U.S. Department of Education

NCES 2006–604

User’s Guide to 

Computing High School 

Graduation Rates

Volume 1

Technical report: Review of 

Current and Proposed Graduation 

Indicators

U.S. Department of Education

NCES 2006–604

User’s Guide to 

Computing High School 

Graduation Rates

Volume 1

Technical report: Review of 

Current and Proposed Graduation

Indicators

August 2006

Marilyn M. Seastrom

Chris Chapman

National Center for Education Statistics

Institute of Education Sciences 

Robert Stillwell

Daniel McGrath

Pia Peltola

Rachel Dinkes

Zeyu Xu 

Education Statistics Services Institute
U.S. Department of Education

Margaret Spellings 

Secretary

Institute of Education Sciences

Grover J. Whitehurst

Director

National Center for Education Statistics

Mark Schneider

Commissioner

The National Center for Education Statistics (NCES) is the primary federal entity for collecting, analyzing, 

and reporting data related to education in the United States and other nations. It fulfills a congressional 

mandate to collect, collate, analyze, and report full and complete statistics on the condition of 

education in the United States; conduct and publish reports and specialized analyses of the meaning 

and significance of such statistics; assist state and local education agencies in improving their statistical 

systems; and review and report on education activities in foreign countries.

NCES activities are designed to address high-priority education data needs; provide consistent, reliable, 

complete, and accurate indicators of education status and trends; and report timely, useful, and highquality data to the U.S. Department of Education, the Congress, the states, other education policymakers, 

practitioners, data users, and the general public. Unless specifically noted, all information contained 

herein is in the public domain.

We strive to make our products available in a variety of formats and in language that is appropriate 

to a variety of audiences. You, as our customer, are the best judge of our success in communicating 

information effectively. If you have any comments or suggestions about this or any other NCES product or 

report, we would like to hear from you. Please direct your comments to

National Center for Education Statistics

Institute of Education Sciences

U.S. Department of Education

1990 K Street NW

Washington, DC 20006-5651

August 2006

The NCES World Wide Web Home Page is http://nces.ed.gov.

The NCES World Wide Web Electronic Catalog is http://nces.ed.gov/pubsearch.

Suggested Citation

Seastrom, M., Chapman, C., Stillwell, R., McGrath, D., Peltola, P., Dinkes, R., and Xu, Z. (2006). User’s Guide 

to Computing High School Graduation Rates, Volume 1: Review of Current and Proposed Graduation 

Indicators (NCES 2006-604). U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics. 

Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.

For ordering information on this report, write to

U.S. Department of Education

D Pubs

P.O. Box 1398

Jessup, MD 20794-1398

or call toll free 1-877-4ED-Pubs or order online at http://www.edpubs.org. 

Content Contact

Marilyn Seastrom

(202) 502-7303

Marilyn.Seastrom@ed.gov
 

 

iii 

Executive Summary 

The increased focus on accountability in education in recent years has resulted in a growing 

interest in the accurate measurement of an on-time high school graduation rate. In fact, the No 

Child Left Behind Act of 2001 included an on-time graduation rate as an accountabilityreporting requirement. The accurate reporting of such a rate requires student record data on 

student progression from grade to grade, data on graduation status, and data on students who 

transfer in and out of a school, district, or state during the high school years, or in other words 

cohort data (National Institute of Statistical Sciences (NISS) 2004 Task Force, NCES 2005-

1105). At the time the on-time graduation rate reporting requirement was enacted, few states 

had data collection systems adequate to support the calculation of an accurate on-time 

graduation rate. 

Absent the required cohort data, existing measures of high school completion have been 

considered and a number of new proxy graduation indicators have been proposed. The existing 

high school completion measures rely on cross-sectional data, but do not focus uniquely on ontime graduation and thus are not adequate for a measure of on-time graduation. Each of the 

newly proposed proxy measures can be calculated using existing cross-sectional data, but each 

requires a set of assumptions to bridge the gap from cross-sectional data to the desired cohort 

rate. Recognizing the need for an interim measure to use while individual states develop 

student record systems, the leadership in the Department of Education asked NCES to evaluate 

the array of current and proposed graduation indicators. This two-volume report describes that 

effort. 

The first volume of this report examines the existing measures of high school completion and 

the newly proposed proxy measures. This includes a description of the computational 

formulas, the data required for each indicator, the assumptions underlying each formula, the 

strengths and weaknesses of each indicator relative to a true cohort on-time graduation rate, 

and a consideration of the conditions under which each indicator does or does not work. 

The second volume of this report provides documentation of the technical work that the 

Department leadership used to select an interim graduation rate. The analysis in volume 2 

draws upon the student record data from two states to compute the true cohort on-time 

graduation rate for each of those states, to compute the proxy graduation measures for each of 

these states, and to compare the performance of each proxy indicator to that of the true cohort 

rate. State and school district level rates were computed for three graduating classes in State 1 

and four graduating classes in State 2. A combination of descriptive univariate statistics and 

regression analyses were employed. Although each of the four proxy measures of on-time 

graduation rates— the Freshman Graduation Rate (FGR) indicator, the Averaged Freshman 

Graduation Rate (AFGR) indicator, the Green Graduation Indicator (GGI), and the Swanson 

Cumulative Promotion Indicator (SCPI), perform well relative to the true cohort rate (EACGI) 

in one or more of the analyses, AFGR is the only measure that is consistently among the best 

performing indicators in each analysis. 
 

 

iv

Building on the performance of the Averaged Freshman Graduation Rate in the student 

record data comparisons from States 1 and 2, this rate was taken as the standard for 

comparison and the performance of this rate was compared to that of the other three 

proxy graduation rate measures using cross-sectional data for the 50 states and the 

District of Columbia for rates computed at the national and state levels. First, it was 

shown that in States 1 and 2 each of the four proxy measures computed using crosssectional data correlate strongly with the same proxy measures computed using student 

record data and that the four proxy measures computed using cross-sectional data show 

the same patterns of correlation with the true cohort on-time graduation rate that were 

observed with the proxy measures computed using the student record data. Next, the 

analyses that compared the performance of each proxy graduation measure to the true 

cohort-on-time graduation rates in States 1 and 2 were repeated at the national and state 

levels comparing the performance of the other three proxy graduation rate measures to 

that of the Averaged Freshman Graduation Rate. The relative performance of each of the 

proxy measures repeated the patterns observed in the two states, with the performance of 

the Freshman Graduation Rate most closely approximating that of the Averaged 

Freshman Graduation Rate, and with weaker associations with the Greene Graduation 

Indicator and then with the Swanson Cumulative Promotion Indicator. 
 

 

v

Preface 

The fact that graduation rates are an important indicator of students’ performance in 

American schools was highlighted by the inclusion of an on-time high school graduation 

rate in the monitoring requirements included in the 2001 No Child Left Behind Act. 

Unlike the assessment measures called out in the law, the calculation of an on-time 

graduation rate requires data that do not exist in most states. An on-time high school 

graduation rate requires data on student progression from grade to grade, data on 

graduation status, and data on students who transfer in and out of a school, district, or 

state during the four year period—in other words a student record system. 

Absent the data required to compute an accurate on-time cohort high school graduation 

rate, a number of researchers have proposed different formulations that rely on existing 

data to estimate proxy indicators of high school graduation rates. Each measure is unique 

with it’s own positive and negative attributes. In an attempt to sort out the various 

measures, the National Center for Education Statistics, on behalf of the Department of 

Education, asked the National Institute of Statistical Sciences (NISS) to convene a 2004 

Task Force of experts to examine the array of measures and provide a recommendation 

for the calculation of graduation rates. The NISS Task Force concluded that the only way 

to accurately measure high school graduation rates in a mobile society like the United 

States is through the development and use of student record systems. They provided 

detailed specifications for the true cohort rate that will yield an accurate on-time 

graduation rate, and recommended that NCES work with the states to move the 

implementation forward (NCES 2005-105). 

At that time, seven states reported that they had statewide student record systems in 

place, and a number of other states were in the planning and early developmental stages. 

Recognizing that even if all 50 states were to start collecting the required data elements 

for the cohort on-time graduation rate in the 2005-06 school year, the country would still 

be 4 years away from having one consistent graduation rate measure across the states, 

leadership in the Department of Education asked NCES to further evaluate the array of 

current and proposed graduation indicators. This report describes that effort. 

This report consists of two volumes, the first takes an in-depth look at the various 

graduation indicators, with a description of the computational formulas, the data required 

for each indicator, the assumptions underlying each formula, the strengths and 

weaknesses of each indicator, and a consideration of the conditions under which each 

indicator does or does not work. In addition to the discussion in the body of the text, 

there is a summary description of each indicator and an accompanying spreadsheet that 

can be used to compute each indicator in appendix A. 

The second volume of this report is more technical in nature. The analysis presented in 

this volume of the report provided the technical basis that Department policy makers used 

to identify an interim graduation indicator. Thus, using the information from volume 1 as 
 

 

vi

a backdrop, volume 2 uses the best available national and state data to provide estimates 

of the various indicators. While this provides some basis for drawing comparisons across 

the indicators, the comparative analysis relies most heavily on student record data from 

two individual states. The state data represent the universe of students enrolled in public 

schools in each state over a sufficient number of years to compute the true cohort rate. 

The NISS panel recommended the true cohort rate as the only rate that will yield an 

accurate on-time graduation rate. The true cohort rate is thus used as the “gold standard” 

for a comparison of the performance of the various graduation indicators for the two 

individual states. The analysis of the state student record data then served as a basis for a 

related analysis of proxy graduation indicators computed for all 50 states and the District 

of Columbia at the national and state levels using NCES Common Core of Data. 
vii

Acknowledgments 

The authors wish to acknowledge the contribution of many individuals to the 

development of this report. Several staff members at NCES provided significant 

substantive contributions to the content of the report including Lee Hoffman, Jeff 

Owings, and Val Plisko. Staff at the Education Statistics Services Institute (ESSI) helped 

test and verify estimates in the report, and helped with the final report layout. 

Contributors from ESSI included Kevin Bromer, Aparna Sundaram, Janine Emerson, and 

Devin Carlson. We would also like to thank the careful review provided by Anne 

Ricciuti at the Institute of Education Sciences along with the comments provided by 

several anonymous reviewers. Their comments were thought provoking and greatly 

improved the report. Finally, we would like to thank Fiona Edler at Synergy Systems for 

her careful review of the release copy of the report. 
viii

Contents 

 Page 

 

Executive Summary.......................................................................................................... iii

Preface............................................................................................................................... v 

Acknowledgements........................................................................................................... vii

List of Tables .................................................................................................................... ix 

List of Figures................................................................................................................... x 

 

 

Volume 1. 

Review of Current and Proposed Graduation Indicators ...................................... 1 

Introduction to High School Graduation Rates..................................................... 1 

Background on this User’s Guide......................................................................... 2 

Existing High School Graduation Rates ............................................................... 4 

Current Population Survey High School Completion Indicator (CPS HSCI) 4 

NCES Digest Graduation Indicator (DGI)...................................................... 6 

Freshman Graduation Rate (FGR).................................................................. 7 

Averaged Freshman Graduation Rate (AFGR)............................................... 8 

CCD Graduation Leaver Indicator (GLI) ....................................................... 11 

Swanson’s Cumulative Promotion Indicator (SCPI) ...................................... 12 

Greene’s Graduation Indicator (GGI)............................................................. 14 

In-Transfer Adjusted Graduation Indicator (IAGI) ........................................ 17 

Cohort Graduation Indicator (CGI) ................................................................ 18 

Proposed NISS High School Graduation Rate...................................................... 19 

Exclusion-Adjusted Cohort Graduation Indicator (EACGI) .......................... 20 

Discussion and Summary...................................................................................... 22 

References...................................................................................................................... 25 

Appendix A: Description of Common Core of Data, Private School 

 Universe Survey, and Current Population Survey....................................... A-1 

Appendix B: Formulas and Details of Each Indicator....................................................... B-1 

 
ix

List of Tables 

Table Page 

1. Components of numerator and denominator used for calculation of 

 CPS HSCI: 1999-2000 ......................................................................................... 5 

2. Components of numerator and denominator used for calculation of 

 DGI: 1999-2000 ................................................................................................... 6 

3. Components of numerator and denominator used for calculation of 

 FGR: 2001-02....................................................................................................... 7 

4. Components of numerator and denominator used for calculation of 

 AFGR: 2001-02.................................................................................................... 9 

5. Components of numerator and denominator used for calculation of 

 CCD GLI: 2001-02............................................................................................... 12 

6. Components of numerator and denominator used for calculation of 

 SCPI: 2001-02 ...................................................................................................... 13

7. Components of numerator and denominator used for calculation of 

 GGI: 2001-02 ....................................................................................................... 15

8. Components of numerator and denominator used for calculation of 

 IAGI: 2001-02 ...................................................................................................... 18 

9. Components of numerator and denominator used for calculation of 

 CGI: 2001-02........................................................................................................ 19 

10. Components of numerator and denominator used for calculation of 

 EACGI: 2001-02.................................................................................................. 21 

11. Summary of components of specific graduation indicators ................................. 23 

12. Summary of limitations of specific graduation indicators ................................... 24 
x

List of Figures 

Figure Page 

B-1. Current Population Survey High School Completion Indicator (CPS HSCI)...... B-1 

