EDUCATIONAL TRAJECTORIES AND OUTCOMES ...

EDUCATIONAL TRAJECTORIES AND OUTCOMES OF YOUTH IN FOSTER CARE

1

Pears, K. C., Kim, H. K., & Brown, K. L. (2018). Factors affecting the educational trajectories and outcomes of youth in foster care. In E. Trejos-Castillo & N. Trevino-Schafer (Eds.), Handbook of foster youth (pp. 208-222). New York: Routledge.

Factors Affecting the Educational Trajectories and Outcomes of Youth in Foster Care Katherine C. Pearsa Hyoun K. Kima b Kimbree L. Browna a

Oregon Social Learning Center b

Yonsei University

Acknowledgements Support for this chapter was provided by the following grants: R01 DA021424 and P30 DA023920 Division of Epidemiology, Services and Prevention Research, Prevention Research Branch, NIDA, U.S. PHS. The content of this chapter is solely the responsibility of the authors and does not necessarily represent the official views of the funding organizations. Katherine Pears is a co-developer of the KITS Program. The authors would like to thank Sally Schwader for editorial assistance.


2

Abstract Youth in foster care are particularly likely to do poorly in school. They have higher rates of suspension, use of special education services, and dropout. They also tend to have lower educational attainment overall than their peers who are not in foster care. There are a number of potential reasons for this poor performance; most are linked to the high likelihood that these youth have experienced adversity in the forms of maltreatment and frequent moves among and between caregivers. Understanding the factors affecting the school performance and adjustment of youth in foster care can help in efforts to protect these youth from poor outcomes over time. This chapter presents a longitudinal model of the factors affecting the educational trajectories of youth in foster care. Additionally, several approaches to promoting better educational outcomes across different developmental stages are explored.


3

Youth in foster care often perform worse in school than their peers who are not in foster care across a number of domains, including academic, social, and behavioral adjustment (Blome, 1997; Scherr, 2007). They are likely to enter kindergarten without the skills needed to succeed in school (Pears, Heywood, Kim, & Fisher, 2011), and these skill deficits persist throughout the school years, resulting in higher rates of placement in special education, greater numbers of suspensions and expulsions, and much lower rates of high school completion and college attendance (Blome, 1997; Scherr, 2007). Conversely, for youth at high risk for poor adjustment, success in school appears to confer a number of protective advantages, including better overall educational, occupational, and income attainment and better physical and mental health (Campbell et al., 2014; Jones, Greenberg, & Crowley, 2015; Naccarato, Brophy, & Courtney, 2010; Reynolds, Temple, Ou, Arteaga, & White, 2011). Thus, ensuring educational success for youth in foster care may contribute to their long-term health and psychosocial well-being. Although past studies have done the important work of establishing the typical educational outcomes for youth in foster care, very little research has investigated the factors that influence and predict those outcomes over the course of youth’s development (Mehana & Reynolds, 2004). A good deal of the past research has been retrospective (e.g., asking young adults who were formerly in care to recall events from their school years) and focused either only on describing outcomes or explaining how single factors might be linked to outcomes (Mehana & Reynolds, 2004). Whereas such research has been very helpful in illuminating the poor educational outcomes that many youth in foster care experience, it has also been largely atheoretical. Thus, the field lacks a coherent conceptual model specifying the behaviors, experiences, and contextual factors that predict poor school experiences and the mechanisms by which these predictors independently and additively influence youth’s outcomes. Importantly, in


4

order to be able to understand how and when to most effectively prevent negative educational trajectories, such conceptual models must also be longitudinal in nature, illustrating which predictors are most influential at which developmental stages. In order to synthesize the past research and begin to develop a more theory-informed approach, this chapter presents a longitudinal model of the predictors and processes involved in the development of educational outcomes for youth in foster care. The model takes a developmental stages approach, recognizing that the effects of experiences during one developmental stage are likely to carry forward into and impact the next stage (Cicchetti & Rogosch, 2002). The model also takes an ecological systems approach (Bronfenbrenner, 1989), focusing not only on the intraindividual factors, but also the interpersonal and contextual factors that might influence youth’s educational trajectories and outcomes. This is intended to represent the beginning of what will hopefully be a larger effort across the field to develop a comprehensive model of the pathways to varied educational outcomes for youth in foster care, which can be used to tailor effective interventions to promote positive youth outcomes. With that goal in mind, in the latter portion of this chapter, several promising prevention efforts targeting critical factors at each developmental stage in the proposed model are reviewed. A Model of Factors Affecting the Educational Outcomes of Youth in Foster Care Figure 1 outlines the proposed model of factors that may contribute to poor educational outcomes for youth in foster care. The model begins with the experiences of placement in foster care and maltreatment–the reason that most youth are placed into foster care (United States Department of Health and Human Services, 2016). Because they so frequently co-occur and it is beyond the scope of this chapter to separate out the individual effects of these early adverse experiences, they are considered together here. The effects of these experiences on educational


5

outcomes, as well as the factors that might mediate the effects of these experiences, are shown across prekindergarten and the K-12 school years. These factors then cumulatively predict the long-term educational outcomes of youth in foster care. Each stage in the model is reviewed in detail below. Prekindergarten Readiness for School Deficits in pre-academic and social skills. From the beginning of their school careers, youth in foster care may have greater difficulties than their peers who are not in foster care. Well-developed pre-academic skills—literacy and numeracy—are essential to school readiness and continuing school success. Early literacy skills are positively linked to later reading and math outcomes across elementary and middle school (Duncan et al., 2007), and youth who read proficiently by Grade 3 are consequently more likely to graduate from high school (Hernandez, 2012). Early numeracy, although less studied than early literacy, is also positively linked to academic achievement (Duncan et al., 2007). Conversely, poor early reading and math abilities predict behavioral difficulties and a greater likelihood of grade retention across elementary and middle school (Halonen, Aunola, Ahonen, & Nurmi, 2006; McIntosh, Reinke, Kelm, & Sadler, 2013). Maltreatment and foster care placement negatively impact youth’s early academic skills. For example, youth in foster care demonstrate deficits in critical pre-reading skills when compared to low-income youth who were not in foster care (Pears et al., 2011). Such deficits might arise from histories of neglect, during which parents were unlikely to have engaged in activities with the youth such as reading to them and teaching them critical pre-academic skills (Manly, Lynch, Oshri, Herzog, & Wortel, 2013). Additionally, experiences of abuse and neglect may have resulted in injuries or developmental delays that might interfere with youth’s abilities


