According to Ornstein and Hunkins (1997), the population of at-risk students in America:
...tends to encompass the following major groups: poverty children (21 percent of student enrollments K-12); minority students (some 30 percent), especially immigrant children who speak a language other than English (15 percent); and handicapped students (12 percent)...(p. 376).
In addition, Papalia and Olds (1995) report that the at-risk group has been expanded by many educators so as to include children who are abused or neglected, or homeless, or who were born with crack cocaine or other drugs in their systems.
Ornstein and Hunkins (1997) further point out that at-risk students are "at risk" for far more than school failure. Other probable outcomes facing this population include low salaried jobs, substance abuse, and participation in crime.
Until very recently, the educational focus with respect to at-risk students has been upon using educational interventions to increase their chances of school success (Papalia & Olds, 1995). However, longitudinal research conducted on such interventions has, over the years, shown very poor success rates for many of these programs. For example, Le Tendre (1991) reported that of 1,200 such programs and projects developed and implemented during the 1970s and 1980s to help at-risk students, only ten were found to be effective on the basis of statistical re-analysis.
In addition to the foregoing, Ornstein and Hunkins (1997) point out that educational efforts to compensate for the disadvantages of at-risk groups have been criticized on several grounds. These criticisms include: (1) a hasty planning, piecemeal approach; (2) mismanagement and misappropriation of funds; (3) a dependence on unethical grantspeople; (4) large consultant fees being charged for unaccomplished or shoddy work; (5) the use of inadequately trained personnel at both the state and local levels; (6) overly high administr...