As a teacher in the ALS Senior High School program of Bocboc National High School, I have observed that school dropouts in our context are often the result of both push and pull factors that weigh heavily on our learners. On the push side, poverty remains the most pressing issue—many students struggle to afford daily transportation, uniforms, or school requirements, which makes regular attendance difficult. Academic struggles also discourage learners, especially those who enter ALS with significant gaps in reading comprehension, writing skills, and numeracy. Added to this are cases of bullying and the lack of sufficient support that some students experience in formal schooling, which make them feel unwelcome or incapable of succeeding. On the pull side, many of my learners are drawn away from education because of the need to work in farms or plantations to help sustain their families. Others leave school to care for younger siblings or due to early marriage and teenage pregnancy, challenges that disproportionately affect female learners. These factors are deeply connected to gender, geography, and socio-economic realities. In our rural community, boys are often pressured to drop out to work as laborers, while girls are more vulnerable to early family responsibilities or childbearing. The geographical isolation of some barangays also makes schooling less accessible, especially for those who must walk long distances or lack digital access for modular learning. Ultimately, the socio-economic struggles of families in our locality amplify these push and pull factors, making it clear that addressing dropout requires not only educational reforms but also community and livelihood support systems. Ray Butch D. Mahinay

Rolly Ortiz Jr, these are good points for review in ALS Bukidnon.

From my own experience handling similar types of students Doc Ray Butch D. Mahinay, I’ve seen many of these cases firsthand, where they turn to alternative learning as their only option. The common push factors that make the students resort to alternative mode of learning involve financial problems, health concerns like they are pregnant, suffering from illness, or caring for their sick family members, safety issues, and challenges with distance or relocation. At the same time, the pull factors that keep them engaged in alternative modalities are the flexibility to work while studying, the chance to look after their families, and the convenience and safety of not having to travel far. I have noticed these situations also connect with gender, where female students often deal with pregnancy or caregiving duties of the whole family, while male students are more focused on work or generating income for the family. Geography is also a matter at hand, especially for students in far-flung/hinterland areas who face tedious, long, and costly commutes which include being on top of the commute service or commonly known as “topload”. And lastly, socio-economic conditions also make a big difference since those from poorer families are more vulnerable to financial, health, and safety issues despite being aided with all types of aid from local and national agencies. Being able to see all this in practice has shown me how important it is to better understand these push and pull factors, because these guide the policy making and interventions that not only lower dropout rates but also give out-of-school youth real chances to return and continue learning in ways that match their circumstances.

Within the context of the Xavier Night School-Alternative Learning System, which is one of the first initiatives from a Higher Education Institution in collaboration with the Department of Education and Local Governmen Unit, patterns of educational exclusion show themselves as systemic and structural problems, not just individual failures. Many of our learners are referred by the City Social Welfare and Development (CSWD), and their experiences reflect the challenges of poverty, broken family structures, and social marginalization. Boys often enter informal labor markets, such as construction, vending, and street work, at a young age. Meanwhile, girls frequently take on caregiving roles or have their education cut short due to early pregnancy. LGBTQ+ learners face ongoing bullying and stigma, which undermine their sense of belonging in formal school settings. Geography also plays a role: learners from urban poor areas struggle with unstable housing and informal jobs, while those from remote barangays deal with high transportation costs and long distances that make consistent attendance difficult. This situation reveals not just individual dropouts but a larger issue of being pushed out of the mainstream educational system.

The main factors pushing learners away stem from limitations in formal education. Many start school without the basic skills typically gained through early childhood education. Once in overcrowded classrooms, they must follow strict curricula and standardized tests that do not meet their varied learning needs. Teachers, despite their dedication, are often overwhelmed and cannot provide the individual support that many students need. These institutional challenges are worsened by bullying and discrimination, especially against students from marginalized socio-economic or gender-diverse backgrounds. This leaves them feeling discouraged and disconnected from the learning environment.

Equally important are the pull factors rooted in the socio-economic realities of families. Educational choices often take a backseat to survival. Boys are expected to earn money through work, while girls are guided toward caregiving duties or early marriage. Youth involved in street activities may find acceptance in peer groups that distance them from formal education. For both urban poor families and those in rural barangays, the hidden costs of education—such as transportation, food, uniforms, and lost income—make regular attendance financially unfeasible. These pressures lead children and youth into cycles of work, caregiving, and survival that compete directly with their education.

These push and pull dynamics do not act separately but intersect across gender, location, and socio-economic status. Cultural norms often position boys as early breadwinners and girls as caregivers, while LGBTQ+ youth face stigma that damages both their confidence and access to fair educational opportunities. Urban poverty places learners in unstable informal jobs, while geographic isolation creates logistical obstacles that turn education into a privilege rather than a right. Socio-economic hardship spans these situations, forcing families to choose immediate survival over long-term educational goals. Understanding the dropout phenomenon requires a look at it not as a personal choice but as a result of deeper structural inequalities.

Based on my experience as an adviser of a TVL track, the main reasons why students stop going to school are poverty and early pregnancy. Many of them need to work to help their families, and they can't afford the daily transportation fare and the expenses for school projects. Early pregnancy is also becoming more common, especially in senior high school. I have students who personally talked to me, asking for a modular setup because of their situation.