B-2. NCES Digest Graduation Indicator (DGI) ........................................................... B-2 

B-3. Freshman Graduation Rate, All Freshmen (FGR) ............................................... B-3 

B-4. Averaged Freshman Graduation Rate, First-Time Freshmen (AFGR) ................ B-4 

 

B-5. CCD Graduation Leaver Indicator (GLI)............................................................. B-5 

B-6. Swanson's Cumulative Promotion Indicator (SCPI) ............................................ B-6 

B-7. Greene's Graduation Indicator (GGI)................................................................... B-7 

B-8. In-transfer Adjusted Graduation Indicator (IAGI) ............................................... B-9 

B-9. Cohort Graduation Indicator (CGI)...................................................................... B-10 

B-10. Exclusion-Adjusted Cohort Graduation Indicator (EACGI)................................ B-11 

 
1 

Volume 1 

Review of Current and Proposed Graduation Indicators

The purpose of this volume is to provide a guide that describes the various graduation 

rate measures that have been used or proposed over the last several years. The guide 

includes descriptions of the purpose, data requirements, computational procedures, and 

the strengths and weaknesses of each measure. This information is provided with the goal 

of providing schools, school districts, and schools the background needed to understand 

the similarities and differences between the various measures that are in use or proposed 

for use. Included in this analysis are several measures that are typically reported at the 

national level; these measures are included primarily to provide the context of the range 

of graduation measures under consideration in the United States. It is hoped that this 

information will help staff and administrators at the school, district, state and federal 

levels better understand the measurement of high school graduation rates, and that this 

information may help inform decisions on the selection and use of rates at each level of 

reporting. 

Introduction to High School Graduation Rates 

The Hawkins-Stafford Elementary and Secondary School Improvement Amendments of 

1988 reauthorizing the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (P.L. 100-297) required 

the National Center for Education Statistics (NCES) to collect and publish data annually 

on dropout and retention rates. Although the emphasis of the 1988 congressional mandate 

was on the measurement and monitoring of high school dropout rates, each of the annual 

NCES dropout reports produced since 1989 has included available data on high school 

completion and high school graduation rates. 

Most recently, the No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB) of 2001(P.L. 107-110) 

reauthorized the Elementary and Secondary Education Act. Included in that 

reauthorization is a requirement for states and their schools to report an on-time 

graduation rate as one component of annual yearly progress. Specifically, this graduation 

rate is defined in the law as 

“...the percentage of students who graduate from secondary school with a regular 

diploma in the standard number of years ...”(P.L. 107-110, Section 1111(b) (2) 

(C) (vi)). 

Furthermore, states are required to 

“...ensure that the indicators described in those provisions are valid and reliable, 

and are consistent with relevant, nationally recognized professional and technical 

standards, if any; ...” (P.L. 107-110, Section 1111(b) (2) (D) (i)). 

At the time NCLB was enacted, NCES was routinely publishing three graduation 

measures: a population-based rate that measures the percentage of people in a specified 

population who have completed high school, a school-based rate that measures the 
2 

percentage of students who graduate in a specific year, and a hybrid of the two that is the 

ratio of high school graduates to the population age 17 in a specific year. The first of 

these three measures is computed using population-based data from the Current 

Population Survey (CPS), the second is computed using school-based data for public 

schools from the NCES annual data collection known as the Common Core of Data 

(CCD), and the third is computed using both school-based data from the CCD and its 

private school counterpart the Private School survey (PSS) and population-based data 

from CPS (appendix A describes these three data collections). Although the NCLB Act 

includes guidance to draw upon graduation rate measures used in the CCD, the data 

elements necessary to calculate an on-time graduation rate are not currently collected as 

part of the CCD. 

Differences among these three measures that NCES publishes and differences between 

each of these NCES rates and the rate defined in the NCLB Act have given rise to 

criticism of the NCES rates and to much debate in the research literature over the correct 

rate to use to meet the demands of the NCLB Act (Barton 2005, Greene 2002, Hall 2005, 

Swanson 2003, 2004, Wald and Losen, 2005)1

. 

Monitoring the reporting of annual yearly progress measures from individual states and 

their schools is the responsibility of the Office of Elementary and Secondary Education 

within the U.S. Department of Education. However, as the statistical agency within the 

U.S. Department of Education, NCES has a responsibility to contribute to the 

development of a graduation rate that meets the definition specified in the NCLB Act. To 

this end, NCES commissioned the National Institute of Statistical Sciences (NISS) to 

convene a task force of experts to address conceptual, data, and implementation issues 

associated with the calculation of high school graduation and completion rates2

. 

Background on this User’s Guide 

The NISS Task Force’s review of existing and proposed measures of graduation and 

completion rates identified limitations in each existing measure and led to a 

recommendation for a new on-time high school graduation rate that is based on data from 

a student-level tracking system (Task Force on Graduation, Completion, and Dropout 

Indicators 2004). In particular, the recommended rate, which is identified as an 

Exclusion-Adjusted Cohort Graduation Indicator (EACGI), is tied to a group of students 

defined by their year of entry into the 9th grade (i.e., a 9th-grade cohort) and represents the 

 

1

 In December 2005, while this report was undergoing peer review and revision, Warren entered this debate 

with his evaluation of some of the existing high school graduation indicators and the introduction of 

another proxy indicator. Three summary points are relevant to this report. First, his evaluation was based 

on simulations that were intended to show potential shortcomings, but these simulations vary one parameter 

in each formula at a time, holding all else constant. In reality the proxy graduation indicators take 

advantage of counterbalancing changes in the parameters. Second, Warren’s measure uses total population 

change combined with public school data—ignoring migration between private and public schools. Third, 

and most important to finding a useful interim measure for use in monitoring annual yearly progress is the 

fact that Warren’s measure cannot be computed below the state level. 

2

 The National Institute of Statistical Sciences, a highly respected independent research institute, was 

established in 1990 as the result of a competition conducted by the national statistics societies. 
3 

cumulative experience of those students over the 4 intervening years to their expected 

graduation. 

At the state level, the proposed NISS on-time graduation indicator starts with the group 

of students in a state who enter the 9th grade for the first time in one school year, and then 

uses data on students who transfer in and out of schools in that state and on students who 

otherwise leave schools in that state over the next 4 years to calculate the percent of 

students in the initial 9th-grade group who graduate on time. The same rate can be 

computed for the nation, for states, for school districts, and for individual schools. 

While recognizing that the data required to calculate their proposed on-time graduation 

rate do not currently exist, the task force recommended that NCES direct its efforts and 

resources towards the development and implementation of the student level data required 

to calculate the proposed rate, rather than to the national implementation of new 

alternative measures. Thus, the task force recommended continuing the current NCES 

graduation rate while working toward the goals identified by the task force. However, in 

recognition of the immediate need for the best possible measures of on-time graduation 

rates, NCES is issuing this guide to help provide information that will help states, 

districts, and schools make the decisions needed to produce interim high school 

graduation indicators that use currently available data. 

The cross-sectional data currently available through CCD are aggregate summaries of the 

experiences of students. These data can be used to compute school-based graduation 

indicators that can be compared across states. These aggregates are based on annual 

snapshots of the number of students and dropouts at one point in time in the school year. 

These data do not allow for the detailed tracking of students as they progress through 

high school (i.e., transfers in and out, retentions, and dropouts). Similarly, the crosssectional data are limited to counts of all students enrolled in each grade, while the ontime graduation rate requires data for the subset of 9th-graders who entered the 9th grade 

for the first time 4 years earlier. In addition, the current year data on graduates are limited 

to counts of all graduates in a particular year, while the on-time graduation rate requires 

data for the subset of graduates who entered 9th-grade for the first time 4 years earlier. 

The alternative graduation indicators that have been developed by NCES staff and other 

education researchers each attempt to use available data to calculate estimates of 

graduation rates. But given the data limitations, the currently available indicators are 

limited in their ability to capture changes in enrollment associated with student transfers 

and none of them can accurately reflect on-time graduations. They are, at best, proxies 

for the true cohort indicator. In the next section of this volume, each of the existing 

indicators is described. Each indicator is compared to the true cohort rate proposed by the 

NISS Task Force as the most accurate on-time graduation rate. The effects of differences 

between each proxy and the true cohort rate due to approximations that are inherent in the 

data elements used in the proxy measures are discussed for each measure. Finally, 

consideration is given to the population conditions that yield reasonable versus unrealistic 

results for the different proxy measures. 
4 

Existing High School Graduation Rates 

Each of the existing proxy indicators is described in this section. For each measure, the 

description will include the purpose or uses of the rate, the data elements required for the 

rate, a description of each step involved in the calculation of the rate, and a summary of 

how each rate differs from a true on-time graduation rate. Several of the rates have only 

been used at the national level, and data limitations preclude their disaggregations below 

the national level. Those rates will be presented first to provide context for the full range 

of measures currently in use; then the attention will turn to the rates for which the data 

elements are feasible at the national, state, district, and school levels. For ease of 

presentation, wherever possible state level data from CCD will be used to provide 

examples of the data components and the calculations needed for each rate. In addition, 

appendix B includes formulas and a summary of details for each measure, along with 

spreadsheets that can be used to compute each indicator. 

Current Population Survey High School Completion Indicator (CPS HSCI) 

Description and Computation: This population-based measure provides a measure of the 

proportion of the young adult population with the basic credential required to enter 

postsecondary education, the military, or jobs requiring a high school credential (figure 

B-1). The rate is based on CPS data and represents the percentage of 18- through 24-

year-olds who are not enrolled in high school and who have earned a high school diploma 

or equivalent credential, including a GED. The rate includes individuals who may have 

completed their education outside of the United States, so the rate is not suited for 

measuring the performance of the education system in this country. 

This rate requires counts of the number of persons ages 18-24 with a high school 

credential and of the number of persons ages 18-24 who are not enrolled in any 

elementary or secondary school program. These data are used to compute the ratio for 

each year of the number of persons in the age group who have a high school credential, to 

the number of persons in the age group who are not currently enrolled in high school or 

below in the same year, expressed as a percent. For example, using data from the civilian 

non-institutionalized population as measured by the Current Population Survey (CPS), 

21,091,000 persons ages 18-24 had a high school credential in 1999. This number is 

divided by the 24,540,000 persons of the same ages who were not enrolled in high school 

or below in 1999 (table 1). The resulting proportion, multiplied by 100, yields an 

estimated high school completion rate of 86 percent. Thus, 86 out of every 100 young 

adults ages18-24 in the United States held a high school credential in 1999 (U.S. Bureau 

of Census, CPS 10/01; Kaufman et al. 2000, NCES 2001-022). 
5 

Table 1. Components of numerator and denominator used for calculation of CPS 

Table 1. HSCI: United States, 1999-2000 

Component Numerator Denominator

 Overall 21,091,000 24,540,000

 

Number of persons ages 18-24 with a high 

 school credential in 1999-2000 21,091,000 †

Number of persons ages 18-24 not enrolled in

 grades K-12 in 1999-2000 † 24,540,000

† Not applicable. 

NOTE: CPS HSCI = Current Population Survey high school completion indicator. 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Commerce, Census Bureau, Current Population Survey 

(CPS), October supplement, 2001. 

Limitations: This measure differs from the proposed on-time graduation rate in several 

ways. First, it is a population-based measure of outcomes for young adults in a sevenyear age group, as opposed to a school-based measure that measures the success of a 

single cohort of students in attaining a high school diploma in 4 years. The fact that the 

data used are estimates of the civilian noninstitutionalized population further 

distinguishes this rate from the school-based measures in that prisoners and members of 

the military are both excluded. These exclusions have counterbalancing effects on each 

other; on the one hand, prisoners are more likely to be high school dropouts, while on the 

other hand, high school completion is a requirement for enlistment into the military. Of 

course imbalances in the sizes of these two populations would yield biased estimates—a 

larger military population ages 18-24 than a prison population of the same ages would 

result in a lower graduation rate; conversely, if the prison population is larger than the 

military population in this age range, the graduation rate would be higher. 