6

to learn new skills at the same rate as nonmaltreated youth (Pears & Fisher, 2005a). Youth’s abilities to get along with adults and peers are also critical to school readiness. Key prosocial behaviors that predict positive peer and teacher relationships include entering peer groups, sharing materials, cooperating, and maintaining social interactions (Ladd, Birch, & Buhs, 1999; Pianta & Stuhlman, 2004). Accurately interpreting the emotions of others (i.e., emotion understanding) is also central to reacting appropriately to peers (Denham et al., 2002). Over time, individuals who show greater prosocial skills at school entry are more likely to graduate from high school, complete college, and obtain full and stable employment in young adulthood—as well as avoid problem behaviors such as involvement in criminality and excessive alcohol use (Jones et al., 2015). The social skills of preschool-aged children in foster care appear to lag behind those of their peers. For example, youth in foster care have more difficulties recognizing and interpreting the thoughts and emotions of others, which are key social skills (Harden, Morrison, & Clyman, 2014; Pears & Fisher, 2005b). Once they enroll in school, youth in foster care generally score lower on ratings of social skills than their peers who are not in foster care (Almas et al., 2012; Leve, Fisher, & DeGarmo, 2007). Deficits in regulatory systems. In addition to pre-academic skills, youth’s abilities to regulate emotions and behaviors to prevent themselves from disrupting academic performance and social relationships are essential to school readiness. Inhibitory control, an executive function that overlaps with self-regulation, involves voluntarily inhibiting dominant attentional or behavioral responses (e.g., yelling out an answer in class) to perform a different response (e.g., raising one’s hand before speaking). These skills influence the acquisition of early literacy skills; higher levels of inattention are associated with lower levels of early literacy, even after


7

accounting for cognitive abilities (Lonigan et al., 1999; Walcott, Scheemaker, & Bielski, 2010). Proficiency in emotional and behavioral self-regulation and inhibitory control also predict better engagement in learning, higher academic achievement, and better social skills (Brock, RimmKaufman, Nathanson, & Grimm, 2009; Graziano, Reavis, Keane, & Calkins, 2007; Howse, Calkins, Anastopoulos, Keane, & Shelton, 2003). A number of studies have demonstrated negative effects of early adversity on the regulatory systems of youth in foster care. Specifically, preschool-aged children in foster care show deficits in inhibitory control, which appear to be closely associated with changes in caregivers (Lewis, Dozier, Ackerman, & Sepulveda, 2007; McDermott, Westerlund, Zeanah, Nelson, & Fox, 2012; Pears, Bruce, Fisher, & Kim, 2010). Early difficulties in inhibitory control then contribute to poorer functioning in elementary school (Pears, Fisher, Bruce, Kim, & Yoerger, 2010). The functioning of the youth’s physiological stress regulatory systems is an underlying aspect of emotional and behavioral self-regulation that may be particularly important to youth who have experienced early adversity. The hypothalamic pituitary adrenal (HPA) axis, a stresssensitive neurobiological system (Gunnar, 1998; Hertsgaard, Gunnar, Erickson, & Nachmias, 1995; Jacobson, Bihun, & Chiodo, 1999; Levine, Lyons, & Schatzberg, 1997), functions interdependently with other systems to mobilize bodily resources in response to real or perceived threat. Its functioning is often measured by the amount of cortisol—the end product of HPA activity—secreted by an organism. Cortisol displays a diurnal rhythm typically characterized by levels that peak around 30–45 minutes after awakening and decline to near zero by bedtime (Kirschbaum, Steyer, Patalla, Schwenkmezger, & Hellhammer, 1990). Response to and recovery from environmental challenges are necessary for well-regulated HPA axis functioning (McEwen,


8

1998), and school can present a number of challenges to young children—including the demands of entering a new environment, learning new rules and routines, adjusting to the signals and responses of a new group of peers, and complying with requests from unfamiliar adults. Previous research (Bruce, Davis, & Gunnar, 2001) has shown that typically developing children demonstrate an HPA axis response to the start of school, characterized by a steeper diurnal cortisol slope (or greater change in cortisol levels across the day) on the first day of school compared to later in the school year. This may indicate an appropriate HPA axis response to the normative stressor of starting school (Bruce et al., 2001). In one of the only studies to examine prediction of outcomes from the HPA axis response to the start of school, a steeper cortisol slope on the first day of school was linked to higher teacher ratings of learning behaviors through the fall of kindergarten (Graham, Pears, Kim, Bruce, & Fisher, 2017). Youth in foster care display dysregulation in their HPA axis functioning (Bernard, Butzin-Dozier, Rittenhouse, & Dozier, 2010; Bruce, Fisher, Pears, & Levine, 2009; Gunnar & Vazquez, 2001). For example, maltreated youth in foster care failed to show an increased diurnal cortisol slope across the first day of school compared to nonmaltreated youth (Graham et al., 2011). This may signify a lack of responsivity to the transition, such that these youth fail to pick up on important aspects of the new school environment and modify their behavior to the demands of that environment, which may then lead to skills deficits (Graham et al., 2017). Lack of access to high-quality early childhood education. In low-income youth, school readiness deficits have been linked to the lack of quality early childhood programming and other experiences such as exposure to books and high levels of vocabulary (Alexander & Entwisle, 1988; Chazan-Cohen et al., 2009). Given that many youth in foster care experienced low incomes in their families of origin (Barth, Wildfire, & Green, 2006), it is likely that a lack of


9

early learning experiences contributes to their low school readiness skills as well. The limited research on the early childhood education (ECE) experiences of youth in foster care suggests that they may be enrolled in programs targeted at high-risk children, like Head Start, at lower rates than their peers (National Working Group on Foster Care and Education, 2014). Furthermore, when these youth are in childcare, that care may be of lower quality than that of even their lowincome peers (Lipscomb & Pears, 2011). This lower rate of high-quality ECE usage might be partially attributable to the fact that youth in foster care, even preschoolers, can be highly mobile. Although experiences of early adversity can have negative effects on prekindergarten educational outcomes, there is also research illustrating that academic and social skills, as well as ECE experiences, can buffer the negative effects of early adversity on outcomes for youth in foster care. For example, in a study examining the effects of foster care on later adjustment, researchers found that early social competence and cognitive ability predicted patterns of stable or increasing behavioral adjustment across time (Proctor, Skriner, Roesch, & Litrownik, 2010). Another study found that participation in Head Start programming predicted better subsequent academic scores for girls and youth with older caregivers in foster care (Lee, 2016). Thus, one potential point of intervention to prevent later educational difficulties might be to strengthen prekindergarten academic, social, and regulatory skills through quality programming. Youth in Foster Care in Elementary through High School Poor academic, behavioral, and social functioning. There is evidence that youth’s earlier deficits in school readiness and regulatory skills contribute to continuing problems with academic, social, and behavioral adjustment—considered together here because they often influence one another—throughout the school years (Pears, Fisher, et al., 2010). One metaanalysis found that youth in foster care were almost five times more likely to be placed in special