My experience teaching in Basic Education, in both Key Stage 1&2, assigned in an Integrated school located in a rural area, have observed several factors why a learner cease going to formal school. It is not poverty nor lack of student support since the educational institution is located within the community and free, not obliged to pay anything except for the little amount of 50 pesos per learner for miscellaneous. I think that most children in our school prefer to stop schooling is because they cannot cope up with the lessons. They find it real hard to understand the content of the lesson even if teachers tried to explain in the most simplified way. Most drop-outs come from the the Key Stage 3, JHS, almost half of these students also struggle to read and comprehend. I am teaching kinder and core subjects in 5th grade. Coping with the rigid curricula, is the push factor in my context. Since the DepEd curriculum is in spiral progression, whatever pre-requisite skills that has been unmastered, it will lead to a learning gap making it difficult to understand higher-level competencies. On the other hand, work attraction and family obligation on the pull factor side is another reason also for drop-out rates in our school, the socio-economic status in the community is quite a challenge. Only a few people in the community pursue college. Most of the family's mindset doesn't take education seriously. Some female learners engage in early marriage risking the future with no parental guidance. Parents often agree to this, to avoid burden raising and investing in child's education

If these push and pull factors will continue it will incorporate challenges to learners, thus drop-out rates increases. A learner who comes from a low-income family, who struggles academically in a geographically challenge location will likely wish to stop schooling. This is a scenario by which absenteeism in school attendance often linked to. A reality that most teachers find it hard to motivate students to come to school regularly. It is also a burn-out to teachers who just wanted to uplift and encourage learners to pursue education no matter how tough it is, however realities in their life situation is a consideration also.

In the seven years that I have been teaching in this institution, I have encountered multiple students who chose not to enroll. One of the push factors is poverty or more specifically, lack of financial resources. Given that it is a private institution, the tuition is not inexpensive, and the current state of our economy is not helping.

Another factor is mental health concerns which was really magnified during post-pandemic period. We have experienced cases wherein students refused to go to school due to the instability of their mental health which may be brought about by different factors such as family pressure, peer conflicts, and even high academic standards.

A pull factor that I can identify in this context is the opportunities of their parents to work abroad. This usually happens in the middle of the year when students would withdraw their enrolment from the school to be with their parents even if they are not as keen to transfer.

The interaction of this push and pull factors may be heavily influenced by gender and socio-economic conditions. The socio-economic conditions may be the most pervasive factor as families who lack financial resources may opt to switch school with lesser fees or move to another country (while bringing their children with them) to provide enough salary and financial support. Low-income households may not be able to keep their children engaged in education and the students may face barriers that would limit them in pursuing their full potential in school. Gender may also impact the students' mental health stability as there are some who experience being bullied by their peers because of the way they identify or express themselves. Given the stereotypes on men and how they are supposed to act all masculine plays a heavy burden on the male population to keep up with the standards. This may also be experienced by girls who are expected by their parents to do (too many) household chores and taking care of their younger siblings at the expense of limiting their time to study and prepare for their lessons.

When we think about why some young people might leave school, it's not a simple answer. It's a complex interplay of forces, which the prompt so perfectly describes as "push" and "pull" factors. In our school's specific context, shaped by the Chinese culture of most of our clientele, these factors take on a very particular flavor.

The "push" factors, those conditions that might drive a student away from school, often feel different for our students. Yes, things like bullying or rigid curricula can be an issue anywhere. But here, the pressure to excel, to live up to the high expectations set by families, can become a significant push factor. For a student who feels they are constantly falling short, who is struggling with a subject despite their best efforts, the immense weight of disappointing their family can be a crushing burden. This pressure, while born from a place of love and hope for a better future, can inadvertently push a student towards a feeling of hopelessness and inadequacy. They might feel that leaving school is the only way to escape this constant sense of failure. We've seen how this can be linked to socio-emotional struggles and a lack of resilience in a few of our students, who are not accustomed to setbacks and may not have developed the coping mechanisms to navigate them.

On the other hand, the "pull" factors, those external attractions, are also shaped by our cultural landscape. While for many, a pull factor might be a quick job opportunity, for our students, the pull is often more subtle. It's the pull of tradition, of filial piety, of the family's needs. A student might feel a strong pull to help with the family business or to take care of a younger sibling or an elderly relative. This isn't just about an obligation; it's about giving honor to their family in a different way, one that feels more immediate and tangible than long-term academic success. They might see it as a way to ease their parents' burden and fulfill their duty as a child. This pull is deeply rooted in our values and can be a powerful force, even when the student has the academic potential to succeed in school.

When we look at how these factors intersect with gender, geography, and socio-economic conditions, the picture becomes even more nuanced. For our male students, the pull to work, especially in a family business, can be very strong. There's often a traditional expectation for them to take on a leadership role and contribute financially, and this can be seen as a way of demonstrating their maturity and responsibility. Conversely, a male student who is struggling academically might feel a double dose of shame and pressure, leading them to be pushed out of the academic environment. For our female students, while the expectation to succeed academically is just as high, the pull of domestic responsibilities can be a significant factor. While it may not be as prominent as in other cultures, the traditional role of a woman in the home can still be a subtle pull, especially if there is a family member who needs care.