This measure differs from most of the school-based measures in that it includes the 

experiences of young adults who attended both public and private schools, or who were 

home schooled. It also includes immigrants in the 18-24-year-old age range who may or 

may not have received their secondary education in the United States. This measure also 

differs in that it includes alternative forms of high school completion in addition to 

regular diplomas. In fact, if these alternative completers are removed from the numerator 

in the 1999 example by subtracting alternative completions from all completers, the rate 

shows that 77 percent of the population ages 18-24 who are no longer enrolled in high 

school or below had a regular high school diploma. Another difference is that in order to 

measure the educational attainment of the young adult population, this population-based 

measure excludes those young adults ages 18-24 still enrolled in an elementary or 

secondary program. To better understand the differences and similarities between this 

rate and others, adding these young adults who are still enrolled in elementary or 

secondary school to the denominator shows that 72 percent of all persons age 18-24 had a 
6 

regular high school diploma by 1999. This number is on a par with the rates attained 

using the various school-based estimates of on-time graduation rates. 

NCES Digest Graduation Indicator (DGI) 

Description and Computation: This measure is published annually at the national level 

to provide a measure of the percentage of 17-year-olds who are graduates (figure B-2). 

This indicator requires counts of the graduates from public and private schools and 

counts of the number of 17-year-olds. These data are used to compute the ratio of the 

number of graduates from public and private schools in a specific year, to the number of 

17-year-olds in that year, expressed as a percent. For example, there were 2,554,000 

public school graduates plus 277,000 private school graduates in the 1999-2000 school 

year, resulting in a total of 2,831,000 high school graduates in 1999-2000 (table 2). This 

number is divided by the 4,057,000 persons who were17-year-olds in the fall of the 1999-

2000 school year. The resulting proportion, multiplied by 100, yields an estimated high 

school graduation indicator of 70 percent. Thus, 70 out of every 100 persons age 17 at the 

start of the 1999-2000 school year graduated from high school that year (Digest of 

Education Statistics, 2003, table 102). 

Table 2. Components of numerator and denominator used for calculation of DGI: Table 

2. United States, 1999-2000 

Component Numerator Denominator

 Overall 2,831,000 4,057,000

 

Public school graduates in 1999-2000 2,554,000 †

Private school graduates in 1999-2000 277,000 †

Number of 17-year-olds in the fall of 1999 † 4,057,000

† Not applicable. 

NOTE: DGI = NCES Digest graduation indicator. 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Digest of 

Education Statistics 2003, table 102, 2003. 

Limitations: This measure differs from the proposed on-time graduation rate in several 

ways. First, it differs from most of the school-based measures in that it includes the 

experiences of young adults who attended both public and private schools. Second, this 

measure uses a population-based estimate of the number of 17-year-olds as a proxy for 

the population who should be expected to graduate in a specific year. Using this age 

group ignores the fact that 2 percent of 17-year-olds completed high school before 

reaching age 17. Third, this measure assumes that all seniors start the year as 17-yearolds, when the CPS data show that in October of 1999 only 60 percent of the 12th-grade 

students were age 17, about 5 percent of the 12th-graders were younger, and the rest were 

older (U.S. Bureau of Census, P20, Oct. 1999, Internet Release 3/23/01). 
7 

Freshman Graduation Rate (FGR) 

Description and Computation: This graduation measure (UGI0 in the NISS report) 

provides an estimate of an on-time graduation rate (figure B-3). This indicator requires 

counts of the number of graduates in a specific year and the number of all incoming 

freshmen 4 years earlier. These data are used to compute the ratio of the number of 

graduates in a specific year to the number of students who enrolled in the 9th grade 4 

years earlier, expressed as a percent. To use one state as an example, 50,883 students 

graduated from public schools in Maryland in the 2001-02 school year (table 3). The 

count of graduates divided by the 69,247 public school students who enrolled in the 9th

grade in Maryland in the 1998-99 school year is 0.73. This proportion, multiplied by 100, 

yields an estimated on-time graduation rate of 73 percent for Maryland in school year 

2001-02. Based on this estimated on-time graduation rate, approximately 73 of every 100 

students who were high school freshmen in Maryland in 1998-99 graduated in 2001-02 

(NCES, CCD, Dropout and Completer data files as of 12/04). 

Table 3. Components of numerator and denominator used for calculation of FGR: Table 

3. Maryland, 2001-02 

Component Numerator Denominator

 Overall 50,833 69,247

 

Public school graduates in 2001-02 50,833 †

Public school 9th-graders in 1998-99 † 69,247

† Not applicable. 

NOTE: FGR = Freshman graduation rate, all freshmen. 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Common 

Core of Data (CCD), "Local Education Agency Universe Survey Dropout and Completion Data 

File," school years 1998-99 through 2002-03. 

Limitations: This measure falls short of the proposed on-time graduation rate on three 

dimensions. First, by including all freshmen in 1998-99, the group of freshmen in this 

measure includes freshmen repeating the 9th grade who are not first-time freshmen. 

Second, by including all graduates in 2001-02, the graduates may include students who 

repeated a grade in high school and thus are not on-time graduates.3

 Third, although 

some students in their high school years moved in or out of Maryland between 1998-99 

and 2001-02, there are no adjustments for these movements over this period. 

Each of these limitations has separate potential effects on the resulting estimate. For 

example, the inclusion of freshmen who failed the 9th grade in 1997-98 and re-enrolled in 

the 9th grade in 1998-99 increases the number of freshmen. This inflates the denominator 

 

3

 There may also be a small number of students who finish high school early, and as a result, are not strictly 

on time in the context of the 1999 graduating class. 
8 

of this rate. This should have the effect of producing a lower estimated rate than would 

be the case if only first-time freshmen were included in the denominator. Next, the 

inclusion of 2001-02 graduates who spent more than 4 years (or fewer than 4 years) in 

high school increases the number of graduates. This inflates the numerator of this rate. 

This should yield a higher estimated rate than would be the case if only on-time graduates 

were included in the numerator.4 The effect of not including any adjustments for 

migration is not as straightforward. If more high school students moved out of Maryland 

than transferred in between 1998-99 and 2001-02, the number of graduates in the 

numerator would be smaller and the estimated graduation rate would be smaller. On the 

other hand, if more high school students moved into Maryland than moved out during 

this 4-year period, the number of graduates in the numerator would be increased and the 

estimated on-time graduation rate would be increased. 

Averaged Freshman Graduation Rate (AFGR) 

Description and Computation: The next graduation measure (UGI in the NISS report) is 

closely related to the previous measure FGR, but is closer to the proposed rate in that the 

denominator is an estimate of the number of first-time freshmen who enrolled in the 9th

grade 4 years earlier (figure B-4). Thus, this measure requires counts of the number of 

graduates in a specific year for the numerator and the number of entering first-time 

freshmen 4 years earlier for the denominator. Returning to the example of Maryland, the 

numerator is unchanged with 50,883 graduates from public schools in Maryland in the 

2001-02 school year (table 4). But, the estimated number of first-time freshmen in public 

schools is lower with 63,791 freshmen starting 9th grade for the first time in 1998-99.5

These estimates result in an estimated on-time graduation rate of 80 percent for Maryland 

in 2001-02. This rate is 7 percentage points higher than the first rate that was computed 

including all freshmen (NCES, CCD, Dropout and Completer data files as of 12/04). 

Limitations: This measure falls short of the proposed on-time graduation rate on two 

dimensions. First, by including all graduates in 2001-02, the graduates may include 

students who repeated a grade in high school or completed high school early and thus are 

not on-time graduates in 2001-02. Second, although it is likely that some students in their 

high school years moved in and out of Maryland between 1998-99 and 2001-02, there are 

no adjustments for these movements over this period and the effects here are the same as 

those described above for FGR. 

The only estimate that changed between this rate and the previous one is the number of 

freshmen. In this case, an estimate of students who were not first-time freshmen was 

removed from the denominator. This leaves two problems to consider. The inclusion of 

2001-02 graduates who spent more or less than 4 years in high school increases the 

 

4

 Assuming there have been no major changes in retention policy over this 4-year period, these two effects 

will, at least partially, cancel each other out. However, this assumption is likely not to hold across the 

entire range of schools, districts, and states. 5

 Because there is no estimate of first-time freshmen in CCD, a smoothed average of 61,004 students who 

were 8th graders in 1997-98, 69,247 who were 9th graders in 1998-99, and 61,121 who were 10th graders in 

1999-2000 was used to approximate first-time freshmen. 
9 

number of graduates in the numerator over the number of on-time graduates, and yields a 

higher estimated rate than would be the case if only on-time graduates were included in 

the numerator. As described earlier, the effect of ignoring movements in or out of the 

state could result in a decrease in the estimated rate with more departures than entrants or 

an increase with in the estimated rate with more entrants than departures. 

Table 4. Components of numerator and denominator used for calculation of AFGR: 

Table 4. Maryland, 2001-02 

Component Numerator Denominator

 Overall 50,833 63,791

 

Public school graduates in 2001-02 50,833 †

Public school first-time 9th-graders in 1998-991 † 63,791

† Not applicable. 

1

 First-time 9th-graders in 1998-99 is calculated by averaging the 8th-grade enrollment in 1997-98, 

the 9th-grade enrollment in 1998-99, and the 10th-grade enrollment in 1999-2000. 

NOTE: AFGR = Averaged freshman graduation rate, first-time freshmen. 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Common 

Core of Data (CCD), "Local Education Agency Universe Survey Dropout and Completion Data 

File," school years 1997-98 through 2002-03. 

However, in the example given here using CCD data, the interpretation of this rate is not 

as straightforward. Since CCD does not currently include a count of first time freshmen, 

this count was estimated using the averaging approach advocated by Greene (2002); 

where a smoothed average of 61,004 students who were 8th graders in 1997-98, the 

69,247 who were 9th graders in 1998-99, and the 61,121 who were 10th graders in 1999-

2000 was used to approximate first-time freshmen. In most states, the freshman retention 

rate is higher than the retention rates evident in the other middle- and high-school grades 

and this tends to inflate the 9th grade enrollment counts. To account for this, Greene 

proposes using the 8th-grade enrollment from the previous year to help adjust (i.e., 

deflate) the 9th-grade enrollment for students who were retained in the 9th grade and thus 

are not first-time 9th-graders (the logic here is that the number of first-time freshmen 

should be tied to the number of 8th graders the previous year). He also posits that the 

average of the previous year’s 8th-grade enrollment and the current year’s 9th-grade 

enrollment provides an adjustment for transfers between public and private schools.6

 The 

smoothed rate proposed by Greene also includes the 10th-grade enrollment; the rationale 

 

6

 The authors of this report agree with the need to remove the impact of 9th-grade retentions, but do not see 

a need to adjust for transfers between public and private schools—regardless of whether a public school 

freshman attended public or private school in the 8th grade, once enrolled in the public school in the 9th

grade the student should be counted. 
10 

for this is that the 10th-grade enrollment is also lower than the 9th-grade enrollment with 

retentions. 

Looking more closely at the Greene estimate for first-time freshmen, dropouts from 

grades 8 and 9 are not discussed in Greene’s rationale for smoothing enrollments across 

grades 8, 9, and 10, but their impact should not be ignored. Logically, the 9th-grade 

enrollment should be lower than expected based on 8th-grade enrollments because those 

students who dropout in the 8th grade in one year are not eligible to be first-time 

freshmen in the next year, and these 8th-grade dropouts should not impact the count of 

first-time freshmen in the next year. Thus, including the dropouts from the 8th grade in 

the estimate of first-time freshmen increases the contribution of 8th grade enrollments 

and inflates the Greene estimate of first-time freshmen. At the same time, the observed 

9th-grade enrollment in one year should be higher than the observed 10th-grade 

enrollment in the next year due to the loss of 9th-grade dropouts in 10th-grade 

enrollments. Because the 10th grade enrollments exclude the 9th-grade dropouts, the 

averaging of enrollments from grades 8, 9 and 10 reduces the contribution of 9th-grade 

dropouts to the estimate of first-time freshman enrollments. This deflates the Greene 

estimate of first-time freshmen. Since there are typically more 9th- than 8th-grade 

dropouts, the overall impact of ignoring 8th- and 9th-grade dropouts is to most likely 

reduce the Greene estimate of first-time freshmen.7 

In addition, smoothing enrollments across these 3 grades to estimate first-time 9th-grade 

enrollment minimizes actual population changes in public school enrollments across 

these grades. For example, if there is an increase in the number of first-time freshmen 

relative to the number of 8th-graders the year before due to migration or transfers from 

private to public schools, the smoothing of 8th- and 9th-grade data would dampen this real 

increase in the size of the freshman class, causing an underestimate of the size of the 

first-time freshman class and an overestimate of the graduation rate. 