10

education classes than their peers who were not in care (Scherr, 2007). The majority of youth involved with child welfare who were in special education had received a diagnosis of emotional disturbance—a pattern of behavior associated with difficulties in learning and displaying inappropriate social behaviors toward others—which was associated with higher rates of emergency room visits and juvenile delinquency (Lee & Jonson-Reid, 2009). Higher rates of special education placement may adversely affect these youth’s opportunities for educational attainment because, compared to students in general education, foster youth in special education earn fewer credits toward graduation (Geenen & Powers, 2006). Such poor outcomes for foster youth in special education have led some researchers to question whether such placements might be overly restrictive for some of these youth (see Zetlin, 2006). In addition to higher rates of special education placement, youth in foster care are more likely to be held back in a grade than their peers (Burley & Halpern, 2001; Flynn & Biro, 1998; Scherr, 2007). One study found a 32% difference between the percentages of youth in foster care who had repeated a grade (41%) and the percentage of youth not in care (9%) who had done so (Flynn & Biro, 1998). Youth in foster care are also more likely than their peers to receive sanctions for poor behavior in school. Rates of suspensions and expulsions are consistently higher for youth in foster care than for their peers (McMillen, Auslander, Elze, White, & Thompson, 2003; Scherr, 2007; Smithgall, Gladden, Howard, Goerge, & Courtney, 2004; Zima et al., 2000). Time missed from school is likely to negatively affect achievement. Lack of caregiver involvement. Decades of research show that caregiver involvement is critical for youth’s positive school adjustment (Barnard, 2004; Christenson, 2004). Caregivers can provide practical assistance (e.g., helping with homework and advocating for the youth at school), emotional support, and may pass on their views on the value of education (Barnard,


11

2004; Chazan-Cohen et al., 2009; Miedel & Reynolds, 1999). There is very little research on caregiver involvement in school for youth in foster care, specifically, but the extant studies suggest that involvement is poorer for these youth (Pears, Fisher, et al., 2010). For example, 65% of foster youth in high school reported that their caregivers had never attended a teacher conference, 73% reported that their caregivers had never visited their class, and 70% reported that their caregivers had never volunteered at school (Blome, 1997). Multiple placement changes are likely to interfere with caregiver involvement in schooling (Storer et al., 2014) in several ways. The caregiver may not receive adequate information about the youth’s academic history. For example, one study found that information on past academic performance was missing from 53% of foster youth’s school records (Parrish et al., 2001). Additionally, if the duration of a placement is short (e.g., 1–2 months), caregivers may not have the opportunity to become involved with the schooling of the youth in their care. A recent study demonstrated that while foster caregivers clearly believed that involvement in school was an important part of their role, most caregivers never or only occasionally participated in activities at their foster youth’s schools. By contrast, over 80% were involved at home through asking about homework or what was happening at school, although only 55–57% reported actually helping with homework activities (Beisse & Tyre, 2013). Caregiver involvement in schooling may buffer youth in foster care from some of the negative effects of early adversity. In one study of school outcomes through second grade, higher caregiver involvement predicted better academic competence (Pears et al., 2010). In another study of youth aged 10–15 years, higher home-based caregiver involvement (e.g., helping with homework, talking about problems at school) and higher academic expectations predicted academic success (Cheung & Pomerantz, 2012). Interestingly, caregiver involvement in school


12

activities (e.g., field trips or parent–teacher association meetings) was not significantly associated with academic success (Cheung, Lwin, & Jenkins, 2012). School mobility. Youth in foster care change schools frequently, and these changes often occur in the middle of school years (Barrat, 2013; Pears, Kim, Buchanan, & Fisher, 2015). Studies have shown that moving between schools puts all youth (not only those in foster care) at a disadvantage in a number of ways (Grigg, 2012; Mehana & Reynolds, 2004; Sullivan, Jones, & Mathiesen, 2010). Mobile youth may miss considerable amounts of classroom instructional time, causing them to fall behind their non-mobile peers. Some researchers have estimated that mobile students are about 4 months behind in reading and math achievement (Mehana & Reynolds, 2004). Once in the new school, youth may continue to lose time in appropriate instruction because it may take teachers time to establish the correct placement for the student. More important for youth in foster care, lack of records may interfere with teachers’ abilities to provide students with the appropriate level of instruction and services (Grigg, 2012). Finally, because school mobility is likely to disrupt social relationships (Sullivan et al., 2010), youth establishing new ties with peers and adults at their new school may become distracted from academics. Studies on school mobility, specifically in youth in foster care, generally find negative effects of such mobility (Conger & Finkelstein, 2003; Ferguson & Wolkow, 2012; Ward, 2009). However, many of these have been based on retrospective reports from youth exiting foster care, and thus were not able to show directionality of associations. More recently, a prospective study of youth in foster care demonstrated that school mobility in early elementary school adversely affected social-emotional adjustment in Grades 3 through 5 (Pears et al., 2015), but only for youth who had had poorer academic skills at kindergarten entry. The youth who had better early


13

academic skills did not experience negative effects even when they changed schools, once again highlighting a potential point of intervention (Pears et al., 2015). Long-Term Educational Outcomes for Youth in Foster Care Low rates of high school graduation and college attendance/completion. Although youth in foster care frequently aspire to go to college, they are between one third to one half less likely to graduate from high school than even their highest-risk, most impoverished peers (Barrat, 2013; Burley & Halpern, 2001; Wolanin, 2005). Those youth who do graduate from high school are less likely to go to college, and those who do attend college perform more poorly and are more likely to drop out than their peers (Day, Dworsky, Fogarty, & Damashek, 2011; Gillum, Lindsay, Murray, & Wells, 2016; Unrau, Font, & Rawls, 2012). Not surprisingly, studies that have followed foster care alumni across late adolescence and early adulthood have documented that completion rates for secondary education are very low (Gillum et al., 2016). Such low educational attainment may contribute to the finding that the average earnings of foster care alumni were not enough to raise them above the poverty threshold (Naccarato et al., 2010). Continuing effects of caregiver involvement and school mobility. As with performance in school, high school graduation and the pursuit of higher education are affected by both caregiver involvement and school mobility (Burley & Halpern, 2001). In a study of over 1000 foster care alumni, the higher the number of placement changes that a youth had experienced, the lower the likelihood that the youth would graduate from high school (Pecora, 2012). Other reports on foster youth aging out of care highlight the youths’ continuing reliance on relationships with their former foster caregivers to help them navigate the developmental milestones of young adulthood, including college attendance (Courtney, Piliavin, GroganKaylor, & Nesmith, 2001).


