What was the prevalence of academic support classes in high schools?

In 2014–15, 67 percent of high schools nationwide offered at least one academic support class to some 

students; an estimated 13 percent of high school students6 participated in at least one academic 

support class, according to school principals. The prevalence of academic support classes varied by 

school size, school locale, and graduation rate (Exhibit 1). There were no significant differences by 

school poverty level.

Differences by school size. Large schools were more likely than small schools to offer at least 

one academic support class (85 percent versus 58 percent).

Differences by school locale. More city and suburban schools offered at least one academic 

support class than rural schools (72 percent of city and suburban schools versus 59 percent of 

rural schools).

 

3 HSS survey of high school administrators, 2015 (Question 55). 4 In the HSS, schools reported on students with attendance issues using their own definition of poor attendance. This may 

include measures of truancy and/or chronic absenteeism.

5 HSS survey of high school administrators, 2015 (Question 60).

6 Ibid. 3.
4

Differences by graduation rate. High-graduation-rate schools were more likely than lowgraduation-rate schools to offer at least one academic support class (68 percent versus 61 

percent).

Exhibit 1. Percentage of high schools that offered at least one academic support class, 2014–15

Exhibit reads: In 2014–15, 67 percent of high schools nationwide offered at least one academic support class.

* p < .05. 

NOTE: An asterisk indicates statistical significance. The asterisk is placed on one case per comparison. Differences across school 

characteristics with two categories were based on comparisons between the two groups. Differences across school 

characteristics with three categories were based on goodness-of-fit across all three categories.

Unweighted n = 1,892 to 1,925.

Source: HSS survey of high school administrators, 2015 (Question 42).

How did high schools target students for participation in academic support classes?

High schools most frequently offered an academic support class to specific students on the basis of 

academic performance (91 percent), followed by staff referrals (59 percent), attendance issues (31 

percent), and whether students were English learners (30 percent) among others. There were significant 

differences by school poverty level and school graduation rate in the students that were targeted for 

participation in academic support classes (Exhibit 2). There were no significant differences by school size 

or school locale.

Differences by school poverty. High-poverty schools were more likely than low-poverty schools

to target English learner (EL) students (36 percent versus 23 percent).
5

Differences by graduation rate. High-graduation-rate schools were less likely than lowgraduation-rate schools to target students performing below standards (85 percent versus 94

percent) and were more likely to target students in a particular grade level (28 percent versus 10 

percent) and reentry7 students (15 percent versus 7 percent).

Exhibit 2. Percentage of high schools that targeted specific student subgroups or issues for 

participation in an academic support class, 2014–15

Poverty Graduation rate

Student subgroups targeted 

All schools 

offering

academic 

support classes

High 

poverty

Low 

poverty

Low grad 

rate

High grad 

rate

Students performing below 

standards or grade level

91% 91% 93% 94%* 85%

Recommended by school 

staff

59% 58% 59% 61% 55%

Students with attendance 

issues

31% 33% 29% 27% 34%

English learners 30% 36%* 23% 25% 31%

Students with discipline or 

behavioral issues

23% 25% 19% 18% 26%

Students in a particular grade 

level, regardless of 

performance

16% 21% 11% 10%* 28%

Reentry students 11% 13% 7% 7%* 15%

Exhibit reads: Among high schools that offered at least one academic support class in 2014–15, 91 percent targeted students 

performing below standards or grade level.

* p < .05.

NOTE: An asterisk indicates statistical significance. The asterisk is placed on one case per comparison. Differences across school 

characteristics with two categories were based on comparisons between the two groups..

Unweighted n = 859.

Source: HSS survey of high school administrators, 2015 (Question 5). 

How did high schools deliver academic support classes to students?

High schools delivered their academic support classes to students using more traditional approaches. 

Most commonly, an academic support class was provided to students in person (92 percent), followed 

by a blended model with an in-person facilitator and online tools (19 percent), and then online only (10 

percent). There were significant differences in how schools delivered academic support classes by school 

size, school poverty level, school locale, and graduation rate (Exhibit 3). 

Differences by school size. Large schools were more likely than small schools to offer at least 

one academic support class in person (96 percent versus 88 percent). Small schools were more 

likely to offer at least one academic support class using a blended model with an in-person 

facilitator and online tools (25 percent versus 12 percent) and online only (13 percent versus 7 

percent).