The limitations associated with the Greene averaged estimate of first-time freshmen 

affect the two rates that use the Greene estimate, the Average Freshman Graduation Rate 

discussed here and the Greene Graduation Indicator, discussed later, but do not impact 

the other measures under consideration. 

Returning to the Maryland example, the 7 percentage point increase in the estimated ontime graduation rate is partially due to the removal of a number of 9th-grade repeaters 

from the denominator, but also due to the impact of ignoring 8th- and 9th-grade dropouts. 

What is more, some of the increase is likely due also to the number of 2001-02 graduates 

who took longer than 4 years to graduate and thus increased the numerator. In addition, 

because the estimate for first-time freshmen is based on a smoothed average across 3 

years, the increase could also be due to changes in the enrollment counts in Maryland 

 

7

 Recall that the averaging is intended to adjust for the impact of variation in grade-to-grade retentions, 

because freshman retentions are much more frequent than 8th-grade dropouts, the harm from ignoring 

retentions exceeds that of ignoring 8th-grade dropouts. 
11 

between the 8th and 10th grade (NCES, CCD, Dropout and Completer data files as of 

12/04). 

CCD Graduation Leaver Indicator (CCD GLI) 

Description and Computation: This graduation indicator (CCD GLI) differs from the 

last two measures in that it was not developed as an estimate of on-time graduation; 

rather it is a measure of departures (figure B-5). This rate requires counts of the number 

of students who graduated with a regular diploma in one year, the number of students 

who were alternative completers in the same year, and counts of students who dropped 

out of the 12th grade in that year, grade 11 in the previous year, grade 10 the year before, 

and grade 9 the year before that (i.e., counts of dropouts from 4 consecutive grades over 4 

consecutive years). To compute this Graduation Leaver Indicator, the numerator is the 

number of students who graduate in a specified year, regardless of how long a student 

takes to complete high school, and the denominator is the number of current year 

graduates and completers, plus the sum of all of the students who dropped out over the 4-

year period (i.e., all of the students who left). More specifically, using Maryland as the 

example, the number of graduates from Maryland public high schools in 2001-02 is, 

again, 50,883 (table 5). This is the numerator of this rate. Instead of focusing on an 

estimate of the starting population, this rate uses the sum of the graduates (50,883) and 

alternative completers (510) in 2001-02 plus the number of dropouts from 12th grade in 

2001-02 (1,836), from 11th grade in 2000-01 (2,290), from 10th grade in 1999-2000 

(2,582), and from 9th grade in 1998-99 (3,118) for a denominator total of 61,169 students 

who left public high schools in Maryland between 1998-99 and 2001-02. The estimated 

graduation leaver rate is 83 percent; or in other words, 83 percent of the students from the 

freshman class of 1998-99 who left Maryland’s public high schools over this 4-year 

period did so with a regular high school diploma (NCES, CCD, Dropout and Completer 

data files as of 12/04). 

Limitations: This measure differs from the proposed on-time graduation rate in several 

respects. As was the case with the previous graduation indicators, the graduates are not 

limited to on-time graduates (i.e., repeaters and early completers are included). The 

resulting number of graduates is larger than it otherwise would be and contributes to a 

higher rate. Most importantly this rate differs in that it is a leaver rate, rather than a 

graduation rate. Because the denominator includes the sum of the students from the 

freshman class of 1998-99 who dropped out of Maryland high schools over a 4-year 

period or graduated in 2002, students who started high school in Maryland in 1998-99 (or 

who moved into Maryland during the intervening years), but did not leave high school by 

the end of the 2001-02 school year, are not included in the numerator or the denominator. 

Thus, the exclusion of the number of students who started high school and did not finish 

on time decreases the denominator for the leaver rate and thus increases the leaver rate 

relative to an on-time measure. As a result, the graduation leaver rate is 3 percentage 

points higher than the Maryland graduation rate (AFGR) that used an estimate of firsttime freshmen and 10 percentage points higher than the Maryland graduation rate (FGR) 

that included the larger number of all freshmen in the starting population. 
12 

Table 5. Components of numerator and denominator used for calculation of CCD GLI: 

Table 5. Maryland, 2001-02 

Component Numerator Denominator

 Overall 50,833 61,169

 

Public school graduates in 2001-02 50,833 50,833

Alternative completers in 2001-02 † 510

Number of 9th-grade dropouts in 1998-99 † 3,118

Number of 10th-grade dropouts in 1999-2000 † 2,582

Number of 11th-grade dropouts in 2000-01 † 2,290

Number of 12th-grade dropouts in 2001-02 † 1,836

† Not applicable. 

NOTE: CCD GLI = Common Core of Data graduation leaver indicator. 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Common 

Core of Data (CCD), "Local Education Agency Universe Survey Dropout and Completion Data 

File," school years 1998-99 through 2002-03. 

Swanson’s Cumulative Promotion Indicator (SCPI) 

Description and Computation: This graduation measure (SCPI) is another approach to 

estimating an on-time graduation rate (figure B-6). In this case, the indicator is a 

cumulative product of the proportion of students who progress from one grade to the next 

at the end of the school year for grades 9, 10, and 11 multiplied by the proportion of 

seniors who graduate at the end of the school year. This measure requires counts of the 

number of graduates and the number of students in each of the 9th, 10th, 11th and 12th

grades in year one and counts of the number of students in the 10th, 11th, and 12th grades 

in the next year. To compute this indicator, the grade specific promotion rates are 

computed by dividing the number of students enrolled in each of grades 10, 11, and 12 in 

the fall of one year by the number of students enrolled in each of grades 9, 10 and 11 in 

the fall of the previous year to compute the promotion rate from the first year to the next 

by grade. Similarly, the number of students graduating at the end of the first school year 

is divided by the number of 12th graders enrolled in the fall of that year to compute the 

promotion rate for the 12th grade (i.e., 12th grade graduation rate). More specifically, the 

number of students in grade 10 in the next year is divided by the number of students in 

grade 9 in year one, this is repeated for the number of 11th-graders in the next year as a 

ratio to the number of 10th-graders in year one, for the number of 12th-graders in the next 

year to the number of 11th-graders in year one, and for the number of graduates in year 

one divided by the number of 12th-graders in year one; then the rate is the product of 

these 4 proportions multiplied by 100. In Maryland, the 63,951 10th-graders in 2001-02 

divided by the 72,204 9th-graders in 2000-01 is 0.89, the 57,681 11th-graders in 2001-02 

divided by the 62,839 10th-graders in 2000-01 is 0.92, the 53,014 12th-graders in 2001-02 

divided by the 56,147 11th-graders in 2000-01 is 0.94, and the 49,222 diploma recipients 

in 2000-01 divided by the 51,312 12th-graders in the same year is 0.96 (table 6). The 
13 

cumulative product for these 4 proportions is .736. Thus this measure yields an estimate 

of 74 percent for 2000-01; according to this cumulative promotion indicator 74 of each 

100 students who start the 9th grade complete high school on time 4 years later (NCES, 

CCD, Dropout and Completer data files as of 12/04).8

Table 6. Components of numerator and denominator used for calculation of SCPI: 

Table 6. Maryland, 2001-02 

Component Numerator Denominator

 

10th-graders in 2001-02 63,951 †

11th-graders in 2001-02 57,681 †

12th-graders in 2001-02 53,014 †

Diploma recipients in 2000-01 49,222 †

9th-graders in 2000-01 † 72,204

10th-graders in 2000-01 † 62,389

11th-graders in 2000-01 † 56,174

12th-graders in 2000-01 † 51,312

† Not applicable. 

NOTE: SCPI = Swanson's cumulative promotion indicator. The numerator and denominator are 

both the products are all their components. 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Common 

Core of Data (CCD), "Local Education Agency Universe Survey Dropout and Completion Data 

File," school years 2000-01 through 2002-03. 

Limitations: This measure differs from the NISS proposed on-time graduation rate in 

some of the same ways described for FGR and AFGR. In particular, all graduates are 

included, rather than just on-time graduates, thus inflating the rate. Movements in and out 

of the state are not taken into account; in this case if the migration scale were tipped 

toward students moving in, the numerator of each proportion would be inflated, thus 

inflating the rate. However, if the state were losing students, the smaller numerators 

would yield a lower graduation rate. There is one additional difference in that rather than 

relying on the experiences over a 4-year period, this cross-sectional rate uses data from 

only 2 consecutive years as proxies for data drawn from all 4 years. Thus in this case, 

although the graduates for any specific year are actually from the 9th-graders 4 years 

earlier, this group of 9th-graders is not included in the rate. Instead, the promotion rates 

are computed using enrollment data for the year of the graduates and the following year 

combined with the ratio of graduates to starting seniors in the specific year. This rate is 

in effect, a type of synthetic cohort rate, in which it is assumed that the experiences of the 

population over the 4-year period from high school entry in grade 9 through graduation 

 

8

 Because this rate requires enrollment data for individual grades in the subsequent year to compute rates 

for specific years, using the same years of data used for the other graduation measures yields the rate for 

one year earlier in time. 
14 

are captured in 2 years of data for consecutive grades. This would only hold true if the 

retention policies or patterns or other education policies or practices that impact student 

grade progression were the same in the 2 years used as they were over the graduating 

seniors high school years. Additionally, this would only hold true if the characteristics of 

the students enrolled in each grade in the 2 years were the same as those of students in 

each of the grades as the graduating seniors progressed through high school. 

It is also important to note that when Swanson proposed this measure, he cautioned 

against using it for populations that do not include each of grades 9 through 12, that were 

not in existence for the two consecutive years required to compute the rate, or that have 

had significant changes in the boundaries of the population (Swanson 2003). 

Furthermore, Swanson recommended trimming and censoring population estimates that 

exceed 100 percent by recoding rates between 100 and 110 percent to 100 percent and by 

treating any larger percents as missing. 

Returning to the Maryland example, note that the cumulative promotion rate of 74 

percent is for school year 2000-01, not school year 2001-02 used to illustrate the three 

preceding measures. For comparison purposes, for Maryland, the 2000-01 unadjusted 

graduation rate, using all freshmen is 73 percent; the 2000-01 unadjusted graduation rate 

using estimated first-time freshmen is 79 percent, and the CCD graduation leaver rate is 

83 percent. In this example, the cumulative promotion rate estimation of the graduation 

rate is closest to the unadjusted graduation rate based on all freshmen. 

Greene’s Graduation Indicator (GGI) 

Description and Computation: This graduation measure (GGI) uses a simulated cohort 

approach to estimating an on-time graduation rate (figure B-7). This measure requires a 

multi-step process to reach the final estimate. The data required to estimate the number of 

first-time freshmen include counts of the number of 8th-graders 5 years before the 

graduation year, 9th-graders 4 years prior to the graduation year, and the number of 10thgraders from 3 years before the graduation, and a count of diplomas awarded in the 

graduation year. Counts of 9th- through 12th-grade enrollment in the graduation year and 

4 years before the graduation year are also needed. 

The first step in computing this measure involves estimating the rate of change in the 

high school population from the time a freshman class started to the time it was to have 

graduated. This rate is intended to approximate the amount of population change from 

migration in grades 9 through 12. The numerator is the number of students enrolled in 

grades 9 through 12 in the graduation year minus the number of students enrolled in 

grades 9 through 12 four years earlier. The denominator is the number of students 

enrolled in grades 9 through 12 four years earlier. This rate of change is multiplied by the 

Greene estimate of the number of first-time freshmen 4 years earlier to yield an adjusted 

estimate of first-time freshmen that takes changes due to migration into account. Greene 

describes this adjusted estimate as an estimate of the number of on-time seniors eligible 
15 

to graduate assuming no one drops out.9 Then in the final step, the number of diplomas 

awarded in the graduating year is divided by the estimated number of potential on-time 

seniors. Computationally, the resulting rate is the AFGR, based on first-time freshmen, 

with the rate of change in the size of 9th- to 12th-grade enrollments applied to the 

averaged freshmen data. 

By way of example, recall that for Maryland, the Greene estimate of first-time freshmen 

in 1998-99 was 63,791 ((61,004 8th-graders in 1997-98 plus 69,247 9th-graders in 1998-

99 plus 61,121 10th-graders in 1999-2000) divided by 3). The enrollment for grades 9 

through 12 in 2001-02 was 248,445 and the enrollment for grades 9 through 12 in 1998-

99 was 233,541; thus the difference of 14,904 divided by the starting enrollment of 

233,541 in 1998-99 yields a rate of change of 0.0638 (table 7). Increasing the first-time 

freshman count of 63,791 by the growth rate of 0.0638, results in an estimate of 67,862 

on-time seniors in 2001-02. Finally, 50,883 diplomas were awarded to public high school 

students in Maryland in 2001-02. That number divided by the estimate of 67,862 

potential on-time seniors results in an on-time graduation rate estimate of 75 percent. 