14

Support services. Studies on youth who have aged out of foster care have shown that the use of support services—such as financial aid, assistance with housing, and academic advising— increase the likelihood that they will complete higher education programs and obtain post-highschool degrees (Lovitt & Emerson, 2008; Merdinger, Hines, Osterling, & Wyatt, 2005). Additionally, federal legislation provides for Education and Training Vouchers (ETVs; Promoting Safe and Stable Families Amendments of 2001) for eligible foster care alumni to enroll in postsecondary vocational, technical, or academic programs. However, these studies also note that many youth do not know about the existence of or how to access these services (Lovitt & Emerson, 2008; Merdinger et al., 2005). There also appears to be wide variation in how individual states allocate funding for ETVs, as well as in whether additional funds beyond the ETVs are available to foster care alumni (Simmel, Shpiegel, & Murshid, 2013). The Buffering Effects of Better Educational Outcomes Throughout the proposed model of educational outcomes for youth in foster care, there is evidence that better academic, social, and behavioral outcomes and contextual factors at any one stage can help to buffer youth against negative outcomes in later stages. For example, as is noted above, youth in foster care who had better skills at the start of school did not appear to be adversely affected by school mobility in the same way as foster youth who had poorer early skills (Pears et al., 2015). Youth whose caregivers were more involved in kindergarten were likely to have better outcomes in elementary school than youth with less involved caregivers (Pears et al., 2010). Finally, youth who complete some college or obtain an Associate’s degree earn 50% more than former foster youth with lower educational attainment (Naccarato et al., 2010). The higher the level of educational attainment, the more likely the foster alumni are to have employment and housing and the less likely they are to be involved in criminal activities or


15

to have severe mental and physical health problems (Courtney, Hook, & Lee, 2012). Taken together, these findings suggest possible points of intervention to protect youth at each stage from negative outcomes in the next. They also highlight the critical importance of ensuring that youth in foster care have support to attain the highest levels of educational attainment that they can achieve in order to promote healthy adult outcomes. Interventions to Improve the Educational Outcomes of Youth in Foster Care This section explores interventions to improve educational outcomes for youth in foster care that target particular points in youth’s educational trajectories. It should be noted that there are a number of intervention programs to promote better school adjustment—such as Head Start—that include youth in foster care. This section, however, focuses on programs designed for youth in foster care. This is not an exhaustive review but rather an overview of the types of programs that might help to prevent negative educational outcomes. Further, it should be noted that very few of these programs have been rigorously tested, with the exception of the Kids in Transition to School (KITS) Program detailed below. Intervening on School Readiness to Improve Educational Outcomes Decades of research have demonstrated the utility of intervening before formal schooling begins in order to prepare youth for success in school and into adulthood (Ramey, Campbell, & Blair, 1998; Reynolds & Bezruczko, 1993; Reynolds & Temple, 2008). For youth in foster care, such intervention may be particularly important because it may buffer the effects of later events such as school mobility. Preparing youth in foster care to enter school with the skills necessary to succeed in kindergarten and promote subsequent positive school adjustment is the aim of the KITS Program (Pears et al., 2013). It features a series of 24 school readiness groups for children in which they learn and practice early literacy, numeracy, prosocial, and self-regulation skills.


16

The program also focuses on promoting caregiver involvement in early learning and school through a series of 12 workshops for caregivers that occur concurrently with the school readiness groups. These workshops feature discussions on such topics as how caregivers may teach critical early academic skills through everyday activities, how they may become involved at school, and positive parenting techniques to help children learn new skills and regulate behaviors that may interfere at school and home. The program duration is relatively short (12–16 weeks) in order to decrease the potential of mobility interfering with children receiving the full dosage. The KITS Program has been tested in a randomized controlled trial with 192 children in foster care who were entering kindergarten and their caregivers. The youth were followed through their fifth-grade year. Results from that study show immediate positive effects of the KITS Program on children’s early literacy and self-regulation skills just before kindergarten entry (Pears et al., 2013). Positive effects on children’s teacher-rated behavior at the end of kindergarten have also been demonstrated (Pears, Kim, & Fisher, 2012). Finally, the program continues to have positive effects on youth’s self-competence through the third grade, 4 years after the intervention was delivered. Additionally, the program decreases youth’s positive views of alcohol use and antisocial behavior, for which youth in foster care are at high risk, as well as the likelihood that they will be involved with deviant peers (Pears, Kim, & Fisher, 2016). Intervening to Reduce the Negative Effects of Mobility in Elementary through High School As is noted above, school mobility has negative effects on the academic, social, and behavioral adjustment of youth in foster care (Conger & Finkelstein, 2003; Ferguson & Wolkow, 2012; Pears, et al., 2015; Ward, 2009). Thus, efforts to reduce school mobility seem warranted. The Fostering Connections to Success and Increasing Adoptions Act (2008) requires that state child welfare agencies create plans to ensure educational stability for youth in foster care. Such


17

plans should allow the youth to remain in the same school that he or she attended at the time of placement unless it is not in the youth’s best interest. In practice, this may be difficult for agencies to do, especially if youth move between school districts during placement changes. The McKinney-Vento Homeless Education Assistance Improvements Act (1987) requires districts to provide transportation for youth who are homeless to their schools of origin. This has led some districts to develop novel approaches that could be replicated or expanded for youth in foster care. Such efforts do require the support of a range of school personnel, as well as endorsement by the family (James & Lopez, 2003). When changes in schools cannot be prevented, efforts to ensure that records and other information about the youth are quickly transferred to the new school become critically important. Various efforts have been made by states or localities to develop systems by which to do this. One example is the Foster Care Passport Program in Washington State. Through this program, youth’s dental, medical, behavioral, psychological, and educational records are summarized in one set of documents and given to the foster care provider at the youth’s entry into foster care (Burley & Halpern, 2001). In this way, the caregiver would be able to provide a new school with information about the youth’s past educational history, placement, and any special services. However, as noted in their review of the program, Burley and Halpern (2001) found that educational information was not always available to be included in the passports. Further, passports may not be available for all youth entering care (Children's Administration of the State of Washington, 2016). Thus, although this could be a promising way to reduce the length of time that it takes for records to reach new schools, it remains to be determined how all of the relevant information can be collected in one place as well as how records will be updated over time (Burley & Halpern, 2001). Additionally, the efficacy of this method in helping to