 

7 Reentry students are those who dropped out of high school and then re-enrolled, as defined by the HSS.
6

Differences by school poverty. High-poverty schools were more likely than low-poverty schools 

to offer at least one academic support class using a blended model with an in-person facilitator 

and online tools (22 percent versus 13 percent). 

Differences by school locale. More city schools offered at least one academic support class using 

a blended model with an in-person facilitator and online tools than rural or suburban schools 

(23 percent of city schools versus 20 percent of rural schools and 16 percent of suburban

schools).

Differences by graduation rate. Low-graduation-rate schools were more likely than highgraduation-rate schools to offer at least one academic support class in person (93 percent

versus 82 percent). High-graduation-rate schools were more likely than low-graduation-rate 

schools to offer at least one academic support class using a blended model with an in-person 

facilitator and online tools (30 percent versus 16 percent) or online only (19 percent versus 9 

percent).

Exhibit 3. Percentage of high schools that offered at least one academic support class and method of

delivery by school characteristics, 2014–15

Size Poverty Locale

Graduation 

rate

Method of 

delivery

All 

schools 

offering 

academic

support 

classes Large Small

High 

poverty

Low 

poverty City Suburban Rural

Low 

grad

rate

High 

grad 

rate

In person 92% 96%* 88% 91% 93% 91% 94% 90% 93%* 82%

Blended 

model 19% 12%* 25% 22%* 13% 23%* 16% 20% 16%* 30%

Online 10% 7%* 13% 13% 9% 12% 9% 10% 9%* 19%

Exhibit reads: Among high schools that offered at least one academic support class in 2014–15, 92 percent offered 

an academic support class in person.

* p < .05.

NOTE: An asterisk indicates statistical significance. The asterisk is placed on one case per comparison. Differences across school 

characteristics with two categories were based on comparisons between the two groups. Differences across school 

characteristics with three categories were based on goodness-of-fit across all three categories.

Unweighted n = 1,294 to 1,925.

Source: HSS survey of high school administrators, 2015 (Question 61). 

Who provided instruction in academic support classes?

High schools can assign different instructors to teach academic support classes. The most common types 

of instructors for academic support classes were regular core course teachers who taught the student’s 

core course (63 percent), followed by regular core course teachers who did not teach the student’s core 

course (46 percent), special education teachers (42 percent), teachers who instructed only academic 

support classes (17 percent), and tutors (7 percent). There were significant differences in who delivered 

instruction in academic support classes by school size, school poverty level, and graduation rate (Exhibit 

4). There were no significant differences by school locale.
7

Differences by school size. Large schools were more likely than small schools to have academic 

support classes taught by regular core course teachers who did not teach the student’s core 

course (54 percent versus 39 percent), special education teachers (46 percent versus 39 

percent), or teachers who instructed only academic support classes (22 percent versus 12 

percent). Small schools were more likely than large schools to have academic support classes 

taught by regular core course teachers who also taught the student’s core course (69 percent

versus 56 percent) or tutors (9 percent versus 5 percent).

Differences by school poverty. High-poverty schools were more likely than low-poverty schools 

to have academic support classes taught by special education teachers (53 percent versus 37 

percent) and less likely to have academic support classes taught by regular core teachers who 

also taught the student’s core course (68 percent versus 54 percent).

Differences by graduation rate. Low-graduation-rate schools were more likely than highgraduation-rate schools to have academic support classes taught by special education teachers

(45 percent versus 33 percent) and regular core course teachers who did not teach the student’s 

core course (49 percent versus 39 percent). 

Exhibit 4. Percentage of high schools that reported the type of instructor providing academic support 

classes by selected school characteristics, 2014–15

Size Poverty Graduation rate

Type of instructor

All 

schools 

offering

academic

support 

classes Large Small

High 

poverty

Low 

poverty

Low 

grad 

rate

High 

grad 

rate

Regular core course teacher who 

taught student’s core course 63% 56%* 69% 54%* 68% 58% 66%

Regular core course teacher who 

did not teach student’s core 

course

46% 54%* 39% 51% 44% 49%* 39%

A special education teacher 42% 46%* 39% 53%* 37% 45%* 33%

A teacher who instructed only 

academic support classes 17% 22%* 12% 20% 16% 16% 17%

A tutor 7% 5%* 9% 7% 8% 8% 10%

Other 1% 2% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1%

Exhibit reads: Among high schools that had academic support classes in 2014–15, 63 percent used the student’s regular core 

course teacher to teach the classes.