Using this approach, 75 out of every 100 first-time freshmen in Maryland public high 

schools in 1998-99 graduated from a Maryland public high school in 2001-02 (NCES, 

CCD, Dropout and Completer data files as of 12/04). 

Table 7. Components of numerator and denominator used for calculation of GGI: 

Table 7. Maryland, 2001-02 

Component Numerator Denominator

 Overall 50,833 67,862

 

Public school graduates in 2001-02 50,833 †

Enrollment for grades 9-12 in 2001-02 † 248,445

Enrollment for grades 9-12 in 1998-99 † 233,541

First-time 9th-graders in 1998-991

 † 63,791

† Not applicable. 

1

 First-time 9th-graders in 1998-99 is calculated by averaging the 8th-grade enrollment in 1997-

98, the 9th-grade enrollment in 1998-99, and the 10th-grade enrollment in 1999-2000. 

NOTE: GGI = Greene's graduation indicator. The denominator is first-time 9th graders in 1998-

99 adjusted by the rate of change of enrollment from the years 1998-99 to 2001-02. This gives 

an estimate for the number of potential seniors in 2001-02. 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Common 

Core of Data (CCD), "Local Education Agency Universe Survey Dropout and Completion Data 

File," school years 1997-98 through 2002-03. 

 

9

 Recall from the discussion of the unadjusted graduation rate based on first-time freshmen that first-time 

freshmen are estimated summing the number of 8th-graders from 5 years before the graduation year, the 

number of 9th-graders from 4 years before the graduation and the number of 10th-graders from 3 years 

before the graduation year and dividing by 3 for a smoothed average. 
16 

Limitations: This measure falls short of the proposed on-time graduation rate on three

dimensions. First, by including all graduates in 2001-02, the graduates may include 

students who repeated a grade in high school or completed high school in less than 4 

years and thus are not on-time graduates. Comparing all graduates to the estimate for ontime 12th-graders includes graduates who repeated a grade between the 9th and 12th grades 

and graduates who finished high school in less than 4 years in the numerator, but they are 

not in the denominator estimate of first-time 12th-graders. 

Second, as discussed in the case of the AFGR, while the assumptions introduced in the 

estimate Greene proposed for first-time freshmen serve to adjust the estimate of 9thgraders for the increased rate of retentions that occur in the freshman year, the averaging 

that occurs also reduces the estimate of first-time freshmen by ignoring 8th- and 9th-grade 

dropouts. The assumptions also overlook the impact of ignoring any population changes 

in the enrolled student population between the 8th and 10th grades due to differential 

migration. 

 

Third, because the rate of change estimate compares the size of the enrolled population in 

grades 9-12 in one year to the size of the enrolled population in those grades 4 years 

earlier Greene assumes that the change in the size of the 9th to 12th grade population 

over the 4-year period is due to migration. However, the students in grades 9, 10, 11, and 

12 in the later year come from four different cohorts of starting freshmen. The relative 

change captured by comparing these two groups of students would reflect migration 

alone only if each of the starting freshman cohorts were the same size.10 However, 

differences in the birth rates and in migration patterns over time, along with differences 

in elementary school retention policies over time, result in variations in the size of the 

freshman cohort from year to year. For example, in Maryland the size of the freshman 

class grew by approximately 2 percent each year between 1998-99 and 2001-02. These 

were the students making up the 9th to 12th grade population in 2001-02, thus much of the 

.0638 growth rate was due to the increasing size of the freshman classes rather than due 

to migration during the high school years. This suggests that a portion of the increase in 

the rate of growth in the Maryland example is due to underlying population changes that 

occur before the freshman year, not to the effects of net migration during the high school 

years. If this is true, this adjustment is artificially increasing the denominator of GGI and 

as a result unnecessarily lowering the graduation rate. In other words, if the rate of 

change is due to growth in the incoming cohorts rather than to growth associated with 

migration during the high school years, the Greene rate without the growth adjustment is 

closer to the observed population changes (i.e., the AFGR). 

It is also important too note that when Greene and Winter proposed this measure, they 

cautioned against using it for small populations or for populations that have undergone 

large changes in size over the 4 year high school period (Greene and Winters 2005). In 

particular, they treated cases with fewer than 200 9th graders as missing. In addition, 

cases with a change in the population larger than 30 percent were also set to missing, as 

were cases that had both fewer than 2,000 9th graders and a change in the population of 

more than 20 percent. 

 

10 This also assumes that there are no major changes in dropout rates over the 4-year period. 
17 

The on-time graduation rate of 75 percent in 2001-02 from the Greene graduation 

indicator can be compared with other rates computed for 2001-02—73 percent for the 

FGR, 80 percent for the AFGR, and 83 percent for the CCD graduation leaver rate. 

Numerically, the Greene graduation indicator, like the Swanson measure, is closest to the 

FGR. 

In-Transfer Adjusted Graduation Indicator (IAGI) 

Description and Computation: Like the other measures presented thus far, this 

graduation measure (IAGI) uses cross-sectional data to estimate an on-time graduation 

rate (figure B-8). The difference here is that in addition to the number of graduates in a 

specific year, this indicator requires both the count of first-time freshmen 4 years earlier 

and counts of the number of students transferring into each grade between the 9th and 

12th grades. Of these data elements, only the number of graduates is currently included in 

the CCD data collection. Assuming these data were available, this indicator would be 

computed by dividing the number of graduates by the sum of the number of first-time 

freshmen 4 years earlier plus the number of students who transferred into the 9th grade 

plus transfers into each successive grade over the intervening years. To illustrate this 

indicator, data are needed for counts of first-time freshmen and grade- and year-specific 

transfers. For the sake of illustration, the estimate of first-time freshmen used earlier in 

the unadjusted graduation rate based on first-time freshmen and in the Greene graduation 

indicator is used again. In addition, to illustrate the computational procedures for this 

rate, an annual in-transfer rate of 2 percent is assumed. Thus, returning to the Maryland 

example, the denominator, which is only illustrative, is the sum of the estimated 63,791 

first-time freshmen in 1998-99 plus the estimate of 1,276 9th-grade transfers during 1998-

99, some 1,301 10th-grade transfers during 1999-2000, some 1,328 11th-grade transfers in 

2000-01, and 1,354 12th-grade transfers in 2001-02 for a total of 69,050 students who 

were eligible to be in the 12th grade in 2001-02 (table 8). This number divided into the 

50,883 graduates from Maryland high schools in 2001-02 yields a graduation rate of 74 

percent. Thus, given the assumptions used in this example, 74 out of 100 freshmen in 

1998-99 would have graduated in 2001-02 (NCES, CCD, Dropout and Completer data 

files as of 12/04). 

Limitations: If, in fact, the counts for the number of first-time freshmen in 1998-99 and 

the counts for the number of transfers into each consecutive year of high school were 

available, this rate would still differ from the NISS proposed on-time graduation rate 

because the numerator includes all graduates, rather than just on-time graduates. This will 

contribute to an inflated rate. This rate also differs, in that although it takes students 

transferring in to the state into account, it fails to incorporate data for students 

transferring out of the state. This has the effect of inflating the denominator (because 

students who left are still included) and thus will decrease the graduation rate. In 

addition, the fact that cross-sectional estimates for individual grades are being used 

results in a simulation of a cohort rate, as opposed to a true cohort rate. This will yield 

different results than would be obtained by following the experiences of a set of students 

across the 4 years of high school. 
18 

Table 8. Components of numerator and denominator used for calculation of IAGI: 

Table 8. Maryland, 2001-02 

Component Numerator Denominator

 Overall 50,833 69,050

 

Public school graduates in 2001-02 50,833 †

First-time 9th-graders in 1998-991 † 63,791

9th-grade transfers in 1998-99 † 1,276

10th-grade transfers in 1999-2000 † 1,301

11th-grade transfers in 2000-01 † 1,328

12th-grade transfers in 2001-02 † 1,354

† Not applicable. 

1 First-time 9th-graders in 1998-99 is calculated by averaging the 8th-grade enrollment in 1997-

98, the 9th-grade enrollment in 1998-99, and the 10th-grade enrollment in 1999-2000. 

NOTE: IAGI = In-transfer adjusted graduation indicator. Data on the number of transfers are 

hypothetical and were used only for illustrative purposes. 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Common 

Core of Data (CCD), "Local Education Agency Universe Survey Dropout and Completion Data 

File," school years 1997-98 through 2002-03. 

Cohort Graduation Indicator (CGI) 

Description and Computation: This cohort indicator yields an on-time graduation rate. 

Because it is cohort based, this measure requires actual counts of first-time freshmen, 

transfers into the 9th grade and transfers into each successive grade over the intervening 

years, and counts of graduates from each of these five groups of students (figure B-9).11

The numerator for this measure is the sum of the students who entered this cohort, either 

in the 9th grade or by transferring in, and who graduated on time. The denominator is the 

sum of all students who entered this cohort. CCD includes only cross-sectional data, and 

thus does not include these cohort data. To illustrate how this rate is constructed, the 

Maryland estimate of 63,791 first-time freshmen in 1998-99 is used as a starting point for 

the cohort, along with the hypothetical data on grade specific transfers in (i.e., 1,276 9thgrade transfers during 1998-99, some 1,301 10th-grade transfers during 1999-2000, some 

1,328 11th-grade transfers in 2000-01, and 1,354 12th-grade transfers in 2001-02) (table 

1.9). These hypothetical numbers yield a denominator of 69,050 students from the cohort 

who could have been in the 12th grade in 2001-02. Then, assuming, for the sake of this 

example, that 75 percent of the original first-time freshmen graduated on time, and that 

70 percent of the transfer students graduated on time, the numerator is the sum of all of 

the students in the cohort who graduate on time in 2001-02. Under these assumptions, 

there are 47,843 first-time 9th-graders who graduate on time, plus the sum of 893 

graduates from the 9th-grade transfer students, 911 graduates from the 10th-grade transfer 

 

11 Although the NISS formula did not explicitly mention transfers into the 9th grade, they are also required. 

Thus, there are two sets of graduates who are from the 9th grade. 
19 

students, 930 graduates from the 11th-grade transfer students, and 948 graduates from the 

12th-grade transfer students, for 3,682 graduates who transferred into the state and an 

overall total of 51,525 graduates in 2001-02. The 51,525 graduates divided by the 69,050 

students from the cohort who could have been in the 12th grade in 2001-02 yields a 

graduation rate of 75 percent (NCES, CCD, Dropout and Completer data files as of 

12/04). 

Table 9. Components of numerator and denominator used for calculation of CGI: 

Table 9. Maryland, 2001-02 

Component Numerator Denominator

 Overall 51,525 69,050

 

Public school graduates in 2001-02 51,525 †

First-time 9th graders in 1998-991 † 63,791

9th-grade transfers in 1998-99 † 1,276

10th-grade transfers in 1999-2000 † 1,301

11th-grade transfers in 2000-01 † 1,328

12th-grade transfers in 2001-02 † 1,354

† Not applicable. 

1

 First-time 9th graders in 1998-99 is calculated by averaging the 8th grade enrollment in 1997-

98, the 9th grade enrollment in 1998-99, and the 10th grade enrollment in 1999-2000. 

NOTE: CGI = Cohort graduation indicator. Data on the number of transfers are hypothetical 

and were used only for illustrative purposes. 

SOURCE: Data from a state student record system. 

Limitations: This rate is a cohort rate that requires detailed data on individual students’ 

status over time. However, even if each of the required data elements were available, it 

falls short of the NISS proposed graduation rate in that it does not include any 

adjustments for students leaving the cohort. That is to say, although students entering the 

cohort are accounted for, the data on exits due to transfers or deaths are not directly 

included. The absence of these data serves to increase the size of the denominator and 

thus decreases the graduation rate. 