18

improve school outcomes would need to be rigorously tested. Intervening to Improve Attendance and Completion of Secondary Education Given that attendance in post-high-school training and academic programs may confer advantages on former foster youth (Courtney, Hook, & Lee, 2010; Naccarato et al., 2010), efforts to increase youths’ success in these programs could be critical for their adult functioning. As is noted above, at a national level, youth who have been involved in foster care may receive ETVs, and many states have individual tuition waiver or scholarship programs (Simmel et al., 2013). However, as Dworsky and Perez (2010) note, although these programs may help ease some of the financial burden, they do not actually offer the social, academic, and logistical supports that former foster youth may need to successfully navigate and complete postsecondary programs. Campus support programs specifically targeted at youth with a history of foster care offer a promising approach to increasing the likelihood that they will attain post-high-school education. Examples of services include financial support, assistance choosing courses, studyskills training, and mentoring. In one of the only studies of multiple campus-support programs in California and Washington (Dworsky & Pérez, 2010), the majority of program recipients who responded to a survey reported high satisfaction with the programs. Many youth appreciated the sense that there was somewhere that they go for support and to meet with peers who shared their experiences. Although the researchers noted that these programs are promising, they also pointed out that most programs do not yet have a way to track the progress of the participants through college. A critical next step in the development of such programs will be to rigorously evaluate their effects. Future Directions in Improving Educational Outcomes for Youth in Foster Care The interventions described above are not the only programs that may help to improve


19

the educational outcomes of youth who have been in foster care. However, given the unique sets of circumstances faced by youth in foster care, such as maltreatment and separation from the biological family, programs tailored to the needs of these youth may prove to be the most effective (Dworsky & Pérez, 2010). In order to determine if this is the case, interventions that specifically target youth in foster care need to be evaluated using rigorous tests, such as randomized controlled trials with long-term follow-up. Additionally, in order to give youth in foster care a voice in determining their experiences and outcomes, interventions should focus on the youths’ satisfaction with and feedback about potential ways to adapt and improve programs. Although in a few cases, such as the study of campus-support programs cited above (Dworsky & Pérez, 2010), youths have been interviewed about their experiences with an intervention, this is relatively rare in the literature. Future research should clarify what components and types of programs the youths themselves find helpful and easy to access. As shown in Figure 1, the educational trajectories of youth in foster care span multiple developmental stages, with the outcomes in each stage affecting those in the next. Although the factors shown are not the only ones that are likely to affect that trajectory, research has shown them to be salient for youth in foster care. As such, they provide points at which to intervene to improve the educational outcomes of these youth. Further research to identify other potential intervention targets is needed. Because youth in foster care are likely to have experienced a number of severe forms of early adversity, the deficits that they exhibit may require intervention across time and developmental stages. Thus, they are likely to benefit most from multiple programs across their educational trajectories that build on past successes, rather than one “single bullet” program at


20

any one stage. Research should focus on how efficacious interventions might be combined to additively increase positive educational outcomes across time. Critically, because there has been very little research on how educational trajectories and outcomes vary by gender and ethnicity, future research must consider these factors. Admissions into foster care are higher for minority youth (Wulczyn & Lery, 2007), suggesting that these youth may be disproportionately at risk for poorer educational outcomes. This is particularly important as the limited research on potential gender and ethnic disparities in service usage by youth in foster care shows that minority youth are less likely to utilize mental health services than non-minority youth (Leslie et al., 2000). Thus, in addition to understanding whether differences in trajectories and outcomes by gender and ethnicity exist, future studies will need to examine whether there are also differences in availability and usage of interventions to promote positive educational outcomes for these youth. Finally, it will also be important to tailor interventions to different groups depending on their differential experiences and their own input about which programs might be most “user-friendly” and efficacious. Conclusion Youth in foster care appear to have significantly reduced chances of such positive educational outcomes as finishing high school or completing a degree in secondary education. In order to change these outcomes for the better, we need to understand the factors affecting their educational trajectories at different stages of their school careers. We also need to examine how individual characteristics, skill levels, and behaviors, as well as contextual factors, may interact to produce differing outcomes over time. Through understanding the risk and protective factors for negative educational outcomes and using those factors to build testable, theoretical models, researchers and practitioners will be better able to effectively increase positive educational

EDUCATIONAL TRAJECTORIES AND OUTCOMES OF YOUTH IN FOSTER CARE trajectories for youth in foster care.

21


22

References Alexander, K. L., & Entwisle, D. R. (1988). Achievement in the first 2 years of school: Patterns and processes. Monographs of the Society for Research in Child Development, 53, 1–157. doi:10.2307/1166081 Almas, A. N., Degnan, K. A., Radulescu, A., Nelson III, C. A., Zeanah, C. H., & Fox, N. A. (2012). Effects of early intervention and the moderating effects of brain activity on institutionalized children's social skills at age 8. PNAS Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 109(Suppl 2), 17228–17231. doi:10.1073/pnas.1121256109 Barnard, W. M. (2004). Parent involvement in elementary school and educational attainment. Children and Youth Services Review, 26(1), 39–62. doi:10.1016/j.childyouth.2003.11.002 Barrat, V. X. (2013). The invisible achievement gap, Part 1: Education outcomes of students in foster care in California’s public schools. San Francisco: WestEd. Barth, R. P., Wildfire, J., & Green, R. L. (2006). Placement into foster care and the interplay of urbanicity, child behavior problems, and poverty. American Journal of Orthopsychiatry, 76(3), 358–366. doi:10.1037/0002-9432.76.3.358 Beisse, K., & Tyre, A. (2013). Caregiver involvement in the education of youth in foster care: An exploratory study. School Social Work Journal, 37, 1–20. Bernard, K., Butzin-Dozier, Z., Rittenhouse, J., & Dozier, M. (2010). Cortisol production patterns in young children living with birth parents vs children placed in foster care following involvement of child protective services. Archives of Pediatrics & Adolescent Medicine, 164(5), 438–443. doi:10.1001/archpediatrics.2010.54 Blome, W. W. (1997). What happens to foster kids: Educational experiences of a random sample


23

of foster care youth and a matched group of non-foster care youth. Child and Adolescent Social Work Journal, 14(1), 41–53. doi:10.1023/A:1024592813809 Brock, L. L., Rimm-Kaufman, S. E., Nathanson, L., & Grimm, K. J. (2009). The contributions of ‘hot’ and ‘cool’ executive function to children's academic achievement, learning-related behaviors, and engagement in kindergarten. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 24(3), 337–349. Bronfenbrenner, U. (1989). Ecological systems theory. In R. Vasta (Ed.), Six theories of child development: Revised formulations and current issues (pp. 187–249). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press. Bruce, J., Davis, E. P., & Gunnar, M. R. (2001). Individual differences in children's cortisol response to the beginning of a new school year. Psychoneuroendocrinology, 27(6), 635– 650. doi:10.1016/S0306-4530(01)00031-2 Bruce, J., Fisher, P. A., Pears, K. C., & Levine, S. (2009). Morning cortisol levels in preschoolaged foster children: Differential effects of maltreatment type. Developmental Psychobiology, 51(1), 14–23. doi:10.1002/dev.20333 Burley, M., & Halpern, M. (2001). Educational attainment of foster youth: Achievement and graduation outcomes for children in state care. Olympia, WA: Washington State Institute for Public Policy. Campbell, F. A., Conti, G., Heckman, J. J., Moon, S. H., Pinto, R., Pungello, E., & Pan, Y. (2014). Early childhood investments substantially boost adult health. Science, 343, 14781485. doi:10.1126/science.1248429 Chazan-Cohen, R., Raikes, H., Brooks-Gunn, J., Ayoub, C., Pan, B. A., Kisker, E. E., . . . Fuligni, A. S. (2009). Low-income children's school readiness: Parent contributions over