* p < .05.

NOTE: An asterisk indicates statistical significance. The asterisk is placed on one case per comparison. Differences across school 

characteristics with two categories were based on comparisons between the two groups. 

Unweighted n = 1,100.

Source: HSS survey of high school administrators, 2015 (Question 59). 
8

What curriculum did schools use in their academic support classes? 

High schools with academic support classes most frequently used a support curriculum that was aligned

with the regular core course curriculum (57 percent), followed by the same curriculum as used in the 

regular core course (32 percent), no standard curriculum (5 percent), and a support curriculum that was 

not aligned with the regular core course (4 percent).8 There were significant differences in the 

curriculum used by school size and school locale. There were no significant differences by school poverty 

level or graduation rate. 

Differences by school size. Small schools were more likely than large schools to use the same 

curriculum as used in the regular core course (37 percent versus 28 percent).

Differences by school locale. More city schools used the same curriculum as used in the regular 

core course than rural or suburban schools (27 percent of city schools versus 36 percent of rural 

schools and 33 percent of suburban schools).

Were academic support classes typically provided to students in small or large groups? 

High schools most frequently provided academic support classes to students in groups of six to 10 

students (25 percent) and 11 to 15 students on average (26 percent), followed by groups of 16 to 20 

students (19 percent). The average class size of academic support classes varied by school size, school 

poverty level, and school locale for the smallest average class size of one to five students (Exhibit 5). 

There were no significant differences by graduation rate.

Differences by school size. Small schools were more likely than large schools to provide

academic support classes in groups of one to five students (17 percent versus 3 percent).

Differences by school poverty. Low-poverty schools were more likely than high-poverty schools 

to provide academic support classes in groups of one and five students (12 percent versus 9 

percent).

Differences by school locale. More rural schools provided academic support classes in groups of

one and five students than city or suburban schools (15 percent of rural schools versus 12 

percent of city schools and 7 percent of suburban schools).

 

8 Ibid. 5.
9

Exhibit 5. Percentage of high schools that provided academic support classes and the average class 

size by school characteristics, 2014–15

Size Poverty Locale

Average class 

size

All schools 

offering 

academic

support 

classes Large Small

High 

poverty

Low 

poverty City Suburban Rural

1 to 5 

students 11% 3%* 17% 9%* 12% 12%* 7% 15%

6 to 10 

students 25% 10% 32% 22% 30% 17% 23% 33%

11 to 15 

students 26% 25% 24% 24% 27% 21% 29% 26%

16 to 20 

students 19% 25% 16% 21% 15% 21% 20% 16%

21 to 25 

students 13% 25% 8% 16% 13% 17% 14% 9%

26 to 30 

students 5% 9% 2% 6% 1% 9% 5% 1%

More than 30 

students 2% 4% 1% 2% 1% 4% 3% 1%

Exhibit reads: Among high schools that had academic support classes in 2014–15, 11 percent had 1 to 

5 students per class.

* p < .05.

NOTE: An asterisk indicates statistical significance. The asterisk is placed on one case per comparison. Differences across school 

characteristics with two categories were based on comparisons between the two groups. Differences across school 

characteristics with three categories were based on goodness-of-fit across all three categories.

Unweighted n = 1,294 to 1,925.

Source: HSS survey of high school administrators, 2015 (Question 57). 

When were academic support classes offered?

High schools offered academic support classes to students at various times of the day or school year. 

Most commonly, high schools provided academic support classes to students on the same day as the 

regular core course, but not right before or after that course (51 percent), followed by the same day as 

the regular core course, right before or after that class (36 percent), a different day or different week 

than the regular core course (10 percent), and in a different semester than the regular core course (3 

percent). There were significant differences in when academic support classes were offered by school 

size and graduation rate (Exhibit 6). There were no significant differences by school poverty level or 

school locale.

Differences by school size. Large schools were more likely than small schools to offer academic 

support classes on a different day than the regular core course (12 percent versus 8 percent).