Proposed NISS High School Graduation Rate 

Although a general description of the proposed rate was included in the background 

discussion earlier in this report, the details of the data elements required and the 

computational procedures are included here. 
20 

Exclusion-Adjusted Cohort Graduation Indicator (EACGI) 

Description and Computation: This cohort graduation rate takes all possible changes in 

status into account, thus following the movement of students from one freshman class, 

and new entrants to that class, over time as they progress towards graduation (figure B10). This rate requires counts of first-time freshmen; counts of students who leave the 9th

grade and each successive grade over the intervening years due to documented transfers, 

imprisonment, or death (i.e., exclusions); transfers into the 9th grade and each successive 

grade over the intervening years; and counts of graduates for the starting first-time 

freshmen and for students who transfer into the cohort.12 The computational formula is 

similar to the one described above for the cohort graduation rate, the only difference 

being that students who are documented exclusions are subtracted from transfers in for 

the grade and year in which they leave. The numerator for this measure is the sum of the 

students who entered this cohort, either in the 9th grade or by transferring in, and who 

graduated on time. Using the same 1998-99 to 2001-02 time period, this includes firsttime freshmen from 1998-99 who graduated in 2001-02, plus students who transferred in 

as first-time freshmen in 1998-99 who graduated in 2001-02, plus students who were 

first-time freshmen in 1998-99 and transferred in as 10th-graders in 1999-2000 and 

graduated in 2001-02, plus students who were first-time freshmen in 1998-99 and 

transferred in as 11th-graders in 2000-01 and graduated in 2001-02, plus students who 

were first-time freshmen in 1998-99 and transferred in as 12th-graders in 2001-02 and 

graduated in 2001-02.13 The denominator is the sum of all students who entered this 

cohort less those who exited for one of the documented allowable reasons (i.e., transfers, 

imprisonment, or death, but not dropping out). More specifically this includes first-time 

freshmen from 1998-99 minus the documented exclusions from this group during the 9th, 

10th, 11th, or 12th grade, plus students who transferred in as first-time freshmen in 1998-

99 minus the documented exclusions from this group during the 9th, 10th, 11th, or 12th

grade, plus students who were first-time freshmen in 1998-99 and transferred in as 10thgraders in 1999-2000 minus the documented exclusions from this group during the 10th, 

11th, or 12th grade, plus students who were first-time freshmen in 1998-99 and transferred 

in as 11th-graders in 2000-01 minus the documented exclusions from this group during 

the 11th or 12th grade, plus students who were first-time freshmen in 1998-99 and 

transferred in as 12th-graders in 2001-02 minus the documented exclusions from this 

group during the 12th grade. 

To illustrate this rate, data are needed for counts of first-time freshmen and grade- and 

year-specific transfers in and exclusions. For the sake of illustration, the estimate of firsttime freshmen used earlier in the unadjusted graduation rate based on first-time freshmen 

and in the Greene graduation rate is used again. In addition, to illustrate the 

computational procedures for this rate, the in-transfer counts and the graduation rates 

used in the CGI example, and an annual exclusion rate of 3 percent is used for each 

year’s starting enrollment and for each year’s in-transfer counts. Thus, returning to the 

 

12 Although the NISS formula did not explicitly mention transfers into the 9th grade, they are also required. 

In addition, transfers in must be assigned to the cohort that corresponds with their first-time freshman year. 13 Although not included in this detailed discussion, students who graduate ahead of schedule could be 

included in the count of on-time graduates for the cohort, reported as a subtotal and as part of the total 

number of graduates. 
21 

Maryland example based on hypothetical data, the numerator is the same as the 

numerator in the CGI, with 51,525 graduates (table 10). The first term in the denominator 

is the sum of the estimated 63,791 first-time freshmen in 1998-99 minus the 7,317 

exclusions (1,914 in 9th grade, 1,856 in 10th grade, 1,801 in 11th grade, and 1747 in 12th

grade); this is added to the estimate of 1,276 who are 9th-grade transfers-in less the 146 

exclusions from this group over the 9th, 10th, 11th, and 12th grades (38, 37, 36, and 35); 

plus the 1,301 who are10th-grade transfers-in less the 114 exclusions from this group over 

the 10th, 11th, and 12th grades (39, 38, 37); plus the 1,328 11th-grade transfers-in less the 

78 exclusions from this group in the 11th and 12th grades (40 and 39); plus the 1,354 who 

are 12th-grade transfers-in less the 41 exclusions from this group. This resulted in a total 

of 61,354 students who were eligible to be in the 12th grade in 2001-02. This number 

divided into the 51,525 graduates from Maryland high schools in 2001-02 yields a 

graduation rate of 84 percent. Thus, given the assumptions used in this example with a 

slightly higher exclusion rate than in-transfer rate, 84 out of 100 freshmen in 1998-99 

would have graduated in 2001-02 (NCES, CCD, Dropout and Completer data files as of 

12/04). 

Table 10. Components of numerator and denominator used for calculation of EACGI: 

Table 10. Maryland, 2001-02 

Component Numerator Denominator

 Overall 51,525 61,354

 

Public school graduates in 2001-02 51,525 †

First-time 9th-graders in 1998-991 † 63,791

Exclusions from first-time 9th-graders † 7,317

9th-grade transfers in 1998-99 † 1,276

Exclusions from 9th-grade transfers † 146

10th-grade transfers in 1999-2000 † 1,301

Exclusions 10th-grade transfers † 114

11th-grade transfers in 2000-01 † 1,328

Exclusions from 11th-grade transfers † 78

12th-grade transfers in 2001-02 † 1,354

Exlusions from 12th-grade transfers † 41

† Not applicable. 

1 First-time 9th-graders in 1998-99 is calculated by averaging the 8th-grade enrollment in 1997-

98, the 9th-grade enrollment in 1998-99, and the 10th-grade enrollment in 1999-2000. 

NOTE: EACGI = Exclusion-adjusted cohort graduation indicator. Data on the number of 

transfers and exclusions are hypothetical and were used only for illustrative purposes. 

SOURCE: Data from a state student record system. 
22 

Discussion and Summary 

The indicators that are intended to be estimates of a 4-year on-time graduation rate 

require data for graduates and for enrollments in grades 9 through 12. Insofar as these 

data are available at both the national and state levels, each of the measures can be 

computed at both of these levels. At the school and district levels, the utility of these 

measures is limited to those districts that include and have data available for grades 9 

through 12. (Note that, by definition, a 4-year on-time graduation rate cannot be 

computed for districts or schools serving only grades 10 through 12.) Two measures, 

AFGR and GGI have the additional constraint of requiring 8th grade enrollment counts to 

compute the averaged freshman estimate of first-time freshman enrollment. Thus, while 

these two rates (AFGR and GGI) can be computed at the national, state, district, and 

school levels where grade 8 enrollments are included, they cannot be computed for 

secondary level districts or schools that start at grade 9. While this precludes the analysis 

of these two rates at the district or school level using CCD data, it is important to note 

that at the individual school or district levels direct knowledge of students can be used to 

identify students who enroll in grade 9 for the first time in a specific year. Then, instead 

of estimating first time freshman enrollment through the averaging approach used in 

AFGR and GGI, the school or district can use the observed count of first-time freshmen 

in the denominator, in place of the averaged count of freshman enrollment, to yield rates 

that are comparable to AFGR or GGI computed using aggregate data at the state and 

national levels. 

The examples presented in this section were included for illustrative purposes. They were 

constructed as a means to walk through the step-by-step process required to compute 

each rate; indeed, in some cases key elements of a formula were either approximated or 

hypothetical. Tables 11 and 12 summarize some of the key points and may serve as a 

convenient reference to use in reading the next volume of the report. Table 11 identifies 

the various components of the numerators and denominators of each of the indicators, 

and table 12 identifies the limitations of each indicator. 

The second volume of this report explores in more detail the statistical properties and 

strengths and weaknesses of each measure that can be computed using detailed student 

record based cohort data from two states to examine and compare each of the proxy rates 

to the proposed NISS exclusion-adjusted cohort graduation rate. Then existing CCD data 

are used to compare the performance of the full set of available proxy rates across all 

states to the proxy measure identified as the closest approximation of the true rate using 

the cohort data. Briefly, those analyses show that although each of the four proxy 

measures of on-time graduation rates—FGR, AFGR, GGI, and SCPI, perform well 

relative the true cohort rate (EACGI)14 in one or more of the analyses, AFGR is the only 

measure that is consistently among the best performing indicators in each analysis. 

 

 

14 FGR, AFGR, SCPI, and GGI have statistical properties that are relatively close to those observed for the 

true cohort rate (EACGI) in one or more analysis. 
23 

Table 11. Summary of components of specific graduation indicators 

Indicator1

Selected characteristic 

CPS 

HSCI DGI FGR AFGR GLI SCPI

GGI 

rate of

change 

GGI

 rate 

component IAGI CGI EACGI

Population data 

Civilian noninstitutionalized population 

ages 18-24 with a high school 

credential 1999 N 

Civilian noninstitutionalized population 

ages 18-24 not enrolled in K-12 1999 D 

Graduates from public and private schools 

1999-2000 N 

17-year-olds in the civilian 

noninstitutionalized population fall 

1999 D 

Public School Cross-sectional data 

Enrollments 

8th grade 1997-98 D D

10th grade 1999-2000 D D D

9th grade 1998-99 D D N/D D D

10th grade 1998-99 N/D 

11th grade 1998-99 N/D 

12th grade 1998-99 N/D 

9th grade 2000-01 D 

10th grade 2000-01 D 

11th grade 2000-01 D 

12th grade 2000-01 D 

9th grade 2001-02 N 

10th grade 2001-02 N N 

11th grade 2001-02 N N 

12th grade 2001-02 N N 

Leavers 

Graduates 2001-02 N N N/D N N N

Alternative completers 2001-02 D 

9th grade dropouts 1998-99 D 

10th grade dropouts 1999-2000 D 

11th grade dropouts 2000-01 D 

12th grade dropouts 2001-02 D 

9th grade transfers 1998-99 D

10th grade transfers 1999-2000 D

11th grade transfers 2000-01 D

12th grade transfers 2001-02 D

Public School Cohort data 

On-time 9th-graders 1998-99 D D

On-time transfers into cohort 1998-99 

through 2002-02 D D

Validated exclusions from cohort 1998-99 

through 2001-02 D

On-time graduates from cohort and ontime transfers 2001-02 N N 1

 CPS HSCI = Current Population Survey high school completion indicator; DGI = NCES Digest graduation indicator; FGR = Freshman Graduation Rate, all freshmen; AFGR= 

Averaged Freshman Graduation Rate, first-time freshmen; GLI = CCD Graduation Leaver Indicator; SCPI = Swanson's Cumulative Promotion Indicator; GGI = Greene's 

Graduation Indicator; IAGI = In-transfer adjusted graduation indicator; CGI = Cohort graduation indicator; EACGI = Exclusion-Adjusted Cohort Graduation Indicator. 

NOTE: N = numerator, D = denominator, and N/D = numerator and denominator. 
24 

Table 12. Summary of limitations of specific graduation indicators  Indicator2Limitation 

CPS

HSCI DGI FGR AFGR GLI SCPI

GGI 

rate of

change

GGI rate 

component IAGI 

Ignores dropouts X X X X1Includes retained Pub9th-graders X X1 X1 X1 X1

Includes late and early 

graduates X X X X X X X X1

Includes alternative Pubcompleters X Ignores out migration X X X X X Ignores in migration X X X X XIgnores students still Pubenrolled in school XDoes not represent a Pub4-year time span X X X 

1 The averaging is an attempt to adjust for retained freshmen since the 9th grade year typically has the highest reterates of any of the middle and high school grades. 2 CPS HSCI = Current Population Survey high school completion indicator; DGI = NCES Digest graduation indi

Freshman Graduation Rate, all freshmen; AFGR= Averaged Freshman Graduation Rate, first-time freshmen; GLGraduation Leaver Indicator; SCPI = Swanson's Cumulative Promotion Indicator; GGI = Greene's Graduation In

In-transfer adjusted graduation indicator; CGI = Cohort graduation indicator; EACGI = Exclusion-Adjusted CohoIndicator. NOTE: X = indicates limitations. SOURCE: User's Guide to Computing High School Graduation Rates, U.S. Department of Education, National C

Education Statistics. 
25 

References 

Barton, P.E. (2005). One-Third of a Nation: Rising Dropout Rates and Declining 

Opportunities. Princeton, NJ: Policy Information Center, Educational Testing 

Service. 

Greene, J.P. (2002). Public School Graduation Rates in the United States. Civic Report, 

No. 31. New York: The Manhattan Institute for Policy Research. 

Greene, J.P., and Winters, M.A. (2005). Public High School Graduation and CollegeReadiness Rates. Working Paper No.8. New York: The Manhattan Institute. 

Hall, D. (2005). Getting Honest About Grad Rates: How States Play the Numbers and 

Students Lose. Washington, DC: The Education Trust. 

Kaufman, P., Kwon, J.Y., Klein, S., Chapman, C.D. (2000). Dropout Rates in the United 

States: 1999 (NCES 2001-022). U.S. Department of Education, National Center for 

Education Statistics. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office. 

National Institute of Statistical Sciences and Education Statistics Services Institute. 

(2004). National Institute of Statistical Sciences/Education Statistics Services 

Institute Task Force on Graduation, Completion, and Dropout Indicators (NCES 

2005-105). U.S. Department of Education. Washington, DC: National Center for 

Education Statistics. 

No Child Left Behind Act of 2001, P.L. 107-110, 115 Stat. 1425 (2002). 