24

the first five years. Early Education and Development, 20(6), 958–977. doi:10.1080/10409280903362402 Cheung, C., Lwin, K., & Jenkins, J. M. (2012). Helping youth in care succeed: Influence of caregiver involvement on academic achievement. Children and Youth Services Review, 34(6), 1092–1100. doi:10.1016/j.childyouth.2012.01.033 Cheung, C. S.-S., & Pomerantz, E. M. (2012). Why does parents' involvement enhance children's achievement? The role of parent-oriented motivation. Journal of Educational Psychology, 104(3), 820–832. doi:10.1037/a0027183 Children's Administration of the State of Washington. (2016). Foster Care Passport Program. Retrieved from http://www.skagitcounty.net/departments/healthfamily/fosterpassport.htm. Christenson, S. L. (2004). The family-school partnership: An opportunity to promote the learning competence of all students. School Psychology Review, 33(1), 83–104. Cicchetti, D., & Rogosch, F. A. (2002). A developmental psychopathology perspective on adolescence. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 70(1), 6–20. doi:10.1037/0022-006X.70.1.6 Conger, D., & Finkelstein, M. J. (2003). Foster care and school mobility. The Journal of Negro Education, 72(1), 97–103. Courtney, M. E., Hook, J. L., & Lee, J. S. (2010). Distinct subgroups of former foster youth during young adulthood: Implications for policy and practice. Chicago IL: Chapin Hall Issue Brief at the University of Chicago. Courtney, M. E., Hook, J. L., & Lee, J. S. (2012). Distinct subgroups of former foster youth during young adulthood: Implications for policy and practice. Child Care in Practice,


25

18(4), 409–418. doi:10.1080/13575279.2012.718196 Courtney, M. E., Piliavin, I., Grogan-Kaylor, A., & Nesmith, A. (2001). Foster youth transitions to adulthood: A longitudinal veiw of leaving care. Child Abuse & Neglect, 80(6), 685– 717. Day, A., Dworsky, A., Fogarty, K., & Damashek, A. (2011). An examination of post-secondary retention and graduation among foster care youth enrolled in a four-year university. Children and Youth Services Review, 33(11), 2335–2341. doi:10.1016/j.childyouth.2011.08.004 Denham, S. A., Caverly, S., Schmidt, M. H., Blair, K., DeMulder, E., Caal, S., . . . Mason, T. (2002). Preschool understanding of emotions: Contributions to classroom anger and aggression. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 43(7), 901–910. doi:10.1111/1469-7610.00139 Duncan, G. J., Dowsett, C. J., Claessens, A., Magnuson, K., Huston, A. C., Klebanov, P., . . . Japel, C. (2007). School readiness and later achievement. Developmental Psychology, 43(6), 1428–1446. Dworsky, A., & Pérez, A. (2010). Helping former foster youth graduate from college through campus support programs. Children and Youth Services Review, 32(2), 255–263. doi:10.1016/j.childyouth.2009.09.004 Ferguson, H. B., & Wolkow, K. (2012). Educating children and youth in care: A review of barriers to school progress and strategies for change. Children and Youth Services Review, 34(6), 1143–1149. doi:10.1016/j.childyouth.2012.01.034 Fostering Connections to Success and Increasing Adoptions Act of 2008 U.S.C, Pub. L. No. 110351, 3949 Stat. (2008).


26

Flynn, R. J., & Biro, C. (1998). Comparing developmental outcomes for children in care with those for other children in Canada. Children & Society, 12, 228–233. Geenen, S., & Powers, L. E. (2006). Are we ignoring youths with disabilities in foster care? An examination of their school performance. Social Work, 51(3), 233–241. doi:10.1093/sw/51.3.233 Gillum, N. L., Lindsay, T., Murray, F. L., & Wells, P. (2016). A review of research on college educational outcomes of students who experienced foster care. Journal of Public Child Welfare, 10(3), 291–309. doi:10.1080/15548732.2016.1172056 Graham, A. M., Pears, K. C., Kim, H. K., Bruce, J., & Fisher, P. A. (2017). Preparing high-risk children for kindergarten: Effects of a school readiness intervention on HPA axis functioning and school adjustment for children in foster care. Manuscript submitted for publication. Graham, A. M., Yockelson, M., Kim, H. K., Bruce, J., Pears, K. C., & Fisher, P. A. (2011). Effects of maltreatment and early intervention on diurnal cortisol across the start of school: A pilot study. Child Abuse & Neglect, 36(9), 666–670. doi:10.1016/j.chiabu.2012.07.006 Graziano, P. A., Reavis, R. D., Keane, S. P., & Calkins, S. D. (2007). The role of emotion regulation in children's early academic success. Journal of School Psychology, 45(1), 3– 19. doi:10.1016/j.jsp.2006.09.002 Grigg, J. (2012). School enrollment changes and student achievement growth: A case study in educational disruption and continuity. Sociology of Education, 85(4), 388–404. doi:10.1177/0038040712441374 Gunnar, M. R. (1998). Quality of early care and buffering of neuroendocrine stress reactions:


27

Potential effects on the developing human brain. Preventive Medicine: An International Journal Devoted to Practice & Theory, 27(2), 208–211. doi:10.1006/pmed.1998.0276 Gunnar, M. R., & Vazquez, D. M. (2001). Low cortisol and a flattening of expected daytime rhythm: Potential indices of risk in human development. Development and Psychopathology, 13(3), 515–538. doi:10.1017/S0954579401003145 Halonen, A., Aunola, K., Ahonen, T., & Nurmi, J. E. (2006). The role of learning to read in the development of problem behavior: A cross-lagged longitudinal study. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 76(3), 517–534. doi:10.1348/000709905X51590 Harden, B. J., Morrison, C., & Clyman, R. B. (2014). Emotion labeling among oung children in foster care. Early Education & Development, 25, 1180–1197. doi:10.1080/10409289.2014.907694 Hernandez, D. J. (2012). Double jeopardy: How third-grade reading skills and poverty influence high school graduation. Baltimore, MD: The Annie E. Casey Foundation. Hertsgaard, L., Gunnar, M. R., Erickson, M., & Nachmias, M. (1995). Adrenocortical responses to the strange situation in infants with disorganized/disoriented attachment relationships. Child Development, 66, 1100–1106. Howse, R. B., Calkins, S. D., Anastopoulos, A. D., Keane, S. P., & Shelton, T. L. (2003). Regulatory contributors to children’s kindergarten achievement. Early Education and Development, 14, 101–119. doi:10.1207/s15566935eed1401_7 Jacobson, S. W., Bihun, J. T., & Chiodo, L. M. (1999). Effects of prenatal alcohol and cocaine exposure on infant cortisol levels. Development and Psychopathology, 11(2), 195–208. James, B. W., & Lopez, P. D. (2003). Transporting homeless students to increase stability: A case study of two Texas districts. Journal of Negro Education, 72(1), 126–140.