Differences by graduation rate. Low-graduation-rate schools were more likely than highgraduation-rate schools to offer academic support classes on the same day, right before or after 

the regular core course (48 percent versus 31 percent). 
10

Exhibit 6. Percentage of high schools that provided academic support classes and when the classes 

were offered by selected school characteristics, 2014–15

Size Graduation rate

When academic support 

classes were offered

All schools 

offering academic 

support classes Large Small

Low grad 

rate

High grad 

rate

Same day, but not right 

before or after the

regular core course

51% 47% 54% 40% 59%

Same day, right before or 

after the regular core 

course

36% 37% 35% 48%* 31%

A different day than the 

regular core course 10% 12%* 8% 8% 9%

In a different semester 3% 4% 3% 4% 2%

Exhibit reads: Among high schools that had academic support classes in 2014–15, 51 percent held classes on the same day, but 

not right before or after the regular core course.

* p < .05.

NOTE: An asterisk indicates statistical significance. The asterisk is placed on one case per comparison. Differences across school 

characteristics with two categories were based on comparisons between the two groups. Differences across school 

characteristics with three categories were based on goodness-of-fit across all three categories.

Unweighted n = 1,294 to 1,925.

Source: HSS survey of high school administrators, 2015 (Question 58). 

Methodology

The National Survey on High School Strategies Designed to Help At-Risk Students Graduate was a 

survey of 13 high school strategies designed to improve graduation rates among students at risk of 

dropping out and was administered in the 2014–15 school year. The 13 strategies are: (1) academic 

support classes, (2) academic tutoring, (3) career-themed curriculum, (4) case management, (5) collegelevel coursework, (6) competency-based advancement, (7) credit recovery, (8) early warning systems, 

(9) high school transition activities, (10) mentoring, (11) personalized learning plans, (12) social services, 

and (13) student support teams.

The purpose of the survey was to inform education practitioners and policymakers about the

prevalence, characteristics, and students served by these strategies in U.S. public high schools. The

descriptive study did not measure the effectiveness of particular strategies but instead examined

implementation factors in high schools across the country. The study team identified the 13 strategies

and designed survey items for each strategy with input from a panel of external experts in the field and

senior Department officials. All findings are based on self-reported data from school principals.

The researchers selected a nationally representative sample of high schools9 using a random sampling 

approach, stratifying high schools based on graduation rate (from EDFacts)

10 and locale code (from NCES 

 

9 All U.S. public high schools providing instruction to 12th grade students in the fall of 2010 were included unless (1) the lowest 

offered grade was 11th grade or higher, (2) there were fewer than five students in grades 9 through 12, (3) the percentage of

students enrolled in grades 9 through 12 was under 20 percent of the total school enrollment and the total number of students

in grades 9 through 12 was fewer than 20, or (4) the school name contained one of nine keywords indicating juvenile detention

center or hospital. Of the 103,813 total schools listed in the 2010–11 CCD, 22,447 high schools met the criteria to be included in 

the sampling frame.
11

2013–14 Common Core of Data). The survey collected data from high school principals (or designees

knowledgeable about programs and strategies) at sampled schools. The survey response rate was 

90 percent. The survey responses, after cleaning and processing, were analyzed in SAS and Stata using 

descriptive techniques that apply the appropriate statistical population weights to account for 

stratification by graduation rate and locale. 

Results reported in this brief reflect the full survey sample unless otherwise noted and are 

representative of U.S. public high schools nationwide. References in the text to differences between 

subgroups based on sample data refer only to differences that are statistically significant using a 

significance level of 0.05.

 

10 There were 3,302 schools without graduation rate information in the 2010–11 EDFacts public use data set. The researchers 

used an imputation approach to assign these schools to either the high- or low-graduation-rate stratum. The imputation 

process began by examining the distribution of the high/low graduation rate classification for 19,145 schools by sampling 

locale. The percentage of schools classified as high graduation rate was calculated separately for each locale sampling stratum; 

68.4 percent of rural schools were classified as high graduation rate, 63.0 percent of suburban schools were classified as high

graduation rate, and 41.0 percent of city schools were classified as high graduation rate. The research team randomly assigned 

each of the 3,302 schools with unknown graduation rates to the high graduation rate stratum with probability 68.4 if the school 

was classified as rural, with probability 63.0 if the school was classified as suburban, and with probability 41.0 if the school was 

classified as urban. The sample size was adjusted upwards to account for potential misclassification due to this method. In

analysis, the researchers used the restricted-use 2013–14 EDFacts data and graduation rates published on school and district 

websites to fill in this missing data.
12

References

Cortes, K., J. Goodman, and T. Nomi. 2015. “Intensive Math Instruction and Educational Attainment: 

Long-Run Impacts of Double-Dose Algebra.” Journal of Human Resources 50 (1): 108-158.