Phelps, R.P. (2005). A review of Greene (2002) High School Graduation Rates in the 

United States. Practical Assessment, Research and Evaluation. 10(15) September 

2005. 

Snyder, T.D., and Hoffman, C.M. (2003). Digest of Education Statistics 2002 (NCES 

2003–060). U.S. Department of Education. Washington, DC: National Center for 

Education Statistics. 

Swanson, C.B. (2003). Keeping and Losing Count: Calculating Graduation Rates for All 

Students Under NCLB Accountability. Washington, DC: The Urban Institute, 

Education Policy Center. 

Swanson, C.B. (2004). Who Graduates? Who Doesn’t? A Statistical Portrait of Public 

High School Graduation, Class of 2001. Washington, DC: The Urban Institute, 

Education Policy Center. 

U.S. Department of Commerce, Census Bureau, Current Population Survey (CPS), 

October supplement, 2001. 
26 

U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Common Core 

of Data (CCD), “Local Education Agency Universe Survey Dropout and Completion 

Data File,” 1991-92 through 1997-98, Version 1c; 1998-99 through 2000-01, Version 

1b; 2001-02, Version 1a. 

Wald, J., and Losen, D. (2005). Confronting the Graduation Rate Crisis in the South.

Cambridge, MA: The Civil Rights Project, Harvard University. 

Warren, J.R. (2005). State-level high school completion rates: Concepts, measures, and 

trends. Education Policy Analysis Archives, 13(51). Retrieved [12-28-2005] from 

http://apaa.asu.edu/epaa/v13n51 
A-1 

APPENDIX A 

Description of Common Core of Data, Private School Universe Survey, 

and Current Population Survey 

Common Core of Data 

NCES uses the Common Core of Data (CCD) survey to acquire and maintain statistical 

data from each of the 50 states, the District of Columbia, the Bureau of Indian Affairs, 

Department of Defense Dependents' Schools (overseas and domestic) and the other 

jurisdictions. Information about staff and students is collected annually at the school, 

local education agency or school district (LEA), and state levels. Information about 

revenues and expenditures is also collected at the state and LEA levels. 

Data are collected for a particular school year via survey instruments sent to the state 

education agencies during the school year. Almost all of the states submit the six CCD 

survey instruments each year, but submissions are sometimes incomplete or too late for 

publication. 

Understandably, when 58 education agencies compile and submit data for approximately 

92,000 public schools and 16,000 local school districts, misreporting can occur. 

Typically, this results from varying interpretations of NCES definitions and differing 

record keeping systems. NCES attempts to minimize these errors by working closely 

with the state education agencies through the National Forum on Education Statistics. 

The state education agencies report data to NCES from data collected and edited in their 

regular reporting cycles. NCES encourages the agencies to incorporate into their own 

survey systems the NCES items they do not already collect so that those items will also 

be available for the subsequent CCD survey. Over time, this has meant fewer missing 

data cells in each state's response, reducing the need to impute data. 

NCES subjects data from the education agencies to a comprehensive edit. Where data 

are determined to be inconsistent, missing, or out of range, NCES contacts the education 

agencies for verification. NCES–prepared state summary forms are returned to the state 

education agencies for verification. Each year, states are also given an opportunity to 

revise their state-level aggregates from the previous survey cycle. 

Further information on CCD may be obtained from: 

John Sietsema 

Elementary/Secondary Cooperative System and Institutional Studies Division (ESCSISD) 

National Center for Education Statistics 

1990 K Street NW 

Washington, DC 20006 

john.sietsema@ed.gov

http://nces.ed.gov/ccd/
A-2 

Private School Universe Survey 

The purposes of Private School Survey (PSS) data collection activities are (1) to build an 

accurate and complete list of private schools to serve as a sampling frame for NCES 

sample surveys of private schools; and (2) to report data on the total number of private 

schools, teachers, and students in the survey universe. The PSS is conducted every 2 

years with collections in 1989–90, 1991–92, 1993–94, 1995–96, 1997–98, 1999–2000, 

and 2001-02 school years. The survey data for the 2003-04 school year is currently being 

edited. 

The PSS produces data similar to that of the CCD for the public schools, and can be used 

for public-private comparisons. The data are useful for a variety of policy and research–

relevant issues, such as the growth of religiously affiliated schools, the number of private 

high school graduates, the length of the school year for various private schools, and the 

number of private school students and teachers. 

The target population for the universe survey consists of all private schools in the United 

States that meet NCES criteria of a school (i.e., private school is an institution which 

provides instruction for any of grades K through 12, has one or more teachers to give 

instruction, is not administered by a public agency, and is not operated in a private 

home). The survey universe is composed of schools identified from a variety of sources. 

The main source is a list frame, initially developed for the 1989–90 PSS. The list is 

updated regularly by matching it with lists provided by nationwide private school 

associations, state departments of education, and other national guides and sources that 

list private schools. The other source is an area frame search in approximately 120 

geographic areas, conducted by the Census Bureau. 

Further information on PSS may be obtained from: 

Steve Broughman 

Elementary/Secondary Sample Survey Studies Program (ESLSD) 

National Center for Education Statistics 

1990 K Street NW 

Washington, DC 20006 

stephen.broughman@ed.gov

http://nces.ed.gov/surveys/pss/

Current Population Survey 

Prior to July 2001, estimates of school enrollment rates, as well as social and economic 

characteristics of students, were based on data collected in the Census Bureau's monthly 

household survey of about 50,000 dwelling units. Beginning in July 2001, this sample 

was expanded to 60,000 dwelling units. The monthly Current Population Survey (CPS) 

sample consists of 754 areas comprising 2,007 geographic areas, independent cities, and 

minor civil divisions throughout the 50 states and the District of Columbia. The samples 
A-3 

are initially selected based on the decennial census files and are periodically updated to 

reflect new housing construction. 

The monthly CPS deals primarily with labor force data for the civilian noninstitutional 

population (i.e., excluding military personnel and their families living on post and 

inmates of institutions). In addition, in October of each year, supplemental questions are 

asked about highest grade completed, level and grade of current enrollment, attendance 

status, number and type of courses, degree or certificate objective, and type of 

organization offering instruction for each member of the household. In March of each 

year, supplemental questions on income are asked. The responses to these questions are 

combined with answers to two questions on educational attainment: highest grade of 

school ever attended, and whether that grade was completed. 

The estimation procedure employed for monthly CPS data involves inflating weighted 

sample results to independent estimates of characteristics of the civilian noninstitutional 

population in the United States by age, sex, and race. These independent estimates are 

based on statistics from decennial censuses; statistics on births, deaths, immigration, and 

emigration; and statistics on the population in the armed services. Generalized standard 

error tables are provided in the Current Population Reports. The data are subject to both 

nonsampling and sampling errors. 

Caution should also be used when comparing data from 1993 to 1999 which reflect 1990 

census-based population controls, with data from March 1993 and earlier years, which 

reflect 1980 or earlier census-based population controls. This change in population 

controls had relatively little impact on summary measures such as means, medians, and 

percentage distributions. It did have a significant impact on levels. For example, use of 

1990-based population controls results in about a 1 percent increase in the civilian 

noninstitutional population and in the number of families and households. Thus, 

estimates of levels for data collected in 1994 and later years will differ from those for 

earlier years by more than what could be attributed to actual changes in the population. 

These differences could be disproportionately greater for certain subpopulation groups 

than for the total population. 

Further information on CPS may be obtained from: 

Education and Social Stratification Branch 

Population Division 

Census Bureau 

U.S. Department of Commerce 

Washington, DC 20233 

http://www.bls.census.gov/cps/cpsmain.htm

B-1 

APPENDIX B 

Formulas and Details of Each Indicator 

Figure B-1. Current Population Survey High School Completion Indicator (CPS HSCI) 

 

Formula: 

Gy HSCI = 

Py 

 

Where: G = Number of persons ages 18-24 with a high school credential 

 Y = School year 

 P = Population of 18-24-year olds not enrolled in grades K-12 

Purpose: 

 This status indicator calculates high school credential recipients as a percent of the 18-24-year old population 

Data: 

 Calculation of HSCI requires information on: 

 ● Total number of persons ages 18-24 with a high school credential in a single year 

 ● Population of 18-24-year-olds who are not enrolled in grades K-12 

Steps: 

To calculate HSCI for students who graduated in the 2001-02 school year: 

1. The numerator is equal to: 

 Number of students with a high school credential in the 2001-02 school year 

2. The denominator is equal to: 

 Population of 18-24-year-olds who are not enrolled in grades K-12 

 3. Divide the numerator (1) by the denominator (2). 

 
B-2 

Figure B-2. NCES Digest Graduation Indicator (DGI) 

 

Formula: 

 Gy DGI = 

Py 

 

Where: G = Number of graduates 

 Y = School year 

 P = Population of 17-year-olds 

Purpose: 

 This status indicator calculates the percentage of 17-year-olds who are high school graduates 

Data: 

 Calculation of DGI requires information on: 

 ● Total number of students graduating with a regular diploma in a single year 

 ● Population of 17-year-olds for that same year 

Steps: 

To calculate DGI for students who graduated in the 2001-02 school year: 

1. The numerator is equal to: 

 Number of students graduating with a regular diploma in the 2001-02 school year 

2. The denominator is equal to: 

 Population of 17-year-olds for the 2001-02 school year 

 3. Divide the numerator (1) by the denominator (2). 

 

 
B-3 

Figure B-3. Freshman GraduationRate, All Freshmen (FGR) 

 

Formula: 

 Gy FGR = 

S*

9,y-3 

 

Where: G = Number of graduates receiving a regular diploma 

 Y = School year 

 S*

9 = all 9th grade-students 

Purpose: 

This status indicator calculates an estimate of on-time graduation rates, taking into consideration total diploma 

recipients in the chosen year and all freshman students from three years prior to the selected year 

Data: 

 Calculation of FGR requires information on: 

 ● Total number of students graduating with a regular diploma in a single year 

 ● Total number of 9th-grade students from three years prior to the chosen year 

Steps: 

To calculate FGR for students who began high school in, for example, the 1998-99 school year and who graduated in 

the 2001-02 school year: 

1. The numerator is equal to: 

 Number of students graduating in the 2001-02 school year 

2. The denominator is equal to: 

 Number of 9th-grade students (first-time and non-first-time) enrolled in the 1998-99 school year 

 3. Divide the numerator (1) by the denominator (2). 

 
B-4 

Figure B-4. Averaged Freshman Graduation Rate, First-Time Freshmen (AFGR) 

 

Formula: 

 Gy AFGR = 

S9,y-3 

 

Where: G = Number of graduates receiving a regular diploma 

 Y = School Year 

 S9 = Number of first-time 9th-graders 

Purpose: 

This indicator calculates graduation rates in year y for first-time 9th-grade students in year y-3. 

Data: 

 Calculation of AFGR requires information on: 

 ● Total number of students graduating with a regular diploma in a single year (y) 

 ● 

Total number of first-time 9th-grade students from three years prior to the 

chosen year (y-3) 

Steps: 

To calculate AFGR for students who began high school in, for example, the 1998-99 school year and who graduated in 

the 2001-02 school year: 

1. The numerator is equal to: 

 The number of students graduating in the 2001-02 school year 

2. The denominator is equal to: 

 The number of students enrolled in 9th grade for the first time in the 1998-99 school year 

 

3. Divide the numerator (1) by the denominator (2). 

 
B-5 

Figure B-5. CCD Graduation Leaver Indicator (CCD GLI) 

 

Formula: 

 Gy GLI = 

Gy + Ay + D12,y + D11,y-1 + D10,y-2 + D9,y-3 

 

Where: G = Number of graduates receiving a regular diploma 

Y = School year 

 A = Number of alternative completers 

 D = Number of dropouts in a specified grade and year 

Purpose: 

This departure classification indicator calculates graduation rates by examining three types of students (leavers): 

graduates, alternative completers, and dropouts at various grades. 

Data: 

 Calculation of GLI requires information on: 

 ● Number of graduates receiving a regular diploma in a single year 

 ● Number of alternative completers in a single year 

 ●

 

Number of dropouts specified by grade and year for four consecutive years up to the year of 

graduation data 

Steps: 

To calculate GLI for students who began high school in, for example, the 1998-99 school year and who graduated in 

the 2001-02 school year: 

1. The numerator is equal to: 

 Number of students graduating in the 2001-02 school year 

2. The denominator is equal to: 

 Number of students graduating in the 2001-02 school year 

 plus 

 Number of alternative completers for the 2001-02 school year 

 plus 

 Number of 12th-grade dropouts in the 2001-02 school year 

 plus 

 Number of 11th grade-dropouts in the 2000-01 school year 

 plus 

 Number of 10th-grade dropouts in the 1999-2000 school year 

 plus 

 Number of 9th grade-dropouts in the 1998-99 school year 

 3. Divide the numerator (1) by the denominator (2). 
B-6 

Figure B-6. Swanson's Cumulative Promotion Indicator (SCPI) 

 

Formula: 

 S10,y+1 S11,y+1 S12,y+1 Gy SCPI = 

S9,y

* 

S10,y

* 

S11,y

* 

S12,y 

 

Where: Sgrade = Number of students in a specified grade 

Y = School year 

 G = Number of graduates receiving regular diplomas 

Purpose: 

This cumulative indicator calculates an estimate of on-time completion rates taking into consideration enrollments 

by grade in two consecutive years. 