28

doi:10.2307/3211296 Jones, D. E., Greenberg, M., & Crowley, M. (2015). Early social-emotional functioning and public health: The relationship between kindergarten social competence and future wellness. American Journal of Public Health, 105(11), 2283–2290. doi:10.2105/AJPH.2015.302630 Kirschbaum, C., Steyer, M., Patalla, U., Schwenkmezger, P., & Hellhammer, D. (1990). Cortisol and behavior: 2. Application of a latent state-trait model to salivary cortisol. Psychoneuroendocrinology, 15(4), 297–307. Ladd, G. W., Birch, S. H., & Buhs, E. S. (1999). Children's social and scholastic lives in kindergarten: Related spheres of influence? Child Development, 70(6), 1373–1400. doi:10.1111/1467-8624.00101 Lee, K. (2016). Head Start's impact on cognitive outcomes for children in foster care. Child Abuse Review, 25(2), 128–141. doi:10.1002/car.2413 Lee, M. Y., & Jonson-Reid, M. (2009). Needs and outcomes for low income youth in special education: Variations by emotional disturbance diagnosis and child welfare contact. Children and Youth Services Review, 31(7), 722–731. doi:10.1016/j.childyouth.2009.01.005 Leslie, L. K., Landsverk, J., Ezzet-Lofstrom, R., Tschann, J. M., Slymen, D. J., & Garland, A. F. (2000). Children in foster care: Factors influencing outpatient mental health service use. Child Abuse & Neglect, 24(4), 465–476. Leve, L. D., Fisher, P. A., & DeGarmo, D. S. (2007). Peer relations at school entry: Sex differences in the outcomes of foster care. Merrill-Palmer Quarterly, 53(4), 557–577. Levine, S., Lyons, D. M., & Schatzberg, A. F. (1997). Psychobiological consequences of social


29

relationships. Annals of the New York Academy of Science, 807, 210–218. doi:10.1111/j.1749-6632.1997.tb51922.x Lewis, E., Dozier, M., Ackerman, J., & Sepulveda, S. (2007). The effect of placement instability on adopted children’s inhibitory control abilities and oppositional behavior. Developmental Psychology, 43(6), 1415–1427. doi:10.1037/0012-1649.43.6.1415 Lipscomb, S. T., & Pears, K. C. (2011). Patterns and predictors of early care and education for children in foster care. Children and Youth Services Review, 33, 2303–2311. doi:10.1016/j.childyouth.2011.08.002 Lonigan, C. J., Bloomfield, B. G., Anthony, J. L., Bacon, K. D., Phillips, B. M., & Samwel, C. S. (1999). Relations among emergent literacy skills, behavior problems, and social competence in preschool children from low- and middle-income backgrounds. Topics in Early Childhood Special Education, 19(1), 40–53. doi:10.1177/027112149901900104 Lovitt, T., & Emerson, J. (2008). Foster youth who have succeeded in higher education: Common themes. Minneapolis, MN: National Center on Secondary Education and Transition. Manly, J. T., Lynch, M., Oshri, A., Herzog, M., & Wortel, S. N. (2013). The impact of neglect on initial adaptation to school. Child Maltreatment, 18, 155–170. doi:10.1177/1077559513496144 McDermott, J. M., Westerlund, A., Zeanah, C. H., Nelson, C. A., & Fox, N. A. (2012). Early adversity and neural correlates of executive function: Implications for academic adjustment. Developmental Cognitive Neuroscience, 2(Suppl 1), S59–S66. doi:10.1016/j.dcn.2011.09.008 McEwen, B. S. (1998). Protective and damaging effects of stress mediators. The New England


30

Journal of Medicine, 338(3), 171–179. doi:10.1056/NEJM199801153380307 McIntosh, K., Reinke, W. M., Kelm, J. L., & Sadler, C. A. (2013). Gender differences in reading skill and problem behavior in elementary school. Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions, 15(1), 51–60. doi:10.1177/1098300712459080 McKinney-Vento Homeless Education Assistance Improvements Act 101, U.S.C., Pub. L. No. 100–77 § 101(a), 482 Stat. (1987). McMillen, C., Auslander, W. F., Elze, D., White, T., & Thompson, R. (2003). Educational experiences and aspirations of older youth in foster care. Child Welfare, 82(4), 475–495. Mehana, M., & Reynolds, A. J. (2004). School mobility and achievement: A meta-analysis. Children and Youth Services Review, 26, 93–119. doi:10.1016/j.childyouth.2003.11.004 Merdinger, J. M., Hines, A. M., Osterling, K. L., & Wyatt, P. (2005). Pathways to college for former foster youth: Understanding factors that contribute to educational success. Child Welfare, 84(6), 867–896. Miedel, W. T., & Reynolds, A. J. (1999). Parent involvement in early intervention for disadvantaged children: Does it matter? Journal of School Psychology, 37(4), 379–402. Naccarato, T., Brophy, M., & Courtney, M. E. (2010). Employment outcomes of foster youth: The results from the Midwest Evaluation of Adult Functioning in Foster Youth. Children and Youth Services Review, 32, 551–559. doi:10.1016/j.childyouth.2009.11.009 National Working Group on Foster Care and Education. (2014, January). Fostering success in education: National factsheet on the educational outcomes of children in foster care. Research Highlights on Education and Foster Care, 1–20. Parrish, T., Delano, C., Dixon, D., Webster, D., Berrick, J. D., & Bolus, S. (2001). Education of foster group home children, whose responsibility is it?: Study of the educational