Dynarski, M., L. Clarke, B. Cobb, J. Finn, R. Rumberger, and J. Smink. 2008. Dropout Prevention: A 

Practice Guide (NCEE 2008-4025). Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of 

Education Sciences, National Center for Education Evaluation and Regional Assistance.

Kemple, J., C. Herlihy, and T. Smith. 2005. Making Progress Toward Graduation: Evidence from the 

Talent Development High School Model. New York, NY: MDRC.

Nomi, T., and E. Allensworth. 2009. “Double Dose” Algebra as an Alternative Strategy to Remediation: 

Effects on Students’ Academic Outcomes. Chicago, IL: Chicago Consortium on School Research.

U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics. 

2015. “Table 219.57. Population of 15- to 24-Year Olds Enrolled in Grades 10 through 12, Number 

Who Dropped Out (Event Dropouts), Percentage Who Dropped Out (Event Dropout Rate), and 

Percentage Distribution, by Selected Characteristics: 2014.” 

https://nces.ed.gov/programs/digest/d15/tables/dt15_219.57.asp

U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics. 

2017. “Table 1. Public High School 4-Year Adjusted Cohort Graduation Rate (ACGR).” 

https://nces.ed.gov/ccd/tables/ACGR_RE_and_characteristics_2015-16.asp
13

Appendix: Academic Support Classes (Survey Excerpt)

National Survey on High School Strategies Designed to Help At-Risk Students Graduate

53. In the 2014-15 school year, does your school offer academic support classes? 

(Please select only one) 

{Only allow one selection} Yes No

 

If user responds “Yes” to Q53, ask Q54 through Q61. Otherwise, skip to Q62. 

54. How are academic support classes allocated to students? 

(Please select only one) 

{Only allow one selection}

Offered of all students (school-wide) 

Offered to a subset of students 

Assigned to all students (school-wide) 

Assigned to a subset of students 

If user responds “Subset of students” to Q54, ask Q55 & Q56. Otherwise, skip to Q57. 

55. On average, approximately what percentage of high 

school students in your school is participating in 

academic support classes in the 2014-15 school year?

{Slide bar for 0% to 100%}

This section asks about Academic Support Classes. For the purposes of this survey academic support 

classes are high school credit-bearing classes designed to support students in their required core 

academic classes, such as algebra, by providing additional instructional time (e.g., double-dose 

instruction). These academic support classes are not academic tutoring but are part of a students’ 

regular schedule of classes.
14

56. Are any of the following subsets of students targeted for receiving 

academic support classes? 

(Check all that apply)

Students with attendance issues (e.g., truancy) 

Students with discipline or behavioral issues 

Students performing below standards or grade level 

Students in a particular grade level, regardless of performance 

Students recommended by high school staff (e.g., counselor or teacher) 

Reentry students 

English Language Learners 

Other

(Please Specify________________)



57. On average, approximately how many students per teacher are there in each 

academic support class in your school? 

(Please select only one) 

{Only allow one selection}

1 to 5 students 

6 to 10 students 

11 to 15 students 

16 to 20 students 

21 to 25 students 

26 to 30 students 

More than 30 students 

58. When are the academic support classes in your school typically 

taught? 

(Please select only one) 

{Only allow one selection}

Same day, right before or after the regular core course 

Same day, but not right before or after the regular core course 

A different day in the same week 

A different week 

In a different semester 
15

59. Who typically teaches the academic support classes in your school? 

(Check all that apply)

The student’s regular core course teacher (e.g., English, math, science) 

Another regular core course teacher 

A special education classroom or pull-out teacher (also teaches students 

outside of support classes) 

A teacher who only teaches support courses (does not have any other 

teaching duties) 

A tutor (unlicensed educator) 

Other

(Please specify_________________)



60. What curriculum is used in academic support classes in your school? 

(Please select only one) 

{Only allow one selection}

The same curriculum used in the regular core course 

A support curriculum or materials that are aligned with the regular core 

course



A support curriculum or materials that are not aligned with the regular 

core course



There is no curriculum 

Other

(Please specify_________________)



61. How are academic support classes typically delivered? 

(Check all that apply)

Online 

In person 

Blended learning (e.g., online with an in-person facilitator) 

The full survey is available at: http://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/opepd/ppss/reports-highschool.html