Socio-economic conditions, of course, play a huge role. For families with limited financial resources, the push and pull factors can become even more intense. A struggling student might feel the need to drop out to alleviate the financial burden on their family, while a very bright student might feel the pull to start working immediately to help them get ahead. The pressure to succeed and to provide for the family is magnified in these situations, and it can become a push factor for a student who feels overwhelmed and a pull factor for a family who needs a helping hand.

The issues of dropping out in our school context are complex, rooted in our cultural values and the expectations we place on our young people. It's a reminder that while the drive for excellence is a wonderful thing, we must also create a supportive environment where our students feel they can seek help, where failure is a learning opportunity, and where their socio-emotional well-being is as important as their academic achievements. By understanding these unique push and pull factors, we can better support our students and ensure they have the resilience and resources to not only succeed but to thrive.

From my own teaching experience, I have seen both push and pull factors that influence learners’ decision to leave school, though they take different forms in Junior High School and college.

In my junior high school teaching experience, some of the most common push factors were attendance struggles due to distance from school and the very early morning assemblies starting at 7 AM. The rigid curriculum and the pressure of accomplishing so many academic requirements also discouraged some students, making school feel overwhelming rather than supportive. On the side of pull factors, I observed that early romantic relationships, particularly among Grades 9 and 10, often distracted students from their studies. Others chose to work in the family business—not because of poverty, but because they wanted independence and the satisfaction of earning money at a young age.

In my college teaching experience, the challenges appear more complex. The most prominent push factor is financial struggle. Many students work part-time jobs while studying, and when expenses pile up, continuing education becomes difficult. Alongside this, pull factors emerge for students who already have families of their own or those who are single parents. The responsibilities of providing for their children or managing household duties often compete with their academic life, sometimes forcing them to put education on hold.

These experiences show how dropout factors are shaped by the learner’s stage in life. For high school students, push and pull factors are often linked to school demands, peer relationships, and the desire for independence. In college, financial responsibilities and family obligations intersect more strongly with gender and socio-economic conditions, particularly for single parents and working students.

Understanding these layers helps me realize that addressing dropout rates is not just about improving teaching inside the classroom—it also requires acknowledging the realities students face beyond it. And my challenge is how to meet the students halfway.

I started teaching in primary school( students aged 5 to 11) and I noted that some students can not make out of alphabets, syllable and numbers. They have merely anything to do with external factors which pull or push students towards dropouts. Failures and dropouts can also be explained by deficit in the cognitive abilities of the children to learn concepts and acquire knowledge. What is wrong is the system which push them towards learning academically while they have aptitude to excel in vocational courses.

I approach this issue not only through statistical trends but also through the lived experiences of students, families, and educators—particularly in marginalized communities.

In the contexts I’ve studied—primarily rural and peri-urban regions in Central America, as well as underserved urban communities in the U.S.—the interplay of push and pull factors is complex, deeply rooted in structural inequities, and profoundly gendered and geographically contingent.

Prominent Push Factors:

Prominent Pull Factors:

Intersection with Gender, Geography, and Socio-Economic Conditions:

• Gender: The burden of pull factors falls heavily on girls. Cultural norms prioritize boys’ education, while girls are expected to fulfill domestic roles. In mathematics, this is compounded by stereotypes that undermine girls’ confidence. However, boys face their own pressures—especially in impoverished areas, where masculinity is tied to early economic contribution, pushing them into labor.
• Geography: Rural students face compounded challenges: long distances to school, lack of transportation, and seasonal labor demands (e.g., harvest periods). In mountainous or isolated regions, schools may only go up to sixth grade. Urban students may have more schools but face overcrowding, violence, and under-resourced institutions. In both cases, mathematics education suffers from standardization without contextualization.
• Socio-Economic Status: Poverty is the overarching thread. Families living in economic precarity cannot afford school supplies, uniforms, or opportunity costs. A student spending hours fetching water or working in a market has little time or energy for homework. Mathematics, often perceived as abstract and elitist, becomes a symbol of exclusion rather than empowerment.

Toward Equitable Interventions:

From a mathematics education standpoint, we must rethink how we teach and why we teach. Interventions should include:

• Contextualized curricula that connect mathematical concepts to local knowledge and economic practices (e.g., financial literacy, agricultural measurement, community mapping).
• Flexible schooling models (evening classes, accelerated programs) for out-of-school youth.
• Teacher training in culturally responsive pedagogy and trauma-informed practices.
• Community engagement to shift norms around gender and education.
• Policy advocacy for poverty alleviation—because no pedagogical innovation can fully compensate for hunger or homelessness.

Ultimately, reducing dropout rates isn’t just about keeping students in seats—it’s about reimagining education as a space of dignity, relevance, and possibility. In mathematics, this means honoring diverse ways of knowing and ensuring that every student sees themselves not just as a learner, but as a mathematical thinker with value.

Very nice input, Sergio Leal Ramirez . Totally agreeable!