31

placement of children residing in group homes. Palo Alto, CA: American Institutes of Research. Pears, K. C., Bruce, J., Fisher, P. A., & Kim, H. K. (2010). Indiscriminate friendliness in maltreated foster children. Child Maltreatment, 15, 64–75. doi:10.1177/1077559509337891 Pears, K. C., & Fisher, P. A. (2005a). Developmental, cognitive, and neuropsychological functioning in preschool-aged foster children: Associations with prior maltreatment and placement history. Journal of Developmental and Behavioral Pediatrics, 26, 112–122. Pears, K. C., & Fisher, P. A. (2005b). Emotion understanding and theory of mind among maltreated children in foster care: Evidence of deficits. Development and Psychopathology, 17, 47–65. doi:10.10170S0954579405050030 Pears, K. C., Fisher, P. A., Bruce, J., Kim, H. K., & Yoerger, K. (2010). Early elementary school adjustment of maltreated children in foster care: The roles of inhibitory control and caregiver involvement. Child Development, 81(5), 1550–1564. doi:10.1111/j.14678624.2010.01491.x Pears, K. C., Fisher, P. A., Kim, H. K., Bruce, J., Healey, C. V., & Yoerger, K. (2013). Immediate effects of a school readiness intervention for children in foster care. Early Education and Development, 24(6), 771–791. doi:10.1080/10409289.2013.736037 Pears, K. C., Heywood, C. V., Kim, H. K., & Fisher, P. A. (2011). Prereading deficits in children in foster care. School Psychology Review, 40(1), 140–148. Pears, K. C., Kim, H. K., Buchanan, R., & Fisher, P. A. (2015). Adverse consequences of school mobility for children in foster care: A prospective longitudinal study. Child Development, 86(4), 1210–1126. doi:10.1111/cdev.12374


32

Pears, K. C., Kim, H. K., & Fisher, P. A. (2012). Effects of a school readiness intervention for children in foster care on oppositional and aggressive behavior in kindergarten. Children and Youth Services Review, 34(12), 2361–2366. doi:10.1016/j.childyouth.2012.08.015 Pears, K. C., Kim, H. K., & Fisher, P. A. (2016). Decreasing risk factors for later alcohol use and antisocial behaviors in children in foster care by increasing early promotive factors. Children and Youth Services Review, 65, 156–165. doi:10.1016/j.childyouth.2016.04.005 Pecora, P. J. (2012). Maximizing educational achievement of youth in foster care and alumni: Factors associated with success. Children and Youth Services Review, 34, 1121–1129. doi:10.1016/j.childyouth.2012.01.044 Pianta, R. C., & Stuhlman, M. W. (2004). Teacher-child relationships and children's success in the first years of school. School Psychology Review, 33(3), 444–458. Proctor, L. J., Skriner, L. C., Roesch, S. C., & Litrownik, A. (2010). Trajectories of behavioral adjustment following early placement in foster care: Predicting stability and change over 8 years. Journal of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, 49, 464– 473. doi:10.1016/j.jaac.2010.01.022 Promoting Safe and Stable Families Amendments of 2001 U.S.C., Pub. L. No. 107–133 § 201, 2413 Stat. (2001). Ramey, C. T., Campbell, F. A., & Blair, C. (1998). Enhancing the life course for high-risk children: Results from the Abecedarian Project. In J. Crane (Ed.), Social programs that work (pp. 163–183). New York: Russell Sage Foundation. Reynolds, A. J., & Bezruczko, N. (1993). School adjustment of children at risk through fourth grade. Merrill-Palmer Quarterly, 39(4), 457–480. Reynolds, A. J., & Temple, J. A. (2008). Cost-effective early childhood development programs


33

from preschool to third grade. Annual Review of Clinical Psychology, 4, 109–139. doi:10.1146/annurev.clinpsy.3.022806.091411 Reynolds, A. J., Temple, J. A., Ou, S.-R., Arteaga, I. A., & White, B. A. B. (2011). School– based early childhood education and age-28 well-being: Effects by timing, dosage, and subgroups. Science, 333(6040), 360–364. doi:10.1126/science.1203618 Scherr, T. G. (2007). Educational experiences of children in foster care. School Psychology International, 28(4), 419–436. doi:10.1177/0143034307084133 Simmel, C., Shpiegel, S., & Murshid, N. S. (2013). Foster care alumni and funding for postsecondary education: Examining variation in state support. Journal of Policy Practice, 12(1), 43–61. doi:10.1080/15588742.2012.739132 Smithgall, C., Gladden, R. M., Howard, E., Goerge, R., & Courtney, M. (2004). Educational experiences of children in out-of-home care. Chicago, IL: Chapin Hall Center for Children at the University of Chicago. Storer, H. L., Barkan, S. E., Stenhouse, L. L., Eichenlaub, C., Mallillin, A., & Haggerty, K. P. (2014). In serach of connection: The foster youth and caregiver relationship. Children and Youth Services Review, 42, 110–117. doi:10.1016/j.childyouth.2014.04.008 Sullivan, M. J., Jones, L., & Mathiesen, S. (2010). School change, academic progress, and behavior problems in a sample of foster youth. Children and Youth Services Review, 32(2), 164–170. doi:10.1016/j.childyouth.2009.08.009 United States Department of Health and Human Services. (2016). Child Maltreatment 2014. Washington, DC: Author. Unrau, Y. A., Font, S. A., & Rawls, G. (2012). Readiness for college engagement among students who have aged out of foster care. Children and Youth Services Review, 34, 76–


34

83. doi:10.1016/j.childyouth.2011.09.002 Walcott, C. M., Scheemaker, A., & Bielski, K. (2010). A longitudinal investigation of inattention and preliteracy development Journal of Attention Disorders, 14(1), 79–85. Ward, H. (2009). Patterns of instability: Moves within the care system, their reasons, contexts and consequences. Children and Youth Services Review, 31(10), 1113–1118. doi:10.1016/j.childyouth.2009.07.009 Wolanin, T. R. (2005). Higher education opportunities for foster youth: A primer for policymakers. Washington, DC: The Institute for Higher Education Policy. Wulczyn, F., & Lery, B. (2007). Racial Disparity in Foster Care Admissions. Chicago, IL: Chapin Hall Center for Children. Zetlin, A. (2006). The experiences of foster children and youth in special education. Journal of Intellectual and Developmental Disability, 31(3), 161–165. doi:10.1080/13668250600847039 Zima, B. T., Bussing, R., Freeman, S., Yang, X., Belin, T. R., & Forness, S. R. (2000). Behavior problems, academic skill delays, and school failure among school-aged children in foster care: Their relationship to placement characteristics. Journal of Child and Family Studies, 9(1), 87–103. doi:10.1023/A:1009415800475


Preschool

Elementary through high school

Long-term educational outcomes

Maltreatment experiences

Deficits in preacademic and social skills

Poor academic achievement

Low high school graduation rates

Placement in foster care

Deficits in regulatory systems

Poor behavioral and social outcomes

Low likelihood of college attendance/ completion

Early adversity

Lack of access to high-quality ECE

35

Lack of support services Lack of caregiver involvement School mobility

Figure 1. Factors contributing to educational outcomes for youth in foster care over time.