Data: 

 Calculation of SCPI requires information on: 

 ● Number of students in 9th, 10th, 11th, and 12th grades in the year of analysis 

 ● Number of students in 10th, 11th, and 12th grades in the year after the year of analysis 

 ● Number of graduates receiving regular diplomas in the year of analysis 

Steps: 

To calculate SCPI for students who began high school in, for example, the 1998-99 school year and who graduated in 

the 2001-02 school year: 

1. The numerator is equal to: 

Number of students enrolled in 10th grade for the 2002-03 school year 

 times 

Number of students enrolled in 11th grade for the 2002-03 school year 

 times 

Number of students enrolled in 12th grade for the 2002-03 school year 

 times 

Number of students graduating with regular diplomas during the 2001-02 school year 

2. The denominator is equal to: 

Number of students enrolled in 9th grade for the 2001-02 school year 

 times 

Number of students enrolled in 10th grade for the 2001-02 school year 

 times 

Number of students enrolled in 11th grade for the 2001-02 school year 

 times 

Number of students enrolled in 12th grade for the 2001-02 school year 

 3. Divide the numerator (1) by the denominator (2). 
B-7 

Figure B-7. Greene's Graduation Indicator (GGI) 

 

Formula: 

 Gy GGI = 

S'12,y 

 

Where: S'12,y = ( 1 + ΔPHS ) * ( S'9,y-3 ) 

 

 ( S9,y + S10,y + S11,y + S12,y ) - ( S9,y-3 + S10,y-3 + S11,y-3 + S12,y-3 ) 

 

ΔPHS = 

( S9,y-3 + S10,y-3 + S11,y-3 + S12,y-3 ) 

 

 S8,y-4 + S9,y-3 + S10,y-2 

 S'9,y-3 = 3 

Where: G = Number of graduates receiving a regular diploma 

 Y = School Year 

 Sgrade = Number of students enrolled in a specific grade 

 ΔPHS = High school population change over 4 year period 

 S'9,y-3 = Smoothed estimator for first-time 9th grade enrollment 

When: DO NOT apply formula when the following statements are true: 

 S'9,y-3 is less than 200 

 or 

 ΔPHS is greater than 30 percent 

 or 

 if S'9,y-3 is less than 2000 and ΔPHS is greater than 20 percent 

Purpose: 

This cumulative indicator calculates an on-time graduation rate. This is done by first estimating the number of 

students in a graduating cohort. Next, an estimation is made of the number of students in a 9th-grade cohort who 

should be expected to graduate four years later. The 9th-grade enrollment is not a direct cohort measure but a 

smoothed estimate to control for 1) population changes between 8th and 9th grade due to the transfers between the 

public and private sector, 2) artificially inflated 9th-grade enrollments due to the significant number of students 

held back in that grade, and 3) depreciated 10th-grade enrollement due to the inflated 9th-grade enrollment and 

because students often begin dropping out between 9th and 10th grades. The population change (enrollment 

change) is calculated to control for changes in enrollment due to students moving in and out of state rather than by 

dropping out of school. 

Data: 

 Calculation of GGI requires information on: 

 ● Number of graduates receiving a regular diploma in a specified year 

 ● High school population (grades 9 through 12) for a specified year 

 ● High school population (grades 9 through 12) for three years prior to the specified year 

 ● Number of 8th grade students enrolled four years prior to the specified year 

 ● Number of 9th grade students enrolled three years prior to the specified year 

 ● Number of 10th grade students enrolled two years prior to the specified year 

 This measure can be computed using aggregated data at the school, district, state or national level. 

Steps: 

To calculate GGI for students who began high school in, for example, the 1998-99 school year and who graduated in 

the 2001-02 school year: 
B-8 

1. The numerator is equal to: 

 Number of students graduating in the 2001-02 school year 

2. Create a smoothed enrollment estimate for the 9th grade cohort by determining the mean of: 

 Number of 8th grade students enrolled in the 1997-98 school year 

 plus 

 Number of 9th grade students enrolled in the 1998-99 school year 

 plus 

 Number of 10th grade students enrolled in the 1999-2000 school year 

3. Determine the total high school populations for the 1998-99 and 2001-02 school years by summing the: 

 Number of 9th, 10th, 11th, and 12th grade students in 1998-99 and 2001-02 

4. Determine the percent change in population by: 

Subtracting the 1998-99 high school population from the 2001-02 high school population (step 3) 

 and dividing that figure by the 

High school population in the 1998-99 school year (step 3) 

5. Create an estimate for the potential 12th grade population in the 2001-02 school: 

Adding one to the percent change in population (step 4) 

 and multiplying that figure by the 

Number of students in the estimated 9th grade cohort (step 2) 

 

6. Divide the numerator (1) by the figure in step 5 unless the 'When' statement in the formula section is 

true. 
B-9 

Figure B-8. In-transfer Adjusted Graduation Indicator (IAGI) 

 

Formula: 

 Gy IAGI = 

S9,y-3 + TI9,y-3 + TI10, y-2 + TI11,y-1 + TI12,y 

 

Where: S9 = Number of first-time 9th-graders 

 Y = School year 

 G = Number of graduates receiving a regular diploma 

 TI = Number of students transfering into a grade level 

Purpose: 

This indicator calculates graduation rates for students who began 9th grade for the first time three school years 

earlier (i.e., y-3) taking into consideration the number of students who transfer into 9th, 10th, 11th, or 12th grade.

Data: 

 Calculation of IAGI requires information on: 

 ● Total number of first-time 9th-graders each year 

 ● 

Total number of students transferring to a high school and to a particular grade level each 

year 

 ● Total number of students graduating each year 

Steps: 

To calculate IAGI for students who began high school in, for example, the 1998-99 school year and who 

graduated in the 2001-02 school year: 

1. The numerator is equal to: 

 Number of students graduating in the 2001-02 school year 

2. The denominator is equal to: 

 Number of students entering 9th grade for the first time in Sept 1998 

 plus 

 Number of students transferring into 9th grade during the 1998-99 school year 

 plus 

 Number of students transferring into 10th grade during the 1999-2000 school year 

 plus 

 Number of students transferring into 11th grade during the 2000-01 school year 

 plus 

 Number of students transferring 12th grade during the 2001-02 school year 

 3. Divide the numerator (1) by the denominator (2). 
B-10 

Figure B-9. Cohort Graduation Indicator (CGI) 

 

Formula: 

 S9,cGc+3 + TI9,cGc+3 + TI10,c+1Gc+3 + TI11,c+2Gc+3 + TI12,c+3Gc+3 CGI = 

S9,c + TI9,c + TI10,c+1 + TI11,c+2 + TI12,c+3

 

Where: S9 = Number of first-time 9th-graders 

 C = Cohort school year (i.e., the school year a student entered high school) 

 G = Number of graduates receiving a regular diploma 

 TI = Number of students transferring into a grade level 

Purpose: 

This cumulative indicator calculates on-time graduation rates taking into consideration students who transfer in within 

a four-year period. This is a cohort-based indicator, which means that each student is considered part of a group of 

students who graduated in a particular year and began high school four years earlier. For example, a student who is 

part of the 2001-02 school-year-graduation cohort, began high school in the 1998-99 school year. Students can join a 

cohort by transferring into it. 

Data: 

 Calculation of CGI requires the following information at student level: 

 ● Year a student enters the 9th grade and whether he/she enters 9th grade for the first time 

 ● Year and grade level a student transfers into a cohort 

 ● Year of graduation 

 ● A reason for a student's departure prior to graduation and documentation related to the departure 

It is necessary to collect this information annually for each student. In other words, CGI requires schools to track 

individual students as they progress through high school. 

Steps: 

To calculate CGI for students who began high school in, for example, the 1998-99 school year and who graduated in the 

2001-02 school year: 

1. The numerator is equal to: 

 Entered the 9th grade for the first time in Sept of 1998 and graduated in 2001-02 school year 

 plus 

 Transferred into 9th grade during the school year of 1998-99 and graduated in 2001-02 school year 

 plus 

 Transferred into 10th grade during the school year of 1999-2000 and graduated in 2001-02 school year 

 plus 

 Transferred into 11th grade during the school year of 2000-01 and graduated in 2001-02 school year 

 plus 

 Transferred into 12th grade during the school year of 2001-02 and graduated in 2001-02 school year 

2. The denominator is equal to: 

 Entered 9th grade for the first time in Sept 1998 

 plus 

 Transferred into 9th grade during 1998-99 school year 

 plus 

 Transferred into 10th grade during 1999-2000 school year 

 plus 

 Transferred into 11th grade during 2000-01 school year 

 plus 

 Transferred into 12th grade during 2001-02 school year 

 3. Divide the numerator (1) by the denominator (2). 
B-11 

Figure B-10. Exclusion-Adjusted Cohort Graduation Indicator (EACGI) 

 

Formula: 

 S9,cGc+3 + TI9,cGc+3 + TI10,c+1Gc+3 + TI11,c+2Gc+3 + T12,c+3Gc+3 EACGI= 

(S9,c - Ec,c+1,c+2, c+3) + (TI9,c - Ec,c+1,c+2, c+3) + (TI10,c+1 - Ec+1,c+2, c+3) + (TI11,c+2 - Ec+2,c+3) + (TI12,c+3 - Ec+3) 

 

Where: S9 = Number of first-time 9th-graders 

 C = Cohort school year (i.e., the school year a student entered high school) 

 G = Number of graduates receiving a regular diploma 

 TI = Number of students transferring into a grade level 

 E = 

Number of students excluded (documented transfers to state-designated diploma granting 

programs, death, or imprisonment) 

 

Purpose: 

This cumulative indicator calculates on-time graduation rates taking into consideration students who transfer in and 

students who transfer out within a four year period. It is a cohort-based indicator, which means that each student is 

considered part of a group of students who graduated in a particular year and began high school four years earlier. 

For example, a student who is part of the 2001-02 school-year-graduation cohort, began high school in the 1998-99 

school year. Students can join a cohort by transferring into it and they are excluded from a cohort if they leave 

school for the three specific reasons prior to graduation. 

Data: 

Calculation of EACGI requires the following information at student level: 

● Year a student enters the 9th grade and whether he/she enters 9th grade for the first time 

● Year and grade level a student transfers into a cohort 

● Year of graduation 

● A reason for a student's departure prior to graduation and documentation related to the departure 

 

 

(Qualified departures for which schools need to obtain appropriate documentation are 1) transfers 

to other institutions offering a state-designated diploma-granting program 2) imprisonment and 3) 

death) 

It is necessary to collect this information annually for each student. In other words, EACGI requires schools to track 

individual students as they progress through high school. 

Steps: 

To calculate EACGI for students who began high school in, for example, the 1998-99 school year and who graduated in 

the 2001-02 school year: 

1. The numerator is equal to: 

 Entered the 9th grade for the first time in Sept of 1998 and graduated in 2001-02 school year 

 plus 

 Transferred into 9th grade during the school year of 1998-99 and graduated in 2001-02 school year 

 plus 

 Transferred into 10th grade during the school year of 1999-2000 and graduated in 2001-02 school year 

 plus 

 Transferred into 11th grade during the school year of 2000-01 and graduated in 2001-02 school year 

 plus 

 Transferred into 12th grade during the school year of 2001-02 and graduated in 2001-02 school year 

2. The denominator is equal to: 

Entered 9th grade for the first time in Sept 1998 minus qualifying departures between Sept 1998 and end 

of May 2002 without graduating 

 plus 
B-12 

Transferred into 9th grade during 1998-99 school year minus qualifying departures between Sept 1998 

and end of May 2002 without graduating 

 plus 

Transferred into 10th grade during 1999-2000 school year minus qualifying departures between Sept 1999 

and end of May 2002 without graduating 

 plus 

Transferred into 11th grade during 2000-01 school year minus qualifying departures between Sept 2000 

and end of May 2002 without graduating 

 plus 

Transferred into 12th grade during 2001-02 school year minus qualifying departures between Sept 2001 

and end of May 2002 without graduating 

 3. Divide the numerator (1) by the denominator (2).